> FWD.us supported some more traditionally conservative causes through two subsidiaries...
Traditionally conservative? Try corruption-mongering and off-message. If someone supports immigration reform, why should that money be used to fund support of an Oil pipeline?
There's no way this looks good for FWD.us. It's not a warning shot, FWD.us shot itself in the foot, and is currently bleeding to death.
I think you could argue that both initiatives will lead to job creation. But since this link wasn't at all mentioned in any of the advertisements I saw, I agree - it felt odd. That's why I can only make sense of them as a quid pro quo.
However, I don't think the attacks on FWD.us are because they were simply 'off-message' - I think it's because of the content of that message. A different, less-objectionable 'off-message' would've passed by comparatively unremarked.
Traditionally conservative? Try corruption-mongering and off-message. If someone supports immigration reform, why should that money be used to fund support of an Oil pipeline?
There's no way this looks good for FWD.us. It's not a warning shot, FWD.us shot itself in the foot, and is currently bleeding to death.