Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Big Money in Elections


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Big Money in Elections Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 6:40:24 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
Interesting article from Reuters this morning.
No one wants to talk about it unless its from the clinton conspiracy theorists side..so im throwing it out here
Heres a taster....

Why U.S. billionaires may not be able to buy the 2016 election
NEW YORK | BY EMILY FLITTER
Florida Senator Marco Rubio has one; Texas Senator Ted Cruz has one; even former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, considered a longshot for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, has a billionaire in his corner. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has two.

Campaign finance watchdog groups fear heavy spending by these ultra-rich Americans will warp the election - already expected to be the most money-soaked in history. The idea that billionaires can buy elections has taken root in the public imagination.

Those billionaires are now seeing small, early signs of a pushback. Whether these are the beginning of a new trend is far too soon to say, but polls show there is wider discontent about the perceived influence of big money in U.S. politics and a growing gulf between the country's very rich and very poor.

These nascent rumblings - along with evidence that the super-rich are inefficient political spenders - raise questions about how effective billionaires will be in the 2016 elections.

Some voters in Philadelphia, for example, were turned off by the billionaires backing a top candidate in the city's May 19 mayoral race. And a Silicon Valley startup, Crowdpac, is hoping to bank on public ire against big political spenders to attract small donations to its new for-profit election campaign crowdfunding platform.

"There's growing public awareness about rich people trying to buy elections and that makes the task of winning all the more difficult," said Darrell West, the author of "Billionaires: Reflections on the Upper Crust," and the director of governance studies at the Brookings Institution think tank.

Potential big donors dispute the notion they are trying to buy elections and say they are simply using their positions to try to influence the future of the country in a positive way.

"I do believe – and I’ve told my kids this - that I can do more for them by giving money to the right presidential candidate in 2016 than by leaving them double that amount in my will," said David Walsh, a retired investor living in Jackson, Wyoming, who would not disclose his net worth but has given several multi-million dollar gifts to charitable causes and said he planned to donate heavily to candidates in 2016.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/02/us-usa-election-billionaires-idUSKBN0OI07I20150602





_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 8:17:06 AM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
Hmmmmm ..."we give millions and millions but we don't buy elections or candidates " Is anyone stupid enough to swallow that?

Since when do billionaires donate millions without expecting some kind of return? If you know any please point them in my direction thanks.

_____________________________



(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 8:27:45 AM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
I don't believe they are purchasing an election. Never have. I do believe that they are purchasing access to the candidate to get them to listen to whatever their cause wants - profits, social change, etc.

I do agree that there is a pushback, but putting big money into an election does not dictate how a person will vote, unless they are REALLLY stupid

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 8:32:58 AM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Interesting article from Reuters this morning.
No one wants to talk about it unless its from the clinton conspiracy theorists side..so im throwing it out here
Heres a taster....

Why U.S. billionaires may not be able to buy the 2016 election
NEW YORK | BY EMILY FLITTER
Florida Senator Marco Rubio has one; Texas Senator Ted Cruz has one; even former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, considered a longshot for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, has a billionaire in his corner. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has two.

Campaign finance watchdog groups fear heavy spending by these ultra-rich Americans will warp the election - already expected to be the most money-soaked in history. The idea that billionaires can buy elections has taken root in the public imagination.

Those billionaires are now seeing small, early signs of a pushback. Whether these are the beginning of a new trend is far too soon to say, but polls show there is wider discontent about the perceived influence of big money in U.S. politics and a growing gulf between the country's very rich and very poor.

These nascent rumblings - along with evidence that the super-rich are inefficient political spenders - raise questions about how effective billionaires will be in the 2016 elections.

Some voters in Philadelphia, for example, were turned off by the billionaires backing a top candidate in the city's May 19 mayoral race. And a Silicon Valley startup, Crowdpac, is hoping to bank on public ire against big political spenders to attract small donations to its new for-profit election campaign crowdfunding platform.

"There's growing public awareness about rich people trying to buy elections and that makes the task of winning all the more difficult," said Darrell West, the author of "Billionaires: Reflections on the Upper Crust," and the director of governance studies at the Brookings Institution think tank.

Potential big donors dispute the notion they are trying to buy elections and say they are simply using their positions to try to influence the future of the country in a positive way.

