A question Worth Asking on Anthony Weiner

Readability

A question Worth Asking on Anthony Weiner

Today at his site Stacy McCain men­tioned the con­nec­tion between the down­fall of Anthony Weiner and issue that sev­eral blog­gers who were involved in the same had:

I’ve got a par­tic­u­lar inter­est in the ques­tion of who ID’d Syd­ney Leathers because, for months, Ladd Ehlinger Jr. has enter­tained the pos­si­bil­ity that the harass­ment of Brett Kimberlin’s ene­mies was some­how being funded by sup­port­ers of Anthony Weiner.

Spec­u­la­tion isn’t my busi­ness, but when you observe extra­or­di­nary behav­ior, you can’t pre­emp­tively rule out extra­or­di­nary motives.

While who is pay­ing Team Kim­ber­lin is an inter­est­ing ques­tion I think a more inter­est­ing ques­tion is this:

What donors have cho­sen to invest in Anthony Weiner and his future?

To answer that ques­tion you have to look Where Anthony Weiner one was

Before his fall Anthony Weiner was the per­fect man for this type of donor. A man to watch he was an ultra lib­eral on almost every issue, he was a man who not only went the full Obama but was a fighter, a man to watch. You couldn’t miss him on TV con­stantly debat­ing and defend­ing the pres­i­dent and all he believed inHe rose through NH pol­i­tics pro­tégé of Chuck Schumer and in 2009 the world seems to be his oyster.

At least until he crashed.

Now lets con­sider polit­i­cal donors there are really four kinds of them:

1. The True Believ­ers: They believe in a cause or a per­son so deeply that they are will­ing to invest their money in them. These are the peo­ple that are con­stantly get­ting calls and the e-​mail from the var­i­ous par­ties. (a lot of small donors fit that description).

Before the fall: He wold be a nat­ural for their money and ado­ra­tion, the Obama/​Liberal point man.

After the fall: It’s really unlikely that too many of these would stay on board with Anthony Weiner. His lying to their face would chase off the per­sonal givers and the cause bear­ers could find other can­di­dates who believe the same to give to. Nor would they be likely to finance a cam­paign of revenge.

2. The Pro­tec­tion Racket: These are the peo­ple who give some­thing to both sides as insur­ance so they’ll just leave them alone when it comes time to reg­u­la­tion and the like.

Before the fall: Weiner would get the dol­lars for peo­ple who wanted to cover them­selves with the Obama team

After the fall: These peo­ple give to cover them­selves, after Weiner’s down­fall there would be no incen­tive to give and such givers would likely wait until after the runoff to hedge their bests, par­tic­u­larly given Weiner’s past.

3. The Groupies: These are van­ity donors. They give so they can say they are involved, so they can talk about how con­nected they are con­vince them­selves how much they mat­ter. This is a very com­mon ani­mal in the cock­tail cir­cuit in the big cities

Before the fall: Weiner as a TV celeb would be a prime mat­eral for this money.

After the fall:How much sta­tus can you get at a party by say­ing “I’m Anthony Weiner’s backer?”

But then there is the 4th type. These are the are the investors. These are the peo­ple who have an agenda and decide a par­tic­u­lar pol has the tal­ent and abil­ity to advance it. If your cause is par­tic­u­larly shady the will­ing­ness to advance said agenda is more crit­i­cal that the amount of talent.

Before the fall: He would be a prime invest­ment for a per­son want­ing power or influ­ence, a ris­ing star in the party, pos­si­ble future Mayor of NY with the senior Sen­a­tor of the state behind him. And if you had a bad or unpop­u­lar cause you might sink in a LOT

After the crash it’s dif­fer­ent, Remem­ber he didn’t just crash he crashed in dis­grace, tried to blame Bri­et­bart for what hap­pened, (Result­ing in my NY Post piece & appear­ance on Fox) He alleged he was hacked and not only was exposed as a liar, but had the ignominy of Andrew Bre­it­bart hold­ing court at his mike before his own press con­fer­ence could begin

Now it’s cer­tainly pos­si­ble that Anthony Weiner was so beloved by peo­ple who even after his fall groups of peo­ple were will­ing to devote hun­dreds or thou­sands of hours to defend him and go after those who were respon­si­ble for his fall and it’s not impos­si­ble that Con­gress­man Weiner was able to find new investors will­ing to sus­tain him and push a his can­di­dacy for Mayor on the off in the hopes that he could over­come the pre­vi­ous embar­rass­ment and scan­dal and get what would be con­sid­ered a higher pro­file posi­tion than he held before his fall.

