| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 1:48 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Maybe Techno missed this on the site:
| Quote: | Money-in-politics is not a young person’s game. While 2016’s presidential hopefuls may try to recreate Barack Obama’s successful appeal to young voters, they’ll spend much of their time hitting up the country’s wealthiest senior citizens for cash. Already Republican candidates are vying for the support of the septuagenarian Koch brothers and the octogenarian Sheldon Adelson, while Hillary Clinton prepares to rally longtime financial backers who were already middle-aged during her husband’s presidency.
It’s not surprising, then that the Center for Responsive Politics’ list of top individual donors is rife with retirees. Of the top 500 donors to federal candidates and committees in 2014, CRP was able to identify or approximate the age of 491. Only 10 were born in 1975 or later, and none after 1985. Among these mega-donors the average age was 65.6, while the most common age was 70.
Democrats have had much more success than Republicans with young voters in the last decade, but their top contributors are not much greener than the GOP’s. While the cycle’s biggest donor — by far — was the relatively spry liberal Tom Steyer (celebrating his 58th birthday later this month), the average Democrat in the top 500 was 64.1 years old in 2014, against 66.7 for Republicans. This matters as both sides worry about how their demographic base will shape their chances in future elections; each side lost at least one major long-time patron, including Peter Lewis on the left and Bob Perry and Harold Simmons on the right, during the 2014 cycle. Of course, it takes immense wealth to make the top tier of political givers — the top 500 all gave over $228,000 in 2014, more than four times the average household’s income — and few of the country’s wealthiest citizens, as identified by Forbes’ 2014 list of billionaires, are young. The American billionaires averaged 65.9 years of age, just months more than the average for mega-donors, and 70 was again the most common age on the list. |
Maybe angry old rich guys have a chance this election?
Did he also miss the top spenders?
Lobbying Client Total
US Chamber of Commerce $19,680,000
National Assn of Realtors $7,736,857
American Medical Assn $6,940,000
Blue Cross/Blue Shield $5,798,964
Google Inc $5,470,000
Pharmaceutical Rsrch & Mfrs of America $5,445,000
American Hospital Assn $5,357,416
General Electric $4,750,000
National Assn of Broadcasters $4,720,000
American Electric Power $4,685,670
Comcast Corp $4,670,000
Business Roundtable $4,480,000
AT&T Inc $4,370,000
United Technologies $4,270,000
CVS Health $4,070,000
National Assn of Manufacturers $3,900,000
Boeing Co $3,880,000
National Cable & Telecommunications Assn $3,780,000
Lockheed Martin $3,626,020
Verizon Communications $3,440,000
Businesses. Medical, defense, Chamber of Commerce. Do you really expect us to believe that is the Democrats normal line of support? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14877
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| techno900 wrote: | Geeeez. All I did was look at Baja's supporting web site and found information contrary to what he is claiming. It must sting to be found so wrong, as exhibited by his ranting.
"Push this button" = go stark raving mad.............. It's so fun at times. |
hahahahaha as usual I posted actual points that show you are so intellectually challenged and can not even understand the data. I gave you the opportunity to re-fute these points. And again these points I did not dig up anywhere in the media. I did not spit out fox and lies, I did not cut and paste from any site so you were stuck with having to use your non-existant brain.
It is obvious you did not do well in math logic. I understand some people just did not apply themselves in school and there are some that just plain stupid. But the problem here is you post on a public website that people from all over the world read and see how stupid americans on the right are. It really is a embarrassment to america. Granted they already know it, but you are too stupid to understand how stupid you really are so you go McVeigh over something this little. Think what your and yours are capable of doing on larger issues because of your frustration with stupidity..
Same with your other little troll who could not debate my points who went McVeigh in the previous post and obviously supports terrorist types like your stupidity posts when they can not post facts they go McVeigh together.
again show me where I am wrong on the post with my analysis. Obviously way past your intellect so you go McVeigh.
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 17, 2015 12:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
OK guys, I admit that I didn't see the "top spenders" list, I just went to "Contributions" from Lobbyists. What I saw does contradict Baja's claim. However, Mac posted the "top spenders" list which is informative, but I would question Baja's claim in the last sentence:
| Quote: | | Over 3 billion is spent a year on Lobbying. and to be elected president is about a billion every 4 years. Notice how they do not claim lobbying is a political expenditure. Again every single one of the companies is right wing and not one liberal major player. |
Every single one? Anyone buy that other than Baja? I wonder what type of intellectual analysis was used to come up with this claim? I am not saying he is wrong, but proving it correct will ease my skepticism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 17, 2015 12:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Techno--you've just done something with class. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14877
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 17, 2015 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| techno900 wrote: | OK guys, I admit that I didn't see the "top spenders" list, I just went to "Contributions" from Lobbyists. What I saw does contradict Baja's claim. However, Mac posted the "top spenders" list which is informative, but I would question Baja's claim in the last sentence:
| Quote: | | Over 3 billion is spent a year on Lobbying. and to be elected president is about a billion every 4 years. Notice how they do not claim lobbying is a political expenditure. Again every single one of the companies is right wing and not one liberal major player. |
Every single one? Anyone buy that other than Baja? I wonder what type of intellectual analysis was used to come up with this claim? I am not saying he is wrong, but proving it correct will ease my skepticism. |
well I have to say does that mean you go McVeigh as you did. Again I was correct you were not and obviously still not able to comprehend the difference in magnitude of 7 million donations to dems vs 3.3 billion to right wing issues. That again you think that is of a significant nature is math-logic- intellectually waco. And again this money dwarfs what is spent for presidential campaigns and for the 501s. This is 3 billion a year.
