Hillary Clinton’s Mega-Donors Are Also Funding Jeb Bush

[think]

Hillary Clinton’s Mega-Donors Are Also Funding Jeb Bush

By Jackie Kucinich - 08.04.159:00 PM ET

For some wealthy donors, it doesn’t matter who takes the White House in 2016—as long as the president’s name is Clinton or Bush.

More than 60 ultra-rich Americans have contributed to both Jeb Bush’s and Hillary Clinton’s federal campaigns, according to an analysis of Federal Election Commission data by Vocativ and The Daily Beast. Seventeen of those contributors have gone one step further and opened their wallets to fund both Bush’s and Clinton’s 2016 ambitions.

After all, why support just Hillary Clinton or just Jeb Bush when you can hedge your bets and donate to both? This seems to be the thinking of a group of powerful men and women—racetrack owners, bankers, media barons, chicken magnates, hedge funders (and their spouses). Some of them have net worths that can eclipse the GDPs of small countries.

Larry Noble, senior counsel for the Campaign Legal Center, told The Daily Beast that it’s a common practice among a small number of people.

“Some of them will say they believe in the process, but the truth is you usually see them giving to people who will be most helpful to them if [the politician] gets into office,” he said. “They are not necessarily Republicans or Democrats, they are business people first.”...

Read more:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/04/hillary-clinton-s-mega-donors-are-also-funding-jeb-bush.html

[Segami]

1. Surprise!

[think]

5. TY for posting this. Hopefully it will entice people to read the article & learn about these donors.

It's well worth the read....

[Segami]

8. I was going to post this read...

..so all is well.

It is a well worth article

[fredamae]

2. Why, this can't be good

news to a Progressive, by majority, electorate.

[think]

3. Apparently to mega donors they see little difference between Bush & Clinton

Social issues are secondary as is the Democratic party.

To mega donors it appears that it's all about making money...

[Scuba]

9. /\_/\_This right here_/\_/\

[fredamae]

18. Exactly! n/t

[Fuddnik]

20. I used to refer to Hillary as "Bush in a skirt", based on her policies.

Still stands.

BTW, note the author of the article is Dennis Kucinich s daughter.

[dsc]

32. yeah

unless you are a woman or care about one, unless you are gay or care about gays, unless you are Hispanic or care about them. Otherwise she is totally the same.

[1StrongBlackMan]

22. Or the mega donors are doing what mega donors always do ...

place a bet on the person/people they think will likely win the general election ... and they give to both sides of the aisle.

[virtualobserver]

26. that is step one

step two.....is that they will influence policy the way that mega donors always influence policy.

[840high]

29. +1

[newfie11]

4. This is scary

Apparently not much difference according to donors!

Go Bernie!

[think]

6. It certainly shows what mega donors care about and it's obviously not social issues..... /nt

[DanTex]

7. Umm, who cares? About 60 people donated a total of about $100K to each campaign.

These aren't "mega-donors", mega-donors don't donate $2700, they donate millions to Super PACs.

[jeff47]

13. And some of these people have.

Hence the "at least" in the chart in the first reply.

[stevenleser]

10. It's called hedging. nt

[think]

11. Hedging is a great way to make Bushes look more ornate....

[stevenleser]

12. No. nt

[Thespian2]

14. What a total surprise!!!

Who could have known???

[JI7]

15. they Would do that no matter who was front runner

[NYCButterfinger]

16. I hope that a Clinton vs. Bush 2016 election doesn't

end up in lower turnout, but that may be the case the way things are going.

[neverforget]

17. Money buys influence and the wealthy have both plus they have both

parties.

[fbc]

19. Can't have all your eggs in one corporate basket

[artislife]

21. This just shows you

How one group thinks the way money is donated is a problem and the some of the others...pffft it doesn't matter.

Money is the single biggest influencer in elections in this country. It is one of the main reasons that the system is rigged.

[Larkspur]

23. As I've said before, Wall Street wins whether a Clinton or a Rethugican wins in Nov 2016

and Main Street is the loser. I'm not surprised these mega donors donate to the top tier Establishment candidates of both parties.
Maybe these mega donors should form their own party -- Sharknado-Political donors.

[FlatBaroque]

24. “They are not necessarily Republicans or Democrats, they are business people first.”...

Let that sink in.

[Zorra]

25. Of course they are. If either Bush or Clinton are elected, Oligarchy is not threatened, and

destructive corporate practices, destructive environmental practices, privatization of government and resources, and ownership of our government by wealthy private interests will remain unregulated and unhindered by government intervention.

After 6-Year Tenure Not Prosecuting Banks, Eric Holder Returns 'Home' to Defend Them

[arcane1]

27. Makes sense, since they will both support and maintain the status quo.

[LondonReign2]

28. I'd say they both support continuing to move the country rightward

[Doctor_J]

30. maybe this is why

http://www.democraticunderground.com/128033005

[KoKo]

31. Now that you mention it and the link....

It's possible.

We can't discount that Karl Rove was NOT the last of the "Dirty Tricksters" in Politics....he had disciples...

[tblue37]

33. K&R for visibility. nt