Posted on Oct 12, 2015
3
3
0
From "The NY Times"
The Families Funding the 2016 election
They are overwhelmingly white, rich, older and male, in a nation that is being remade by the young, by women, and by black and brown voters. Across a sprawling country, they reside in an archipelago of wealth, exclusive neighborhoods dotting a handful of cities and towns. And in an economy that has minted billionaires in a dizzying array of industries, most made their fortunes in just two: finance and energy.
Now they are deploying their vast wealth in the political arena, providing almost half of all the seed money raised to support Democratic and Republican presidential candidates. Just 158 families, along with companies they own or control, contributed $176 million in the first phase of the campaign, a New York Times investigation found. Not since before Watergate have so few people and businesses provided so much early money in a campaign, most of it through channels legalized by the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision five years ago.
These donors’ fortunes reflect the shifting composition of the country’s economic elite. