Campaigns Skirt Political Ad Rules by Paying Influencers
Campaigns, by definition, need to win some elections. And that’s just fine. Their jobs are to get elected and get someone elected so that they can do good things and make their donors happy. But campaigns also need to have a way to “skirt political ad rules” when it comes to paying the people who advertise on their behalf.
It’s been a week since Donald Trump’s election and all his post-election moves are still being parsed for clues about the president-elect’s personality.
The campaign for the White House is a lot of work and there are a lot of things a campaign decides to do.
But campaigns can also do things that a candidate might not consider such as:
Offer a gift to a donor or someone in the campaign, in-kind, just a token thing for a person that they support. The person might give them money or give them something of value.
A candidate could post on Facebook a message that includes a personal plea for support—about a bill or a project that the candidate is working on. In return, a person would receive a message of support and maybe a small amount of money.
A candidate could also pay a person they don’t directly back, directly or indirectly, to advertise on their behalf.
One person the Republican Party of Florida paid to help with the campaign was a man they knew only as “Ginger” who was once accused of sending threatening messages to the family of a member of Congress.
Donald Trump was very clear, when asked about his campaign contributions to his sons, that he has never asked his son Eric to donate anything to the campaign. He said he believes that his campaign is a “positive force.”
Trump’s campaign also said they didn’t think they would have to pay “Ginger” until he