Yes, basically and essentially every one of those companies is not lobbying for the poor people or liberal causes... there is no money to be made in that so no significant money spent. all that major money in Lobbying is spent for those companies special interest. That being no minimum wage increase and so on... And if you do more research it is about 60-70 percent specifically lobbying for tax issues like breaks and handouts for trust fund kids and corporations.
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14877
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2015 11:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
If a liberal ever said this as an active member of congress it would be all over the media for weeks as headlines..
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2015/06/12/3668934/peter-king-denny-hastert/
| Quote: | Rep. Peter King (R-NY), a prominent House Republican who served under Hastert, discussed the matter on the John Gambling Show shortly after the indictment came down in May, but only saw one victim in the ordeal: Hastert. “I don’t know what this is about,” King said. “Apparently this person came and threatened to disclose something on Denny Hastert that goes back over 35 years, that happened 35 years ago, and he was taking money out illegally to pay the person. The only victim here is Denny Hastert.”
“What happened back in the 60s or 70s, I don’t know,” King concluded. |
Nope he got it wrong, it appears the victims were the children a adult teacher abused. Also victims are the speakers family. But he is no victim, oh thats right a republican always playing the victim game. yep the right wing playing the real victim here again.
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 20935
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2015 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pope opposes abortion, gay marriage, et. al., NYT lays into him.
Pope supports AGW legislation, NYT declares him a bone fide climate scientist.
Liberal bias? Of course not. After all, 97% of the Catholic clergy agree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14877
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2015 12:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| isobars wrote: | Pope opposes abortion, gay marriage, et. al., NYT lays into him.
Pope supports AGW legislation, NYT declares him a bone fide climate scientist.
Liberal bias? Of course not. After all, 97% of the Catholic clergy agree. |
you mean there is one quisi liberal media in the entire USA... You mean the media that had obviously a CIA agent on their payroll knowingly... actually many of them. I am sure these CIA paid reporters working at the NYT were un-biassed. So un-biassed to date we do not know which ones were being paid by the CIA.
anyway gee that reporter at the NYT Judith Miller that backed/put out the Bush Cheney Rove war stuff to get us into a war. Remember Cheney quoting the NYT (funny he leaked the info we found out) but here he was quoting Judith (hmmm how much was she paid by the CIA?) to get us lies into the paper from confidential sources.
wow and the NYT is somehow liberal in your delusional mind.
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14877
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2015 12:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If this was a dem the media would be all over it headlines....
Scott Walker gives out 125 million in handouts with no vetting process for about 1/4 of them or more... One as a minimum goes bankrupt that had donated money the max amount to Scott. Not one Wisconsin major paper even covers it in the weekend.... The idiot is in the top 3 for some right wing polling for president... and no one covers it or goes for the details...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/06/21/1395233/-Chicago-Tribune-picks-up-big-Walker-corruption-story?detail=email#
| Quote: | On Friday afternoon, the Walker gang did a news dump, revealing that the corrupt Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation, which Walker created and has chaired, was responsible for handing out more than $124 million to Wisconsin businesses without any formal staff review of them. Please see the diary by Jake formerly of the UP on this. Since hearing about this, I have had the feeling that this outrageous episode of incompetence and cronyism might just be the thing that finally exposes Scott Walker as the criminal he is.
But I have seen little follow-up to the Friday story in any major news outlet. But the Chicago Tribune did cover it in this story: "Scott Walker's Wisconsin jobs agency gave out $124 million without review" |
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14877
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2015 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
where is that liberal media when ya want one... they just will not cover Sanders..
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/05/27/1388205/-Big-media-s-sneering-dismissive-coverage-of-Bernie-Sanders-is-a-plague-on-democracy
Big media's sneering, dismissive coverage of Bernie Sanders is a plague on democracy
| Quote: | The Bernie 2016 boomlet is clearly a bit puzzling to reporters, who don’t seem to know what to do with Sanders beyond treating him as a foil to Hillary, and so they default to doing nothing, even as every utterance of GOP candidates who are polling below 2 percent merits its own headline. There are clear double standards at play, and one of them pertains to how reporters cover a candidate who is unreservedly liberal versus how they cover “proudly conservative” Republicans. This dynamic is sometimes subtle, and it emerged during an interview Sanders gave with CNBC’s John Harwood.
Income inequality and the distribution of wealth are two topics Sanders hammers away at constantly, and during the interview with Harwood he brought up the fact that the top marginal tax rate for income during the 1950s was somewhere around 90 percent. Sanders’ comment took Harwood aback. “When you think about something like 90 percent, you don’t think that’s obviously too high?” he asked. “No,” Bernie shot back. Sanders’ endorsement of the Eisenhower-era tax structure also raised eyebrows at The New York Times, which observed that Sanders “doesn’t flinch over returning to the 90 percent personal income tax rates of the 1950s for top earners.” In these reactions you can easily spy an undercurrent of incredulity that a politician would enthusiastically advocate for rich people to pay more—much, much more—in taxes. |
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