"I do believe – and I’ve told my kids this - that I can do more for them by giving money to the right presidential candidate in 2016 than by leaving them double that amount in my will," said David Walsh, a retired investor living in Jackson, Wyoming, who would not disclose his net worth but has given several multi-million dollar gifts to charitable causes and said he planned to donate heavily to candidates in 2016.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/02/us-usa-election-billionaires-idUSKBN0OI07I20150602






Good, that early sign of a pushback is coming from the left. Keep it up. The Republicans still have to catch up with you guys on this. I mean, things like Daily Kos have been financed by the likes of George Soros for years. It didn't really seem to be a problem until the Republicans finally wised up and began to copy. Now, let's let the Democrates push back, since they've been the early participants. I'm sure the Republicans will eventually follow along.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 9:01:52 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
LMAO shel adelson, the kochs, rupert murdoch, roger ailes, have all been doing it but rw liars never discuss it... righties have mentioned Soros so many times, theyve almost worn the meme out.

A billion dollars on one election is "catch up", thats not only "caught up", thats tackling it from behind and fucking it up the arse with a leaf blower


That they feel they have to spend that much to buy the election, over trusting the people to make the "right" choice, says thats a lot of paranoia.
Good luck with that.

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 9:10:28 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
Americans of both parties fundamentally reject the regime of untrammeled money in elections made possible by the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling and other court decisions and now favor a sweeping overhaul of how political campaigns are financed, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll.

The findings reveal deep support among Republicans and Democrats alike for new measures to restrict the influence of wealthy givers, including limiting the amount of money that can be spent by “super PACs” and forcing more public disclosure on organizations now permitted to intervene in elections without disclosing the names of their donors.

And by a significant margin, they reject the argument that underpins close to four decades of Supreme Court jurisprudence on campaign finance: that political money is a form of speech protected by the First Amendment. Even self-identified Republicans are evenly split on the question.


“I think it’s an obscene thing the Supreme Court did,” Terri Holland, 67, a former database manager who lives in Albuquerque, said in a follow-up interview. “The old-boy system is kind of dead, but now it’s the rich system. The rich decide what’s going to happen because the Supreme Court allows PACs to have civil rights.”

Most Americans say that money has too much of an influence on politicians and that campaign finance changes are needed.

The poll provides one of the broadest and most detailed surveys of Americans’ attitudes toward the role of money in politics since the Citizens United decision five years ago. And the responses suggest a growing divide between the nation and its highest court on constitutional questions that have moved to the heart of the American system, as the advent of super PACs and the abandonment of public financing by both parties in presidential elections have enabled wealthy donors, corporations and unions to play a greater role in political fund-raising.

In recent years, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority has steadily chipped away at restrictions on political donations while narrowing the constitutional definition of corruption. In a series of decisions, the court has rejected the notion that the access and influence afforded big donors can justify further restrictions on campaign money, while dismissing concerns raised by the court’s liberal wing that unrestricted political money skews policy-making in favor of the wealthy.

The broader public appears to see things differently: More than four in five Americans say money plays too great a role in political campaigns, the poll found, while two-thirds say that the wealthy have more of a chance to influence the elections process than other Americans.

Those concerns — and the divide between Washington elites and the rest of the country — extend to Republicans.


Three-quarters of self-identified Republicans support requiring more disclosure by outside spending organizations, for example, but Republican leaders in Congress have blocked legislation to require more disclosure by political nonprofit groups, which do not reveal the names of their donors.

Republicans in the poll were almost as likely as Democrats to favor further restrictions on campaign donations, even as some prominent Republicans call for legislation to eliminate existing caps on contributions.


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/03/us/politics/poll-shows-americans-favor-overhaul-of-campaign-financing.html?_r=1



Edited to add
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/06/02/us/politics/money-in-politics-poll.html
shows the polls in graph form

< Message edited by Lucylastic -- 6/2/2015 9:12:36 AM >


_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 9:13:59 AM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

LMAO shel adelson, the kochs, rupert murdoch, roger ailes, have all been doing it but rw liars never discuss it... righties have mentioned Soros so many times, theyve almost worn the meme out.

A billion dollars on one election is "catch up", thats not only "caught up", thats tackling it from behind and fucking it up the arse with a leaf blower


That they feel they have to spend that much to buy the election, over trusting the people to make the "right" choice, says thats a lot of paranoia.
Good luck with that.



You do love, ever so much, to call people liers. We've discussed this before.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 9:20:24 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

LMAO shel adelson, the kochs, rupert murdoch, roger ailes, have all been doing it but rw liars never discuss it... righties have mentioned Soros so many times, theyve almost worn the meme out.

A billion dollars on one election is "catch up", thats not only "caught up", thats tackling it from behind and fucking it up the arse with a leaf blower


That they feel they have to spend that much to buy the election, over trusting the people to make the "right" choice, says thats a lot of paranoia.
Good luck with that.


