PDA

View Full Version : As Sanders Slams Wall Street Elite, Clinton Ditches Iowa To Fetch Their Checks



AeonPax
01-27-2016, 08:45 AM
`
`
"Seemingly undeterred by the consistent critique that her close ties to the financial industry are hurting her campaign, The Intercept on Tuesday reports that with less than a week until the Iowa caucus, Hillary Clinton will soon leave the hotly-contested state to attend a pair of Wall Street-sponsored fundraising events. According to The Intercept's Zaid Jilani:

Clinton will appear in Philadelphia at a “gala” fund-raiser hosted by executives at Franklin Square Capital Partners, a $17 billion investment fund. Rocker Bon Jovi will reportedly play an acoustic set for “friends” who pledge $1,000 and hosts who bundle up to $27,000." - Source
(http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/01/26/sanders-slams-wall-street-elite-clinton-ditches-iowa-fetch-their-checks?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=reddit&utm_source=news)

`

**********
`
This woman is toxic waste to America's poor, middle and working class. She'll be nobody's president but Wall Streets.

Common Sense
01-27-2016, 08:47 AM
Without campaign finance reform, the system is doomed.

Common
01-27-2016, 09:01 AM
The rich 2% own us and have bought our country. The candidates all suck, bernie is the most honest but he cannot win the general election.

Mac-7
01-27-2016, 09:08 AM
The rich 2% own us and have bought our country. The candidates all suck, bernie is the most honest but he cannot win the general election.

Bernie gets the same 47% of the vote that hillary or joe stalin would get as the democrat candidate.

Common
01-27-2016, 09:15 AM
Bernie gets the same 47% of the vote that hillary or joe stalin would get as the democrat candidate.

Trump gets as much as any gop asshole and cruz gets less because hes a bigger asshole.

Mac-7
01-27-2016, 09:33 AM
Trump gets as much as any gop $#@! and cruz gets less because hes a bigger $#@!.

We'll see.

Since there are now more voters riding in the wagon than pulling it democrats have that much advantage built in to every election.

AeonPax
01-27-2016, 09:46 AM
Without campaign finance reform, the system is doomed.
`
True but neither party (except Sanders) wants this. Therein lays the problem.

Chris
01-27-2016, 10:50 AM
Hillary is in the top 0.1%. Enough said.

Truth Detector
01-27-2016, 10:51 AM
`
`
"seemingly undeterred by the consistent critique that her close ties to the financial industry are hurting her campaign, the intercept on tuesday reports that with less than a week until the iowa caucus, hillary clinton will soon leave the hotly-contested state to attend a pair of wall street-sponsored fundraising events. According to the intercept's zaid jilani:

Clinton will appear in philadelphia at a “gala” fund-raiser hosted by executives at franklin square capital partners, a $17 billion investment fund. Rocker bon jovi will reportedly play an acoustic set for “friends” who pledge $1,000 and hosts who bundle up to $27,000." - source
(http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/01/26/sanders-slams-wall-street-elite-clinton-ditches-iowa-fetch-their-checks?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=reddit&utm_source=news)

`

**********
`
this woman is toxic waste to america's poor, middle and working class. She'll be nobody's president but wall streets.

GOOoooo sanders!!!! Feel the BERN!!

Truth Detector
01-27-2016, 10:53 AM
Without campaign finance reform, the system is doomed.

Wrong; without educated and informed voters, every system is doomed. Obama being the best and latest example.

Truth Detector
01-27-2016, 10:54 AM
The rich 2% own us and have bought our country. The candidates all suck, bernie is the most honest but he cannot win the general election.

And yet, the candidates who are spending and raising the most are struggling on the DNC side and barely moving the Richter scale on the RNC side.

Chris
01-27-2016, 10:55 AM
Without campaign finance reform, the system is doomed.

Yes, let's stop all campaign contributions because some politicians are corrupt.

Truth Detector
01-27-2016, 10:55 AM
Trump gets as much as any gop $#@! and cruz gets less because hes a bigger $#@!.

So you'll be voting Democrat this year? Can they count on your vote? Are you registered as Democrat?

Truth Detector
01-27-2016, 10:59 AM
Yes, let's stop all campaign contributions because some politicians are corrupt.

ALL politicians are corrupt and all politics are corrupting. It's not campaign finance that is the problem, but an uninformed public fed by a media no longer interested in objectivity and reporting but rather, indoctrinating and promoting the Liberal ideology through the DNC.

