Via Zero Hedge last week.
I’m just a li’l part-time blogger, but in the top 20, I count only one eeeeeevil corporation favoring the GOP…against twelve unions, strongly favoring Democrats. Which party is all about the “big money” again?
ZH has a longer list, wherein you’ll glean these tidbits:
- HRC comes in impressively (I mean it) at number 100, having given $11.9 million; 89% to Democrats.
- The much-pilloried Koch Industries only comes in at number 62, with $17.4 million.
- The much-pilloried NRA only comes in at number 52, with $20.2 million.
- Umm…did I miss Halliburton? Or are they not in the top 100?
This is why I won’t buy a UAW-built car anymore. It’s like writing a check to the DNC. My next car will be a Mazda or Subaru.
V, good point. It isn’t “Buy American!”, it’s “Buy Democratic!”
You know you should really go to the source of your information. The blog post claims this chart represents “The All-Time Top 100 Political Donors.” This is absolutely false. If you look at the original page for the information it’s “Top All-Time Donors, 1989-2012” but more importantly, only of their “Heavy Hitters” section, the section that profiles company contributions. Even then, the totals are $1.55 billion for Democratic donations, $1.08 billion for Republicans, only a deficit of 30%.
When you compare top overall donors for 2012, funding went to Republicans nearly 2-to-1, $233 million to $136 million. And historically, the same period you quote above, Republican funding is higher than Democratic.
Or are you also criticizing Sheldon Adelson for his record-breaking near $100 million spending for the 2012 Republican candidate through his companies?
Countervail: Way to miss the forest (my main point) by nitpicking the weeds! Nice job! 🙂
Kindly note how I avoided calling it “The All-Time Top 100 Political Donors” myself, starting from my (simple) insight that the chart only covers 24 years of time. Then kindly note also that the fact that the chart is titled (by its originator) with some hyperbole, doesn’t make the numbers on it either incorrect or misleading.
And sorry, but a 30% deficit in the GOP (vs. Dem) funds from the corporate/union side of things…That is significant, showing that the Democrats are indeed a party of “big money”, *contrary to the Democrats’ propaganda* about themselves. And that was my main point.
That the chart only covers the corporate/union side, is a fair observation. If you want to move to the non-corporate (individual) side of things, I don’t have time to delve into it just now; but it is a fine idea. I’ve long considered posting on the loooooong roster of billionaires who give to the Democrats – including some shady figures from the “housing bubble” and its aftermath (that we are still in).
The fact that the Democrats were deficient in donations, in 2012, may be taken as a testament to what a terrible President has been Obama; how badly he has alienated some of his (former) supporters.
Or to put what CounterFAIL said another way: “You failed to prove a completely different point than the one in the post and therefore you’re a liar and stupid.”
Oh no, I get the intention of your post – “Democrats are bad because they rely on corporations/union for a lot of their funding.” Except using the entirety of that very same list it’s obviously that Republicans rely on a significant amount of corporate funding as well. Are Republicans exonerated because they only racked up $1.08 billion to Democrats $1.55 billion? If a Democratic escort made $100 in a night but a Republican only made $70, the Democrat is a hooker and the Republican is just a friendly girl who doesn’t know why men give her money?
And if you want to talk about “big money,” why don’t you reserve the same derision for people that nearly self-fund their entire campaign well beyond two decades worth of contributions from the biggest corporate Democratic donor. Ross Perot spent $76 million over two campaigns, Linda McMahon spent $100 million. It takes significant group funding from a corporation or a union to compete with that kind of reserve.
Frankly we don’t know what the Koch brothers spent in campaign funding. They have the privileged advantage of being able to launder their donations through dark money sources. There’s reports they were on target to fund $400 million for the past election cycle, more than the $300 million pledged by Grossroads GPS. And in fact, the top 100 individual donors of 2012 were overwhelmingly Republican but their money didn’t go to the Republican party, it went to these other dark money laundry machines. Isn’t that really a bigger problem? Unaccountability in campaign funding? When such a small minority use such a large, overwhelmingly amount of money to sway elections?
Oh no, I get the intention of your post – “Democrats are bad because they rely on corporations/union for a lot of their funding.”
No, you don’t.
More precisely, it’s “Democrats are bad because they rely on corporations/unions for a lot of their funding and demonize doing so as being an awful, bad horrible thing to do when other people do it.”
Case in point:
Doesn’t matter. You and your fellow Obama Party members and Barack Obama himself have screamed that ANY corporate/union money constitutes corruption and a bribe, and makes the person who takes it unfit for public office.
So practice what you preach. Condemn your Obama Party for taking corporate/union money. Or demonstrate that your Barack Obama is a liar and a hypocrite.
And another fine example:
Oops.
So no, it’s not a problem, unless you want to say that your Obama Party is causing the problem.
One has to remember, Countervail, that you are a malicious and sick liar. Barack Obama supporters like yourself will justify breaking any law and telling any lie to win. You have no respect for morality and values, so your screaming about how other people are “cheating” is nothing more than a sick game on your part to try to manipulate others.
Correct. NDT got it
Heh.
All right, I’ll bite. What prominent Democrat or Democratic organization, by quote in context, “demonize others for receiving money from corporations?” Be specific please. No heresay. No anecdotes. Not some crazy activist that mainstream Democratic organizations would never give the time of day.
Really, Counterfail?
Fish, barrel.
And:
Perhaps, Counterfail, you should rethink the value of your racism and start treating Barack Obama and the Barack Obama Party in the same fashion you would treat white people.
Oh, and guess what, Counterfail?
That’s just the tip of the iceberg.
A very BIG iceberg.
This is why racism and bigotry are such bad ideas, Counterfail. Because Barack Obama has black skin, your prejudice and bias prevents you from evaluating his statements and actions, as well as those of members of his political party, objectively or honestly. Hence you miss simple, basic examples like these — or, more likely, are too frightened to do any sort of research into the topic at all, since you have been browbeaten into believing that any criticism whatsoever of Obama or the Obama Party makes you a racist Nazi.