I am jst trying to decide if it is you, or Reuters who is better at pretending that money in politics is purely a right-wing thing


_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 9:23:11 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
Coming from you Hunter, its almost a compliment.
There are right wing liars....just as there are left wing liars.....and libertarian, and christian, and jewish, and hindu, and muslim, men women children and transgendered.
Get used to it, its life.
That you assumed I meant anyone is particular( Other than right wingers that lie) isnt surprising. neither is the fact you made the topic about me again.
have a nice day.



_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 9:26:24 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

LMAO shel adelson, the kochs, rupert murdoch, roger ailes, have all been doing it but rw liars never discuss it... righties have mentioned Soros so many times, theyve almost worn the meme out.

A billion dollars on one election is "catch up", thats not only "caught up", thats tackling it from behind and fucking it up the arse with a leaf blower


That they feel they have to spend that much to buy the election, over trusting the people to make the "right" choice, says thats a lot of paranoia.
Good luck with that.


I am jst trying to decide if it is you, or Reuters who is better at pretending that money in politics is purely a right-wing thing


I never said it was...only that the whinning in here lately has been all about hilary, or soros, or clinton, or clinton foundation, money for speeches and expectations....but nothing about the other side....the fact that the two stories i linked to today talk about the very same thing...seemed appropos..
Please feel free to change the subject, derail, bloviate at will. Its all you have.
Have a nice day



_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 9:30:57 AM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline
The whole "free speech" chicanery -- rank and file Republicans buy that shit.

Governing is second now to fund raising.

< Message edited by cloudboy -- 6/2/2015 9:33:05 AM >

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 9:37:47 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

I never said it was...only that the whinning in here lately has been all about hilary, or soros, or clinton, or clinton foundation, money for speeches and expectations....but nothing about the other side....the fact that the two stories i linked to today talk about the very same thing...seemed appropos..
Please feel free to change the subject, derail, bloviate at will. Its all you have.
Have a nice day



"Nothing about the other side (the right)" Then your standard rabid personal attack

"The other side" is the narrative in your OP Reuters story. You and Reuters attack Republican candidates for their billionaires (oh the horror) while ignoring Hillarys big money bundlers and other donors. While trying to pretend that they dont exist

"Those awful, big money Republicans..." is the narrative. Republicans hate poor people... Democrats (Hillary) stand up for the little guy...

How many millions have the Clintons pulled in recently? 35? 50? Meanwhile, Hillary tried to literally claim that her and Bill are poor, they are just like everyone else

Soros doesnt exist in your narrative, and you go full personal attack mode when he is mentioned because you arent here to debate and discuss, you are here to propagandize and demonize



_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 9:55:38 AM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

The whole "free speech" chicanery -- rank and file Republicans buy that shit.

Governing is second now to fund raising.


Bubba and Obama taught that. Did you mind it when they did it?

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 10:01:30 AM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Coming from you Hunter, its almost a compliment.
There are right wing liars....just as there are left wing liars.....and libertarian, and christian, and jewish, and hindu, and muslim, men women children and transgendered.
Get used to it, its life.
That you assumed I meant anyone is particular( Other than right wingers that lie) isnt surprising. neither is the fact you made the topic about me again.
have a nice day.




Hey, don't throw hate out and you won't see it reflected back at you.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 10:03:36 AM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
heck I cannot ever listen to Obama where I don't feel like he is still in campaign mode. has anyone else ever been called "campaigner in chief?"

(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 10:11:46 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline


Whatever the narrative a leftist is trying to establish, youve always got to assume that the polar opposite must be the truth:

quote:

The Left-Wing Money Machine
By Joseph Smith

Democrats and the media like to paint Republicans as the party of big money, calling out Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers, when in reality the progressive money machine vastly outweighs conservative sources of funds. The Democrat money advantage is so one-sided, in fact, that it is a wonder that Republicans and conservatives are able to win as many elections as they do.

We on the right hear much of George Soros and the Tides Foundation, but it is never quite clear just where all the money comes from to support the myriad left-wing pressure groups that agitate the public and shift the national debate farther and farther to the left.

From illegal immigration and socialized medicine to radical environmentalism and formidable government unions, there is a never-ending flow of funds and coercion toward left-wing causes, at the expense of traditional, conservative American values.

A recent book, The New Leviathan, subtitled How the Left-Wing Money Machine Shapes American Politics and Threatens America's Future, by David Horowitz and Jacob Laskin, examines the forces behind the dangerous and seemingly inexorable push to the left on so many issues of critical national import.