Chris
01-27-2016, 11:10 AM
ALL politicians are corrupt and all politics are corrupting. It's not campaign finance that is the problem, but an uninformed public fed by a media no longer interested in objectivity and reporting but rather, indoctrinating and promoting the Liberal ideology through the DNC.

OK, then let's put all politicians behind bars presuming they're corrupt.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=at82C8E8HUE

Truth Detector
01-27-2016, 11:28 AM
OK, then let's put all politicians behind bars presuming they're corrupt.

When was being corrupt a criminal offense? Do you like making stupid comments just for the sake of stupidity?

Corrupted by power....corrupted by money.....Corrupted by arrogance.....etc. etc.

Dumb.

Tahuyaman
01-27-2016, 11:29 AM
Without campaign finance reform, the system is doomed.

The campaign finance reform we have now was supposed to be the fix for the system.

Theres only one way the campaign finance system can be changed for the better. Enact term limits. Eliminate political office as a career. Once the power of incumbency is eliminated, the system wil fix itself.

AeonPax
01-27-2016, 11:48 AM
Wrong; without educated and informed voters, every system is doomed. Obama being the best and latest example.
`
When has the US, in it's entire history, ever had "educated and informed voters?"

Truth Detector
01-27-2016, 11:52 AM
The campaign finance reform we have now was supposed to be the fix for the system.

Theres only one way the campaign finance system can be changed for the better. Enact term limits. Eliminate political office as a career. Once the power of incumbency is eliminated, the system wil fix itself.

BRAVO; someone who gets it. That and abolishing the current abomination called the Tax Code and supplanting it with a Fair consumption Tax are the ONLY way to end the corruption of the Wahington DC professional politician appealing to dimwitted voters by promising them free stuff.

Tahuyaman
01-27-2016, 11:53 AM
`
When has the US, in it's entire history, ever had "educated and informed voters?"

I'd be willing to bet that in the days before television and the ten second sound bite, people were much more aware of where the candidates stood on the issues.

Truth Detector
01-27-2016, 11:54 AM
`
When has the US, in it's entire history, ever had "educated and informed voters?"

You must have missed this in grade school history; but our founders clearly understood that a Democracy could only last if it had an educated and informed citizenry.

They also debated and understood that the end of the Republic would not come from outside of our borders, but from within when politicians learned they could get elected by promising gullible fools free stuff.

Chris
01-27-2016, 11:57 AM
When was being corrupt a criminal offense? Do you like making stupid comments just for the sake of stupidity?

Corrupted by power....corrupted by money.....Corrupted by arrogance.....etc. etc.

Dumb.


So corruption is OK with you? Amazing, simply amazing.


Nice use on your part of the "I'm right; you're wrong' therefore, there's something wrong with you" sophistry.

Chris
01-27-2016, 11:59 AM
`
When has the US, in it's entire history, ever had "educated and informed voters?"

Consider half of just this thread.

silvereyes
01-27-2016, 12:00 PM
Bernie gets the same 47% of the vote that hillary or joe stalin would get as the democrat candidate.
This is what I love about Mac. He's always so positive about dems. ;)

Tahuyaman
01-27-2016, 12:02 PM
BRAVO; someone who gets it. That and abolishing the current abomination called the Tax Code and supplanting it with a Fair consumption Tax are the ONLY way to end the corruption of the Wahington DC professional politician appealing to dimwitted voters by promising them free stuff.

but the key is term limits. Eliminating the power of incumbency will cure just about everything.

Tahuyaman
01-27-2016, 12:03 PM
This is what I love about Mac. He's always so positive about dems. ;)


He's just a reverse image of you.

silvereyes
01-27-2016, 12:06 PM
And yet, the candidates who are spending and raising the most are struggling on the DNC side and barely moving the Richter scale on the RNC side.
I'm shocked that you can spell Richter. Shocked, I tell ya. ;)

AeonPax
01-27-2016, 12:08 PM
`
What I am saying is that this nation has never had a majority of educated and informed voters. Theoretically, with the internet, we should by rights have one now but no. There will always be a large minority of any population whom despite even having higher education, that can be influenced by things that titillate, entertain and excite. Money, the more, the better, can easily capture the attention and loyalty of such people.

The Xl
01-27-2016, 12:08 PM
I'm not a fan of most of either of their policies, but Trump and Sanders are the only two people running worth anything, because they're the only two people who aren't bought.

The Xl
01-27-2016, 12:09 PM
Yes, let's stop all campaign contributions because some politicians are corrupt.

