$100 million

#1
lawgator1

lawgator1

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
72,840
Likes
42,968
#1
That's how much one guy, Sheldon Addelson, plans to give the GOP this cycle. I'm sure he expects nothing in return. Wall Street has given much more -- MUCH more -- to Romney than Obama.
 
#2
#2
Why would "Wall Street" give one red cent to Obama? That would be like ants offering to pay the pest control bill.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#5
#5
PKT_VOL said:
Both sides give ridiculous money. We need campaign finance reform in the worst way.
Click to expand...

Superpacs included, republicans will be more loaded with special interest contributions than democrats by a big, big margin.

My biggest issue with campaign finance as it currently is is that foreign donors can (and probably do) spend unlimited money on u.s. elections and nobody would know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6
#6
GAVol said:
Why would "Wall Street" give one red cent to Obama? That would be like ants offering to pay the pest control bill.
Click to expand...

Wall street favored Obama in 2008, though they tend to hedge their bets.

If the republicans ran out any other candidate than Romney, the wall street contributions would be a lot closer to 50-50.
 
#7
#7
milohimself said:
Superpacs included, republicans will be more loaded with special interest contributions than democrats by a big, big margin.

My biggest issue with campaign finance as it currently is is that foreign donors can (and probably do) spend unlimited money on u.s. elections and nobody would know.
Click to expand...

McCain has expressed concern specifically about Addelson because a lot if that $100 million is coming from his casino interests in Macau.
 
#8
#8
in the immortal words of then Vice President Al Gore, "There's no controlling legal authority..."
 
#9
#9
lawgator1 said:
That's how much one guy, Sheldon Addelson, plans to give the GOP this cycle. I'm sure he expects nothing in return. Wall Street has given much more -- MUCH more -- to Romney than Obama.
Click to expand...

Hang on it's just not Romney, Wall Street has bought both of these guys.

According to Federal Election Commission figures compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, Goldman Sachs' political action committee and individual contributors who listed the company as their employer donated $994,795 during 2007 and 2008 to Obama's presidential campaign, the second-highest contribution from a company PAC and company employees.

Goldman Sachs was top Obama donor - CNN

JPMorgan Chase & Co
Citigroup Inc
Morgan Stanley
also bought into the "hope and change". I will say this it just isn't Obama, Romney is all up in the wall street money also.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#11
#11
milohimself said:
Superpacs included, republicans will be more loaded with special interest contributions than democrats by a big, big margin.

My biggest issue with campaign finance as it currently is is that foreign donors can (and probably do) spend unlimited money on u.s. elections and nobody would know.
Click to expand...

Link?
 
#14
#14
therealUT said:
LG, why are you concerned with what an individual wants to do with his money?
Click to expand...

He's probably just as sick and tired as I am of our 'leaders' being nothing but a figurehead for whomever shills out the most green. I'm conservative and all about small government and fewer restrictions/limitations, but to me, this kind of campaign giving is no different than the insider trading many of our high-ranking politicians have been doing for so long.

Sad thing is, none of this will ever change until we start electing officials NOT affiliated with the Dems or Repubs - both sides are dirty, dirty, dirty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#15
#15
etmccreary said:
He's probably just as sick and tired as I am of our 'leaders' being nothing but a figurehead for whomever shills out the most green. I'm conservative and all about small government and fewer restrictions/limitations, but to me, this kind of campaign giving is no different than the insider trading many of our high-ranking politicians have been doing for so long.

Sad thing is, none of this will ever change until we start electing officials NOT affiliated with the Dems or Repubs - both sides are dirty, dirty, dirty.
Click to expand...

That will not change anything with regard to campaign finance. If you want leaders that are not nearly as influenced by money, then fight to get rid of the popular vote for President and Senator, and fight for more Representatives in the House.

Sounds like you are for restricting the way individuals spend money so long as it serves the "greater good".
 
#18
#18
etmccreary said:
He's probably just as sick and tired as I am of our 'leaders' being nothing but a figurehead for whomever shills out the most green. I'm conservative and all about small government and fewer restrictions/limitations, but to me, this kind of campaign giving is no different than the insider trading many of our high-ranking politicians have been doing for so long.

Sad thing is, none of this will ever change until we start electing officials NOT affiliated with the Dems or Repubs - both sides are dirty, dirty, dirty.
Click to expand...

You could elect someone from the red pig party and it will not change. Why do you think these people fight so hard and spend so much money for a what $150,000/$175,000 job?

Term limits are the only fix IMHO.
 
#19
#19
lawgator1 said:
That's how much one guy, Sheldon Addelson, plans to give the GOP this cycle. I'm sure he expects nothing in return. Wall Street has given much more -- MUCH more -- to Romney than Obama.
Click to expand...

I bet Clooney and his Hollywood pals don't want anything for their money either.
 
#20
#20
Romney has $37.1 million in donations from Wall Street. Obama has $4.8 million.

They can do what they want with their money, but its obvious who they think is going to protect them more from regulation and oversight.
 
#21
#21
PKT_VOL said:
Both sides give ridiculous money. We need campaign finance reform in the worst way.
Click to expand...

Yeah, cause then the media would be that much more influential.

There's no good solution. We need an informed populace more than anything, but that's not gonna happen.
 
#22
#22
lawgator1 said:
Romney has $37.1 million in donations from Wall Street. Obama has $4.8 million.

They can do what they want with their money, but its obvious who they think is going to protect them more from regulation and oversight.
Click to expand...
If the figures were reversed would you have started this thread??
You would have a much stronger argument had Obama turned down the money and his Wall Street donations were $ 0.0
 
Last edited:
#23
#23
lawgator1 said:
Romney has $37.1 million in donations from Wall Street. Obama has $4.8 million.

They can do what they want with their money, but its obvious who they think is going to protect them more from regulation and oversight.
Click to expand...

Give me a break. The big companies usually support regulation because they enjoy economies of scale, and regulation squeezes out the little guy. They are just basically saying Romney's a more consistent croney capitalist (because make no mistake, Obama is too).
 
#25
#25
cd12 said:
If the figures were reversed would you have started this thread??
Click to expand...

Doubtful.

But the fact is that Romney is being backed by a confederation of 1) gazillionaire fanatic conservatives who, while they don't really like Romney, are beside themselves over their blind hatred of Obama, and 2) financiers who worry that their ability to do insider deals without anyone knowing about it is on the chopping block.


n_huffhines said:
Give me a break. The big companies usually support regulation because they enjoy economies of scale, and regulation squeezes out the little guy. They are just basically saying Romney's a more consistent croney capitalist (because make no mistake, Obama is too).
Click to expand...

Not if they are making personal fortunes by taking advantage of manipulated equity markets.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top