The authors focus on the numerous foundations that provide funding to such radical groups as the National Council of La Raza, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights League, and the Center for American Progress.

The central point of the book is that left-wing foundations outweigh conservative foundations by a factor of more than ten, in both total assets and the value of grants awarded. This is exactly the reverse of what the left-controlled media recites over and over again in its drive to promote the Democrats as the party of the little guy.

An exhaustive appendix of tables listing progressive and conservative foundations, their assets, and their annual grants and revenues shows progressive foundations with assets totaling $104.6 billion, compared with $10.3 billion for conservative foundations, and progressive grants awarded totaling $8.8 billion, compared with conservative grants awarded totaling just $0.8 billion1.

The result is that the resources available to progressive immigration groups, for example, are 22 times those available to conservative groups2, a fact reflected in the continual pressure from the left to open the border and decriminalize illegals.

The authors also find that there are 552 "progressive environmental groups that promote radical views that are anti-business," and just 32 "conservative environmental groups that promote market-friendly solutions," with similar massive funding advantages accruing to the environmental extremists3.

As the authors note, the aggressive environmental agenda of the Obama administration reflects the fact that "the financial muscle of these foundations brought the radicals out of the wilderness and into the mainstream of the nation's environmental politics"4.

A look at the Grants Database of the Ford Foundation, which is the second-largest foundation in total assets (to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation), and which provided the seed money for both the Environmental Defense Fund and the Natural Resources Defense Fund5, shows hundreds of entities receiving grants, including the National Council of La Raza for $1.6 million this year, and the Center for American Progress for $1.7 million, as well as

the Tides Foundation for $250,000, the National Network of Abortion Funds for $300,000, and the National Health Law Program for $300,000, to name a few.

A few minutes perusing the Ford database is instructive as to the nature of the groups receiving grants from the Foundation. Note that the foundation's website states that the foundation gradually divested its Ford Motor Company stock by 1974 (lest you wonder if your new car purchase is funding leftist causes).

Compounding the left's big-money advantage are the public-sector and other unions, from the SEIU to the NEA, whose intimidating tactics and powerful financial influence promote the same radical agenda and were a major factor in the election of our current president.

As the authors point out, the inability of conservatives to influence the ObamaCare debate "illustrates the Left's institutional advantage in orchestrating social change - its financial dominance and its far more developed political coordination"6.

Horowitz and Laskin employ the example of the Woods Fund, whose board Barack Obama and Bill Ayers both served on, and observe that after the most active Woods family member died, "control of the previously traditional charity fell into the hands of leftist staffers, including veterans of the Midwest Academy, who hijacked its agenda and pushed the foundation aggressively to the left[.]" Further7:

The Woods fund trajectory - an apolitical, even conservative, foundation swerving dramatically to the left - was to repeat itself throughout the philanthropic culture.

...


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/08/the_left-wing_money_machine.html#ixzz3bvQtCcnb



quote:

The New Leviathan: How the Left-Wing Money-Machine Shapes American Politics and Threatens America's Future Kindle Edition
by David Horowitz (Author), Jacob Laksin (Author)
48 customer reviews




_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 10:16:02 AM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

...Governing is second now to fund raising.

So, so true...

Between November 2012 and July 2014...a span of almost 20 mos...Obama found time for 81 rounds of golf and 75 fundraisers. That's a round of golf a week and a round of fundraisers a week.

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 10:17:00 AM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline
A lot of that money comes from taxes. People like La Raza collect money from the government. The left has that system built in. All of the hundreds of millions of dollars in housing funds go to people like...oh, community organizers in Chicago...who have no other visible means of support.

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 10:20:48 AM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

...Governing is second now to fund raising.

So, so true...

Between November 2012 and July 2014...a span of almost 20 mos...Obama found time for 81 rounds of golf and 75 fundraisers. That's a round of golf a week and a round of fundraisers a week.



When Obama retires from office...getting close thank god....he'll keep all of his political funds and be able to become a king maker. Sorta like Bubba is doing now. Oh wait, bubba collects money, he doesn't spend it except to pay bill. Anyway, in the further, how ever many hundreds of millions of dollars Obama has in his war chest he gets to keep and spend on politics. I'm sure that's okay with Cloudboy.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Big Money in Elections - 6/2/2015 10:23:34 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

A lot of that money comes from taxes. People like La Raza collect money from the government. The left has that system built in. All of the hundreds of millions of dollars in housing funds go to people like...oh, community organizers in Chicago...who have no other visible means of support.


Theres also the tax money the left uses to insure that there is a perpetually welfare dependent underclass ready to vote for more "free" stuff

_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Big Money in Elections Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125