You misspelled nearly all.

AeonPax
01-27-2016, 12:14 PM
You must have missed this in grade school history; but our founders clearly understood that a Democracy could only last if it had an educated and informed citizenry. They also debated and understood that the end of the Republic would not come from outside of our borders, but from within when politicians learned they could get elected by promising gullible fools free stuff.
`
Good idea professor. But back (Revolutionary War) then only 15, maybe 20% of Americans were truly literate. Yeah, they were well informed. Gotcha.

AeonPax
01-27-2016, 12:15 PM
Consider half of just this thread.
`
Actually, the question was rhetorical.

Truth Detector
01-27-2016, 01:11 PM
`
Good idea professor. But back (Revolutionary War) then only 15, maybe 20% of Americans were truly literate. Yeah, they were well informed. Gotcha.

I'm amused that you equate literacy with today's educational establishment. But yes, 18th century Americans were much better informed, much more mature at a younger age and still didn't think they needed Government to live.

Chris
01-27-2016, 01:32 PM
`
Good idea professor. But back (Revolutionary War) then only 15, maybe 20% of Americans were truly literate. Yeah, they were well informed. Gotcha.

Back then, too, only those who were landed were franchised.

Time were simple back then, too. Today there's information overload and becoming informed politically is too costly for the return on investment (one vote).

MisterVeritis
01-27-2016, 01:33 PM
Without campaign finance reform, the system is doomed.
What reform do you have in mind?

Common Sense
01-27-2016, 01:37 PM
What reform do you have in mind?

Overturn citizens united. Strict limits on campaign spending. No Super PACs. Equal access to public advertising.

MisterVeritis
01-27-2016, 01:38 PM
`
What I am saying is that this nation has never had a majority of educated and informed voters. Theoretically, with the internet, we should by rights have one now but no. There will always be a large minority of any population whom despite even having higher education, that can be influenced by things that titillate, entertain and excite. Money, the more, the better, can easily capture the attention and loyalty of such people.
You are right. We need voter reform. If you haven't a clue you cannot vote. If you are not a net tax contributor at the level of the election you cannot vote.

Add term limits for everybody and reduce the federal government back to its Constitutional limits and the problem will be solved.

Chris
01-27-2016, 01:39 PM
Overturn citizens united. Strict limits on campaign spending. No Super PACs. Equal access to public advertising.

Why do you want to penalize those who have committed no wrongdoing?

Equal access? Who's preventing even you from advertizing publicly?

MisterVeritis
01-27-2016, 01:43 PM
Overturn citizens united. Strict limits on campaign spending. No Super PACs. Equal access to public advertising.
Let's see:
1) Overturn citizens united.
2) Strict limits on campaign spending.
3) No Super PACs.
4) Equal access to public advertising

1) Why overturn Citizens United? What benefit does overturning a right to freedom of speech confer?

2) What benefit would strict limits on campaign spending confer? And who benefits? Do your strict limits include the value of the union thugs who are turned out to support democratic candidates? What would the strict limits mean?

3) How would you determine what is or is not a super PAC? Will you have another police force to enforce this?

4) Who, in your opinion, is not allowed to buy public advertising?

Common Sense
01-27-2016, 01:43 PM
Why do you want to penalize those who have committed no wrongdoing?

Equal access? Who's preventing even you from advertizing publicly?

How's the current system working out for you?

The current system and rules surrounding elections only reward those who can raise the most money. Entrenching the already powerful and assuring that money buys power.

There's a reason why all the other democracies put limits on campaign spending. Because without it, corruption is pretty much guaranteed.

MisterVeritis
01-27-2016, 01:45 PM
How's the current system working out for you?
The current system involves a massive unconstitutional government. Return the Constitutional limits and the problem diminishes.

TrueBlue
01-27-2016, 01:46 PM
`
`
"Seemingly undeterred by the consistent critique that her close ties to the financial industry are hurting her campaign, The Intercept on Tuesday reports that with less than a week until the Iowa caucus, Hillary Clinton will soon leave the hotly-contested state to attend a pair of Wall Street-sponsored fundraising events. According to The Intercept's Zaid Jilani:

Clinton will appear in Philadelphia at a “gala” fund-raiser hosted by executives at Franklin Square Capital Partners, a $17 billion investment fund. Rocker Bon Jovi will reportedly play an acoustic set for “friends” who pledge $1,000 and hosts who bundle up to $27,000." - Source
(http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/01/26/sanders-slams-wall-street-elite-clinton-ditches-iowa-fetch-their-checks?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=reddit&utm_source=news)

`

**********
`
This woman is toxic waste to America's poor, middle and working class. She'll be nobody's president but Wall Streets.
What a nasty and unfortunate spin has been put on this situation. And just how do you perceive a presidential candidate as winning if they do not first raise enough money to offset the costs of running a campaign? After all, Donald Trump is Mega-Rich. He does not need to go anywhere to have money donated to his campaign but other candidates do, including Clinton. So, it is unfair to characterize Hillary in this manner knowing full well that she most certainly does have the Middle Class, the poor and the working class in mind and embraces them all and wants to win this election so that she can put her plans to good use in order to help them and for them to fully benefit from. But again, that will take A LOT OF MONEY! She needs to raise enough money between now and November to become competitive with Trump.

Chris
01-27-2016, 01:48 PM
How's the current system working out for you?

The current system and rules surrounding elections only reward those who can raise the most money. Entrenching the already powerful and assuring that money buys power.

There's a reason why all the other democracies put limits on campaign spending. Because without it, corruption is pretty much guaranteed.

Let's grant all that, for the sake of argument. Your solution doesn't address the problem, the system, the system that allows politicians to use their power to sell out the people. Furthermore, your solution, in addressing only rent seekers, is far too broad in that it penalizes people before any wrongdoing occurs. Finally, your solution only exasperates the real problem, too much political power, by giving politicians even more power to control elections.

Again, you don't have equal access to public advertizing? Who is preventing you?

Chris
01-27-2016, 01:51 PM
What a nasty and unfortunate spin has been put on this situation. And just how do you perceive a presidential candidate as winning if they do not first raise enough money to offset the costs of running a campaign? After all, Donald Trump is Mega-Rich. He does not need to go anywhere to have money donated to his campaign but other candidates do, including Clinton. So, it is unfair to characterize Hillary in this manner knowing full well that she most certainly does have the Middle Class, the poor and the working class in mind and embraces them all and wants to win this election so that she can put her plans to good use in order to help them and for them to fully benefit from. But again, that will take A LOT OF MONEY! She needs to raise enough money between now and November to become competitive with Trump.


Stop portraying Hillary as anything but in the top 0.1%.

Common Sense
01-27-2016, 02:02 PM
Let's grant all that, for the sake of argument. Your solution doesn't address the problem, the system, the system that allows politicians to use their power to sell out the people. Furthermore, your solution, in addressing only rent seekers, is far too broad in that it penalizes people before any wrongdoing occurs. Finally, your solution only exasperates the real problem, too much political power, by giving politicians even more power to control elections.

Again, you don't have equal access to public advertizing? Who is preventing you?

As far as equal access, I was unclear. I meant equal access as in all getting the same air time.

That's just a technical point...

No one is being punished. A limit is not punishment. Just as a speed limit is not a punishment for drivers.

Look, there is a good reason sports teams have spending caps. If you removed them, one team would end up outspending the others and that team would get more and more powerful until it simply dominated.

Another thing beyond campaign finance reform, would be reform of lobbying. That is also a cancer on the political process.

Chris
01-27-2016, 02:12 PM
As far as equal access, I was unclear. I meant equal access as in all getting the same air time.

That's just a technical point...

No one is being punished. A limit is not punishment. Just as a speed limit is not a punishment for drivers.

Look, there is a good reason sports teams have spending caps. If you removed them, one team would end up outspending the others and that team would get more and more powerful until it simply dominated.

Another thing beyond campaign finance reform, would be reform of lobbying. That is also a cancer on the political process.



Ah, you want to coerce equal time for all. What, we'd each get 1 second of air time?

Restricting people from donating when they've done no wrong is punishing them.

Because some teams are owned by cheapskates.

I really wish you would address by three challenges.

AeonPax
01-27-2016, 02:12 PM
Back then, too, only those who were landed were franchised. Time were simple back then, too. Today there's information overload and becoming informed politically is too costly for the return on investment (one vote).
`
Back then, we were a rural agrarian nation. - The answer to information overload is learning how to filter.

Chris
01-27-2016, 02:17 PM
`
Back then, we were a rural agrarian nation. - The answer to information overload is learning how to filter.

Agree, but even that is costly in relation to what it accomplishes: You make a more informed vote, which, in reality, counts so little. Part of filtering information is filtering in information that has value to your life, can be used to accomplish things for yourself and others.

MisterVeritis
01-27-2016, 02:31 PM
As far as equal access, I was unclear. I meant equal access as in all getting the same air time.
Does this mean you would force all advertisers to provide their property without compensation to all of the candidates?
I love slavery just as much as the next guy, but why must the productive always bear the burdens of your utopian dreams?

Common Sense
01-27-2016, 02:36 PM
Does this mean you would force all advertisers to provide their property without compensation to all of the candidates?
I love slavery just as much as the next guy, but why must the productive always bear the burdens of your utopian dreams?

Airtime wold be paid for at industry rates.

I would just advise all of you to just take a look at how other nations do it. Because if you really think this current system is working or is democratic, or that spending $10 billion and stretching an election out over two years is a good idea, then I really don't know what to say.

TrueBlue
01-27-2016, 02:37 PM
Stop portraying Hillary as anything but in the top 0.1%.
And just what is Donald Trump in except in that same category? Fact of the matter is that the Clintons are no where near as rich as Trump.

MisterVeritis
01-27-2016, 02:38 PM
And just what is Donald Trump in except in that same category? Fact of the matter is that the Clintons are no where near as rich as Trump.

Trump earned his. The Clintons are corrupt criminal grifters.

AeonPax
01-27-2016, 02:39 PM
What a nasty and unfortunate spin has been put on this situation. And just how do you perceive a presidential candidate as winning if they do not first raise enough money to offset the costs of running a campaign? After all, Donald Trump is Mega-Rich. He does not need to go anywhere to have money donated to his campaign but other candidates do, including Clinton. So, it is unfair to characterize Hillary in this manner knowing full well that she most certainly does have the Middle Class, the poor and the working class in mind and embraces them all and wants to win this election so that she can put her plans to good use in order to help them and for them to fully benefit from. But again, that will take A LOT OF MONEY! She needs to raise enough money between now and November to become competitive with Trump.
`
I'm not a Democrat and will never even consider a Republican candidate until the party gives the religious right and tea party, the good ol Heave-Ho. Both for profit parties need to have their duopoly broken up.

Chris
01-27-2016, 02:47 PM
And just what is Donald Trump in except in that same category? Fact of the matter is that the Clintons are no where near as rich as Trump.


Same exactly. They're in same rich boat. The Titanic.

Chris
01-27-2016, 03:10 PM
`
I'm not a Democrat and will never even consider a Republican candidate until the party gives the religious right and tea party, the good ol Heave-Ho. Both for profit parties need to have their duopoly broken up.

Agree but for the Tea Parties, but they're a thing of the past like OWS. In their place I'd put neocons.

donttread
01-27-2016, 07:30 PM
`
`
"Seemingly undeterred by the consistent critique that her close ties to the financial industry are hurting her campaign, The Intercept on Tuesday reports that with less than a week until the Iowa caucus, Hillary Clinton will soon leave the hotly-contested state to attend a pair of Wall Street-sponsored fundraising events. According to The Intercept's Zaid Jilani:

Clinton will appear in Philadelphia at a “gala” fund-raiser hosted by executives at Franklin Square Capital Partners, a $17 billion investment fund. Rocker Bon Jovi will reportedly play an acoustic set for “friends” who pledge $1,000 and hosts who bundle up to $27,000." - Source
(http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/01/26/sanders-slams-wall-street-elite-clinton-ditches-iowa-fetch-their-checks?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=reddit&utm_source=news)

`

**********
`
This woman is toxic waste to America's poor, middle and working class. She'll be nobody's president but Wall Streets.

If memory serves wall street poured more money into Obama's campaign then the contributed to McCain

AeonPax
01-28-2016, 04:41 AM
If memory serves wall street poured more money into Obama's campaign then the contributed to McCain
`
I wouldn't doubt it. Obama is a corporate puppet.

PolWatch
01-28-2016, 05:21 AM
The Super-Pacs pay in advance to purchase politicians. The lobby industry keeps politicians on the payroll after their election. The best government money can buy.

MisterVeritis
01-28-2016, 11:38 AM
The Super-Pacs pay in advance to purchase politicians. The lobby industry keeps politicians on the payroll after their election. The best government money can buy.
Do you ever wonder why corporations pay big money to politicians?

It is a legal shakedown. If you don't pay the politicians will hurt you. It is protection money. And sometimes it becomes crony capitalism.

If we restore the Constitutional limits to the Federal government there will be no reason to buy politicians because they will no longer be able to do harm.