But that would seem unlikely. I’d say it’s much more likely you would need some­one with a bad or unpop­u­lar cause that’s it’s dif­fi­cult to find another per­son will­ing to go along or a group with such a large or crit­i­cal invest­ment in Mr. Weiner that it still worth­while to devote the cash nec­es­sary to pun­ish his foes and advance a sec­ond rise from the ashes in the hopes of recov­er­ing the sit­u­a­tion over time.

I won­der who that might be?

Today at his site Stacy McCain mentioned the connection between the downfall of Anthony Weiner and issue that several bloggers who were involved in the same had:

I’ve got a particular interest in the question of who ID’d Sydney Leathers because, for months, Ladd Ehlinger Jr. has entertained the possibility that the harassment of Brett Kimberlin’s enemies was somehow being funded by supporters of Anthony Weiner.

Speculation isn’t my business, but when you observe extraordinary behavior, you can’t preemptively rule out extraordinary motives.

While who is paying Team Kimberlin is an interesting question I think a more interesting question is this:

What donors have chosen to invest in Anthony Weiner and his future?

To answer that question you have to look Where Anthony Weiner one was

Before his fall Anthony Weiner was the perfect man for this type of donor. A man to watch he was an ultra liberal on almost every issue, he was a man who not only went the full Obama but was a fighter, a man to watch. You couldn’t miss him on TV constantly debating and defending the president and all he believed inHe rose through NH politics protege of Chuck Schumer and in 2009 the world seems to be his oyster.

At least until he crashed.

Now lets consider political donors there are really four kinds of them:

1. The True Believers: They believe in a cause or a person so deeply that they are willing to invest their money in them. These are the people that are constantly getting calls and the e-mail from the various parties. (a lot of small donors fit that description).

Before the fall: He wold be a natural for their money and adoration, the Obama/Liberal point man.

After the fall: It’s really unlikely that too many of these would stay on board with Anthony Weiner. His lying to their face would chase off the personal givers and the cause bearers could find other candidates who believe the same to give to. Nor would they be likely to finance a campaign of revenge.

2. The Protection Racket: These are the people who give something to both sides as insurance so they’ll just leave them alone when it comes time to regulation and the like.

Before the fall: Weiner would get the dollars for people who wanted to cover themselves with the Obama team

After the fall: These people give to cover themselves, after Weiner’s downfall there would be no incentive to give and such givers would likely wait until after the runoff to hedge their bests, particularly given Weiner’s past.

3. The Groupies: These are vanity donors. They give so they can say they are involved, so they can talk about how connected they are convince themselves how much they matter. This is a very common animal in the cocktail circuit in the big cities

Before the fall: Weiner as a TV celeb would be a prime materal for this money.

After the fall:How much status can you get at a party by saying “I’m Anthony Weiner’s backer?”

But then there is the 4th type. These are the are the investors. These are the people who have an agenda and decide a particular pol has the talent and ability to advance it. If your cause is particularly shady the willingness to advance said agenda is more critical that the amount of talent.

Before the fall: He would be a prime investment for a person wanting power or influence, a rising star in the party, possible future Mayor of NY with the senior Senator of the state behind him. And if you had a bad or unpopular cause you might sink in a LOT

After the crash it’s different, Remember he didn’t just crash he crashed in disgrace, tried to blame Brietbart for what happened, (Resulting in my NY Post piece & appearance on Fox) He alleged he was hacked and not only was exposed as a liar, but had the ignominy of Andrew Breitbart holding court at his mike before his own press conference could begin

Now it’s certainly possible that Anthony Weiner was so beloved by people who even after his fall groups of people were willing to devote hundreds or thousands of hours to defend him and go after those who were responsible for his fall and it’s not impossible that Congressman Weiner was able to find new investors willing to sustain him and push a his candidacy for Mayor on the off in the hopes that he could overcome the previous embarrassment and scandal and get what would be considered a higher profile position than he held before his fall.

But that would seem unlikely. I’d say it’s much more likely you would need someone with a bad or unpopular cause that’s it’s difficult to find another person willing to go along or a group with such a large or critical investment in Mr. Weiner that it still worthwhile to devote the cash necessary to punish his foes and advance a second rise from the ashes in the hopes of recovering the situation over time.

I wonder who that might be?