Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

LOLZ @ Sheldon Adelson!


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#16 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,729 posts

Posted 09 November 2012 - 12:52 PM

Turd you should have a look at small contributions as a percentage of funds for that 2008 election vs. large corporate donors. He outspent his opponent because of regular people contributing smaller amounts in greater numbers.

#17 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,000 posts

Posted 09 November 2012 - 01:00 PM

is it illegal? what about companies that hired and gave? totally unethical if a company lays off a ton and gives the money away. but, thats up to that company unfortunately.

does each candidate get exactly the same amount of air time?

cap how much goes into campaigns period. look at all that money that was wasted that really could have been spent on a couple of states and the rest given to help the poor or vets or something much more constructive.



legal? who's talking about legal? I thought we were talking about the popularity of occupational indignance and subtly implying class warfare?

#18 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,132 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 09 November 2012 - 01:19 PM

ok you lost me. i thought you were asking if a company lays off workers THEN gives money if it were bad or whatev.

im not talking class warfare at all. i gave the obligatory snarky answer that i knew would befuddle some because they do it so much they would then it gospel.

the cwg says what he did and i responded that oh now we are all up in arms about jobs.

then it spun into campaign finance etc with you and I.


hope that makes sense.

#19 FurdTurgason

FurdTurgason

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 954 posts

Posted 09 November 2012 - 01:20 PM

Turd you should have a look at small contributions as a percentage of funds for that 2008 election vs. large corporate donors. He outspent his opponent because of regular people contributing smaller amounts in greater numbers.


That's a nice fairy tale I'm sure you'd like to believe. Look up George Soros.

#20 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,380 posts

Posted 09 November 2012 - 01:30 PM

That's a nice fairy tale I'm sure you'd like to believe. Look up George Soros.

I take it you didn't look it up as he asked. 50% of his donations were under $200. 67% were under $1000.

Only 30% of Bush and Mccain's donations were under $200.

#21 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 12,389 posts

Posted 09 November 2012 - 01:32 PM

Using numbers and facts here is like reading Japanese poetry to a rock.

#22 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,000 posts

Posted 09 November 2012 - 01:39 PM

ok you lost me. i thought you were asking if a company lays off workers THEN gives money if it were bad or whatev.

im not talking class warfare at all. i gave the obligatory snarky answer that i knew would befuddle some because they do it so much they would then it gospel.

the cwg says what he did and i responded that oh now we are all up in arms about jobs.

then it spun into campaign finance etc with you and I.


hope that makes sense.


i'm lost too... what do you think about MCD at a 52 week low?

#23 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,092 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 09 November 2012 - 02:00 PM

Money is the grease that keeps the political wheels turning. I expect the monied interests to double down for the next election and to be better organized when they do.

Don't lose sight of the fact that much of this money goes towards local and state elections.

If you can control the state houses, you can gerrymander the districts for state and federal elections, securing many seats from ever being seriously challenged by the opposing party.

Representatives that are in secure districts are less likely to listen to constituents with opposing views or compromise on legislation.

Gerrymandering of political districts is why such a high percentage of politicians are returning to congress even though they have accomplish very little in the last two years other than obstruct any serious efforts to compromise and legislate.

#24 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,132 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 09 November 2012 - 02:05 PM

i'm lost too... what do you think about MCD at a 52 week low?



a very sneakily not so good indicator. not this bad since what 2003? Mickey D's is usually a nice indicator unto itself.

#25 FurdTurgason

FurdTurgason

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 954 posts

Posted 09 November 2012 - 02:09 PM

I take it you didn't look it up as he asked. 50% of his donations were under $200. 67% were under $1000.

Only 30% of Bush and Mccain's donations were under $200.


Does that explain five to one?

#26 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,380 posts

Posted 09 November 2012 - 02:12 PM

He was more invested in winning than Mccain. John is a career politician, he knew he had something to go back to.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.