Tim Donnelly Easy Winner Of CA Votes-Per-Dollar Race

It’s nice that immigration patriot Chris McDaniel is ahead in the GOP Mississippi Senate primary, although if it goes to a run-off the usual occult forces will no doubt inspire the GOP Establishment to make a rule-or-ruin last stand.

But  I am really sad about Tim Donnelly, edged out 19%-14..5% by the ludicrous Neel Kashkari in the weird California Monster primary.  Not only is Kashkari not a conservative–he supports homosexual marriage and Amnesty–he’s barely even a Republican, having voted for Obama in 2008. It is no coincidence, comrades, that GOP Establishment favorites so often turn out to be Democrats—think Arlen Specter or Charlie Crist. The California GOP Establishment has simply lost the will to live.

Further proof of how tightly MSM messaging is controlled: no-one seems to have drawn the obvious conclusion from the extraordinary divergence in expenditure in the race:

Kashkari was better financed than Donnelly, giving $2 million to his own campaign and raising roughly another $2 million, compared to the $447,000 Donnelly raised this year. Kashkari also benefited from an independent-expenditure push by major California donor Charles Munger

GOP relieved as Tim Donnelly concedes in California, by Elizabeth Titus, POLITICO, June 4, 2014

Kashkari got 599,543 votes and Donnelly 467,655. So Kashkari spent $6.67 per vote at least—that’s not counting “independent expenditures.”  Donnelly spent only $1.05.

This happens every time patriotic immigration reform comes anywhere remotely close to the electorate.  The classic example: the  astonishing 2012 victory of the Montana initiative restricting illegals’ access to taxpayer monies, which didn’t even have an organized campaign in a year when well-funded Republicans (who needless to say ran away from it) did disastrously statewide.

You’d think the political class would be interested in the remarkable efficiency of the patriotic immigration reform issue. But of course campaign consultants actually want to spend money—it’s not the least reason they keep steering their candidate-victims away from this obvious winning issue.