2016 Postmortem
Related: About this foruma picture is worth a thousand words: list of hillary and bernie's top donors
interpret as you wish
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
artislife
(9,497 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)And it's unfortunate that they reflect very little individual donations to Bernie...mostly PAC money. Hillary seems to be garnering much more individual donors (fro.m those industries)
I suspect after looking through Open Secrets, that there many be more individual donors for Bernie on this 2016 election cycle, but those numbers are not yet available. It's too bad really because this chart seems to indicate that unions donations are not representative of the Union members desire to donate to Bernie.
6chars
(3,967 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)I thought his contributions would be larger than Hillary's.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)is that he has a greater number of donors while she has raised a total $ higher. how that eventually shakes out we will have to see.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)That matters more than the amount donated. In any case, you can't lead the money race and still be on the side of the people.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)There does not need to be CU but campaigns costs lots of money. Spending $42 million on a senator race in one state and then multiple it times 50 to get a ballpark figure. People are donating money to Hillary myself included. If this campaign is going to be a test of running a campaign without funding perhaps before this is attempted again reality will occur. Yes, Hillary has lots giving the $2700 max.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)You would have to admit that it's impossible to take Wall Street money and then still fight for campaign finance reform AFTER getting elected.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Small contribution, everyone does not fit your profile. Hillary has a nice net worth but does not mean she will respond to $18,000 contribution.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)Or maybe I'm looking in the wrong place for 2015/2016 campaign contributions.
Where are you getting the info that Bernie has more donors?
artislife
(9,497 posts)Most flesh and blood people can't drop $10,000 down on a candidate.
Some people, like corporate "people" can.
Hence the difference in contribution amounts.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Attending are not contributing.
artislife
(9,497 posts)Kind of reminds me of another successful candidate who did that.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)ericson00
(2,707 posts)and as much as Wall Street has its faults, you cannot win an election on class warfare. Maybe some class conflict, but not warfare. more things get done with more people at the table.
artislife
(9,497 posts)ericson00
(2,707 posts)and heck, if some of the financial institutions want to be useful idiots, let 'em!
artislife
(9,497 posts)And disappoints us all.
I think we have to go for broke. There is a planet that is melting, the haves are raking in everything to make a killing . And we are suffering because of it. Monsanto putting pestiside inside the effing plants, fracking causing earthquakes in OK, Nestle bottling up water in California...
Then we have financial decay, civil rights violations, and police murdering Blacks and getting away with it. We have kids on pills, Apache lands sold to foreigners and veterans on the streets.
I don't believe in her.
I think she cares, she is human, but isn't feeling any of it as urgent.
I hope I am so wrong. But her winning the election, I fear is losing the battle.
brooklynite
(94,539 posts)...and then when she voted to rescind them in 2008?
I mean, she was bought and paid for!
MisterP
(23,730 posts)REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
This is an ABSOLUTE misrepresentation of this chart, the fact that the Bernie Sanders group allows this distortion in their group is rediculous. Stop the bullshit.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Jul 26, 2015, 10:08 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: facts are not alertable
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: How the heck is this ???? Never mind.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: However misleading, this table isn't going to convince anyone it hasn't already convinced.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: And the childish bullshit between the HRC/BS groups marches on. You're boring me.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)If your biggest donors are from Wall Street, that automatically defines you as a candidate.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Clueless, poutraged and in need of spell check.
The alerter hit the Hillary supporter trifecta!
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)but does the above note mean that someone tried to get the whole thread taken down? i am still pretty new to the mechanics of du
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)It's a common enough tactic when they don't like the info and usually jurors see right through it.
Cowardly, imo. If they had issues with it they should have posted them in the thread.
Don't know how long you've been here but Welcome to DU!
Buckle up!
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)and the welcome! been a member for years, but only started posting again when bernie announced.
udbcrzy2
(891 posts)Response to restorefreedom (Original post)
1000words This message was self-deleted by its author.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)Most of Hillarys money comes from the individuals that work for those industries.
My interpretation? Union PACs don't seem to be representative of the individual Union members.
Other thing to keep in mind, these are CAREER donations and not just for,this election cycle. unions also contributed to Hillary, they are not in the top 20 for her entire political career. I've searched OPen Secrets and find very little breakdown for for contributions for, the 2016 Presidential race.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)NanceGreggs
(27,814 posts)... is it recycling day on DU again? It seems to come about every forty-eight hours, doesn't it?
