They were donating more or the same amount to Republican PACs.
> Some of the “Blockchain Eight,” as the Prospect termed them in March, have benefited from crypto largesse. Five of the eight members received campaign donations from FTX employees, ranging from $2,900 to $11,600. Rep. Ted Budd (R-NC), one of the signatories, received half a million dollars in support from a Super PAC created by FTX co-CEO Ryan Salame.
> More consequentially, Emmer was the head of the National Republican Congressional Committee, the campaign arm for House Republicans, this year. The NRCC’s associated super PAC, the Congressional Leadership Fund, received $2.75 million from FTX in the 2022 cycle; $2 million from Salame in late September, and $750,000 from the company’s political action committee.
> That money helped House Republicans win the majority in 2022. Though FTX has been portrayed as a Democratic firm, thanks to the high profile of former co-CEO Sam Bankman-Fried, the company sprinkled around campaign donations fairly evenly, with a shade over 50 percent going directly to congressional Republicans and a shade under 50 percent to Democrats this cycle.
> In an email, the SEC declined to comment. Six of the eight congressmembers have yet to respond
There's been a concentrated effort by the Republican party to try to link the FTX collapse to the other party, even though the Republican party actually received more contributions from FTX during the general election.
Almost all of SBF's donations were during the primary, and he made almost no donations during the general election. This means his money might have helped influence who showed up on the November ballots he didn't spend anything to help one party win over the other.
In contrast, almost all of the FTX's GOP spending, and all of the FTX executive's donations to the GOP, were during the general election cycle, and specifically to the GOP House races. This means that the GOP owes it's current majority in the house directly to stolen money donated to it by FTX and FTX executives.
>Almost all of SBF's donations were during the primary, and he made almost no donations during the general election. This means his money might have helped influence who showed up on the November ballots he didn't spend anything to help one party win over the other.
That's not how it works. There is no rule that says that donations made during the primary season cannot be spent by the campaign after the primary.
Yes, money from a primary can be used in the general. But in this case, it wasn't. The FTX money was used to select candidates but not to elect them.
In contrast, almost all of the FTX-related donations to the GOP were given during the general cycle meaning that they were specifically given to help elect candidates. This means the GOP actually benefited more from FTX money than the Dems, and explains why McCarthy is focusing his efforts on committee assignments rather than on going after FTX.
>Yes, money from a primary can be used in the general. But in this case, it wasn't. The FTX money was used to select candidates but not to elect them.
Money doesn't work that way. Money is fungible. There is nothing about contribution x that distinguishes it from contribution y once both are received, or prevents x from being used for the same purpose as y.
Further,
>In contrast, almost all of the FTX-related donations to the GOP were given during the general cycle meaning that they were specifically given to help elect candidates. This means the GOP actually benefited more from FTX money than the Dems
The other way around. Money given later in an election cycle means there is less time to use it.
No, campaign money is not fungible. There are rules about how and when it can be spent.
So I'm going to leave this conversation, since it's clear that you're coming from a position of ignorance and there's no point in continuing this conversation until you spend time reading a primer on campaign finance laws.
>No, campaign money is not fungible. There are rules about how and when it can be spent.
Yes, in terms of individual contribution limits, and various other rules. However, not in the context that we have been discussing, which is using primary contributions in the general election. As the FEC explains <https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/candidate...>:
>As previously noted, should the candidate lose the primary election, contributions accepted for the general election must be refunded, redesignated or reattributed within 60 days and may not be used to repay primary election debt. Therefore, candidate committees should ensure they have enough cash on hand to make those refunds if needed.
>Candidates running in the general election, however, may spend unused primary contributions for general election expenses. The contributions would continue to apply toward the contributors’ limits for the primary. [My emphasis] In addition, the campaign of a candidate running in the general election may use general election contributions for primary election debts; the contributions would still count against the contributor’s general election limits.
As I said, this is why donating earlier is better than donating later, and why your claim that "The FTX money was used to select candidates but not to elect them" is meaningless.
Of course you won't pay attention to the above, since you've already pontificated that
>So I'm going to leave this conversation, since it's clear that you're coming from a position of ignorance and there's no point in continuing this conversation until you spend time reading a primer on campaign finance laws.
Both these things— SBF donated more to Republicans than he did to Democrats and that he was the Democrats’ largest donor— can be simultaneously true. And that’s not exactly a great look for the GOP, since it means the plutocratic donor class is heavily on their side.
that's true, but his lieutenants were major donors to republican candidates -- Ryan Salame was advertised as a budding "republican megadonor" at events
You were only looking at the ~$570k assigned to specific candidates at the top. Look further down on the page: there's a $28000k donation to the Democratic "Protect our Future PAC", a $15000k donation to the Republican "American Dream Federal Action", ...
What you're missing is that the Protect our Future PAC only participated in the primary campaign cycle, meaning intra-party elections. POF did not participate in the general election in November.
If you look at donations based on when they were made, the GOP was the overwhelming recipient of FTX money for the general election in November, i.e., the election that mattered.
Protect our Future PAC is just one of several donations that were enormously larger than the $286k R / $283k D total direct candidate donations.
Meanwhile, just because a donation is received during the primary season doesn’t mean it can’t be spent during the general election period, when the candidate in question wins the primary.
And how many time do you need to realize we are discussing SBF and not whole FTX. FTX was a child-like run cult that did what it wanted and every single individual had their agenda. When we are discussing Salame and FTX, bring this point up.
The premise still stands that SBF was biggest personal contributor.
furthermore i would love to know why this demands a partisan lens when the whole of FTX was clearly co-mingling funds; the line between SBF's "personal" contributions and FTX's broader contributions as a network is likely governed more by campaign finance law than anything else
Perhaps they already spent the money on the 2022 mid-terms? If the money is dirty, should they be able to get those dirty dollars back from the places they spent it?
The money is not "dirty" in the typical definition of the word. "Dirty" money needs to be "laundered" so that you can appear to have a genuine justification of having it. That is, it's basically just a matter of whether it was declared as income to tax authorities.
The FTX money was all above board from that perspective. Taking money back from parties that FTX paid seems very unlikely.
https://newrepublic.com/article/169104/sam-bankman-fried-ftx...
No word on if those Democrats or PACs will give back the dirty money