The Shadow Party was conceived and organized principally by George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Harold McEwan Ickes - all identified with the Democratic Party left.
As the Democratic Party becomes ever-more dependent on the Shadow Party for its funding and foot-soldiers, the Shadow Party gains leverage with which to impose its radical agendas on the more moderate Democrat rank and file.
The term "Shadow Party" derives from the fact that the network carries out campaign activities which the Democratic Party would normally perform itself.
However, the Party can no longer perform these activities effectively. Thanks to the soft-money ban enacted by the McCain-Feingold Act of March 27, 2002, the Democratic Party can no longer raise enough money legally to undertake a national presidential campaign. Most Democrat campaigning is now done by the Shadow Party, which raises its own money independently.
2006-08-19 11:06:31 · 11 answers · asked by marceldev29 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Republicans are less dependent on soft money than Democrats. Republicans fund their campaigns mainly through small, hard-money contributions from rank-and-file supporters. Such contributions are permitted under McCain-Feingold, which allows donors to give up to $2,000 per candidate per year to political parties, and up to $5,000 per year to registered federal Political Action Committees (PACs).
Democrats are far more dependent on the sorts of huge, soft-money donations from unions, corporations and wealthy supporters which the Democratic Party is now forbidden to accept under McCain-Feingold.
2006-08-19 11:06:52 · update #1
The Shadow Party's plan is to take over America and rewrite the constitution. They want to sign over national sovereignty to the United Nations. The ideal candidate for the Shadow Party is a left wing radical who can succesfully pass himself (or herself) off as a moderate.
Hillary Clinton is that candidate. Positioning herself in the centre to fool mainstream America. But if she is elected the charade will be over, she will implement nothing but the most left wing extremist policies.
Can we stop these tyrants from taking over?
2006-08-19 11:09:16 · update #2
Boy, do they ever?
And do you notice the lengths these people go to to demonise "the rich", "rich white men", and all the rest? The last time I looked they're just a bunch of rich white MFs! And, yes, they are working very hard to BUY the country.
2006-08-19 11:15:20 · answer #1 · answered by Walter Ridgeley 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
i'd desire to think of them as interest applicants at an interview. enable's additionally think of their resumes are clean and we interviewers have no theory who they 'rather' are. Now what might we are saying approximately them as quickly as they might pass away the room? George: He seems to be a down-to-earth guy, likeable, common to get alongside with, a team participant. If our business enterprise may be in a no brainer business enterprise (e.g. FMCG, uncooked components, vehicle) and the overpowering majority of our shoppers men, we'd hire him for revenues. If he proves himself, he might have the flair to alter into head of revenues sometime. Hilary: She is purpose-oriented, is often used with what she needs and is working complicated to get there. a effective talker, demands admire. top administration fabric, probable strategic progression, HR (or given her rather history, criminal dept). If she proves herself she would desire to alter into CEO. *** George has already shown his revenues skills, hasn't he? The question now's if Hilary has shown herself adequate to be promoted to CEO, or if there is not any longer a greater clever candidate for that place.
2016-09-29 11:07:17 · answer #2 · answered by elidia 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I hope so. Its hard to convince the people of this country whats really going on because of the bias news media. If we don't stop them, AMERICA will not survive long as AMERICA!
2006-08-19 11:17:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Did you have a question, or was this just a convenient place to go on with conspiracy theory?
2006-08-19 11:12:09 · answer #4 · answered by oklatom 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Get Help, and stop listening to Talk radio
2006-08-19 11:12:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
you forgot to mention they supported Lamont
2006-08-19 11:17:44 · answer #6 · answered by W E J 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
you are talking sense .No one here will believe anything they are not told by the shadows
2006-08-19 11:19:54 · answer #7 · answered by Proud Republican 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
go campaign for some right wing nut somewhere
2006-08-19 11:12:37 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Nice conspiracy theory. Pretty silly. This is kookier than neo-con stuff.
2006-08-19 11:11:50 · answer #9 · answered by so 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
If this were true, it would still be better than what we have now, an idiot at the helm.
2006-08-19 11:12:02 · answer #10 · answered by Tommy D 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