Connect with us

Campaign 2020

Beto Explains Stingy 0.3% Donation Rate, Charity is Giving You More Beto

Beto explained away his decision to donate 0.3% of his salary to charity by saying it is okay because of his presidential campaign.

Published

on

Beto ORourke Stingy Charity Donations

Democrat presidential candidate and noted Irishman Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke donated just over $1,100 of his nearly $400,000 earnings to charity in 2017, and explained that his main act of charity was to give voters the opportunity to see more of “Beto” on the campaign trail.

This number amounts to just over one third of 1 per cent of O’Rourke’s earnings, or 0.34 per cent. For the average American household making roughly $56,000 per year, this would translate to about $192 donated to charity.

The number comes from O’Rourke’s 2017 tax returns.

Trending: An America First Patriot is Challenging Dan Crenshaw in Next Year’s GOP Primary. Here’s Why.

When asked by an attendee at one of his events about the remarkably low percentage donated to charity, O’Rourke gave a rambling and pompous response, suggesting that his mere presence on the campaign trail is a phenomenal form of charity to the public.

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024?

  • POLL: Will Republican Senators vote to impeach Trump and ban him from running in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“I’ve served in public office since 2005, I do my best to contribute to my community, my state, and now my country,” said Beto while flailing his arms. “There are ways that I do this that are measurable, and there are ways that are not measurable. There are charities that we donate to that we reported and itemized, others we have donated to that are not.”

The Democrat from Texas, who uses a Spanish abbreviation for “Roberto” as his nickname, continued by saying “I’m doing everything that I can right now, spending this time with you, not with our kiddos, not back home in El Paso, because I want to sacrifice everything to make sure that we meet this moment of truth with everything that we’ve got.”

In other words, it is okay that O’Rourke does not donate to charity because sometimes he does and does not itemize it when filing his taxes, and more importantly, he is running for office.

Public service, in O’Rourke’s mind, appears synonymous with charity.

This might make sense if O’Rourke did not take a salary in 2017 and instead donated his Congressional salary to charity, as does President Trump who recently donated his third quarter salary to alcoholism research, but this is also untrue.

In addition to the $174,000 O’Rourke took home while serving in Congress, a 2018 article revealed he has assets valued between $3.5 million and $16 million.

It appears O’Rourke may simply be one of the greedy, lying, white men the Democrats loathe so fiercely.

Campaign 2020

Trump Campaign Autopsy Shows Decline in Support From White Men, Coronavirus Epidemic Cost President Re-Election

The 2016 coalition didn’t hold this election.

Published

on

A post-election autopsy reveals that Donald Trump lost the 2020 presidential election by losing support from White men and Americans who disapproved of his handling and communication regarding the coronavirus epidemic.

Data suggesting as such was obtained by Trump campaign pollster Tony Fabrizio.

“Racially, POTUS suffered his greatest erosion with White voters, particularly White Men in both state groups,” Fabrizio revealed in his findings. Fabrizio referred to swing states that Trump had held from 2016 and those he had lost. The pollster queried voters in ten different states.

Trump also suffered a decline in support from the youngest Americans and those older than 65. There’s strong reason to believe that some assertions within the Republican Party that the coronavirus pandemic was “no biggie” played a crucial in eroding President Trump’s support among seniors, a vital constituency that has traditionally been strongly Republican. Fabrizio’s data indicates that the coronavirus pandemic was by far and away the most important campaign issue in the 2020 election, and that its importance among the electorate played decisively in Joe Biden’s favor.

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024?

  • POLL: Will Republican Senators vote to impeach Trump and ban him from running in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

President Trump’s support among White Men declined by as much as 12% in swing states that he lost in 2020. Joe Biden also improved his vote share among the demographic, which still voted strongly Republican, although in a diminished fashion.

It’s been said that Joe Biden won the election with a Democratic version of the so-called “Sailer Strategy,” discarding the Obama coalition in favor of making direct appeals to white seniors who traditionally vote Republican.

At the direction of Jared Kushner, the Trump 2020 campaign prioritized minority outreach and the so-called ‘Platinum Plan’ in hopes of expanding the President’s base of support. This appears to have been only partially successful, and may have come at the crucial cost of outreach energy and resources targeting middle-class white voters who won Trump the presidency.

President Trump expanded his support from Hispanic Americans, a vital constituency in states such as Texas, Nevada and Florida. However, the midwestern Rust Belt has smaller Hispanic communities, and Trump ultimately lost Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan. Hispanic outreach in Arizona, a state Trump lost by 10,000 votes, didn’t prove as successful as it was in other Sun Belt states, especially with the state’s White senior population inching to the left, relative to 2016. Buffed Hispanic support didn’t prove enough to ultimately swing Nevada, although the President secured a comfortably high margin of victory in Florida.

Trump’s buffed appeal with Hispanics wasn’t matched with Black voters, who largely voted in a fashion comparable to the 2016 election.

A future Republican candidate- even Trump himself, should he choose to run- would have to look more closely at the path to victory staked out in Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign if they seek a strategy with a proven record of success. It’s entirely plausible to believe that future nationalist, populist and conservative presidential candidates can receive even greater levels of Hispanic support while regaining the white blue-collar populist demographic that swept President Trump into the White House in 2016.

Unfortunately, Fabrizio’s autopsy is likely to be wholly ignored, with a sizable contingent of conservatives blaming Trump’s loss exclusively on a set of election steal theories from “brand” online lifestyle influencers. With a persistent fixation on empty dopamine hits, it may prove that Republicans will never a national election ever again, powerless as the Left and corporations transform the United States into a left-liberal oligarchy.


Follow me on Gab @WildmanAZ, Twitter @Wildman_AZ, and on Parler @Moorhead.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending