NOM's Cultural Director knowingly asked you to support a 'weak' candidate. Weak.
Last night, just moments after we learned that Democrat Liz Mathis triumphed in her Iowa state Senate bid over the National Organization For Marriage's candidate, Republican Cindy Golding, NOM Cultural Director Thomas Peters tweeted the following about the GOP candidate:
So wait: Thomas, whose organization tossed around $40,000 at the cause of electing Golding, calls the candidate "weak" just moments after the returns come in? Doesn't that say much more about NOM/Peters than it does Golding? I mean, Thomas tweeted it literally minutes after the Mathis victory was finalized, so it was clearly on his mind. And considering his high-ranking role -- Thomas spoke at a weekend event right alongside Maggie Gallagher -- he is presumably in on NOM discussions, so I'd even go on a limb and say this was at least a semi-common thought within the NOM culture itself. And yet they were still doing everything in their out-of-state power to influence this one hyper-local race? The cause of taking away Iowa's freedom to marry was so great that NOM was willing to tell locals that the "weak candidate"…
…was the better choice?
I ask again: Doesn't this "weak" claim say much more about the NOM playbook than it does the unsuccessful candidate?
comments powered by Disqus