DanTex
(20,709 posts)brooklynite
(94,539 posts)Beyond the sheer laziness of re-posting the same table that's been endlessly posted for the past several months, you should at least acknowledge that these contribution lists have no relation to the current Presidential Primary fundraising by either candidate.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)not able to read every thread
as to its veracity, there is a pattern to be gleaned. hillary attracts big corporate donors, bernie does not.
sorry if that reality is unpleasant.
edit: "Beyond the sheer laziness of re-posting the same table...."
sorry i don t read every thread, catalog and date it's content, and check my log before posting.
i will have to put that on my to do list.
brooklynite
(94,539 posts)...because none of those corporations gave her a penny. They're not allowed to under FEC rules. Those were individuals affiliated with those companies who gave personal donations. My wife's contribution (as a "Wall St Lawyer" would probably fall into the same category; but then so would her contribution to Elizabeth Warren...
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)the list speaks for itself
they are attracting different types of donors, what that means is up to each voter to decide
if you think it is fine, then great. some think she is owned by the rich and powerful on wall st.
different strokes and all......
brooklynite
(94,539 posts)Wall Street (however you feel about it) plays a significant economic role in New York State...where Clinton was a Senator. Would you prefer that Wall Street workers gave their money to her Republican opponents?
And regardless of who contributed to her, I'll go with how she actually voted:
Perhaps raise capital gains tax, but at most to 20%. (Apr 2008)
Rescind tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 a year. (Feb 2008)
AdWatch: cut taxes for the middle class. (Feb 2008)
Wealthy should go back to paying pre-Bush tax rates. (Jan 2008)
Want to restore the tax rates we had in the 90s. (Dec 2007)
Freeze estate tax at 2009 level of $7 million per couple. (Oct 2007)
Why cut off payroll contribution at $95,000? (Jun 2007)
Cut alternative minimum tax, not billionaire tax cuts. (Mar 2007)
Expand child tax credit for childs first year. (Dec 2006)
End Bush tax cuts;take things away from rich for common good. (Oct 2006)
To get America back on track, cut short tax cuts. (Sep 2005)
NY share of federal taxes is too high. (Feb 2000)
Just Say No to GOP tax plan. (Sep 1999)
GOP tax plan would hurt New Yorks students. (Aug 1999)
Voted YES on increasing tax rate for people earning over $1 million. (Mar 2008)
Voted NO on allowing AMT reduction without budget offset. (Mar 2008)
Voted NO on raising the Death Tax exemption to $5M from $1M. (Feb 2008)
Voted NO on repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax. (Mar 2007)
Voted NO on raising estate tax exemption to $5 million. (Mar 2007)
Voted NO on supporting permanence of estate tax cuts. (Aug 2006)
Voted NO on permanently repealing the `death tax`. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on $47B for military by repealing capital gains tax cut. (Feb 2006)
Voted YES on retaining reduced taxes on capital gains & dividends. (Feb 2006)
Voted YES on extending the tax cuts on capital gains and dividends. (Nov 2005)
Voted NO on $350 billion in tax breaks over 11 years. (May 2003)
Voted YES on reducing marriage penalty instead of cutting top tax rates. (May 2001)
Voted YES on increasing tax deductions for college tuition. (May 2001)
Rated 21% by NTU, indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes. (Dec 2003)
Rated 80% by the CTJ, indicating support of progressive taxation. (Dec 2006)
http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Hillary_Clinton.htm#Tax_Reform
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)i never said her votes were all horrid. i just worry about who any candidate "owes" from donations
another reason we need publicly financed elections imo. then all these threads will cease to exist
although i am sure du ers will find plenty else to argue about.....
brooklynite
(94,539 posts)...without adequate funding under the existing rules, there's too much risk of Sanders losing to a Republican who would have no incentive to fix things. Clinton -will- have the financial resources she'll need for a national election, and is committed to overturning CU through SC appointments and/or a Constitutional amendment.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)but i am hopeful and confident that whoever the nominee is, there will be enough to get ads out etc. and be competitive
well, unless it is trump, then we might be screwed...
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Also, Hillary gets more money from employees of large New York based companies. You'd almost think New York was her home state...
I'm sure you didn't know this, but if you click on another tab at OpenSecrets, you will find that 3.4% of Hillary's money came from financial sector employees. Retirees contributed more to her than bankers. So if you're worried that she's "owned by banks", you can rest at ease.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1107&pid=12458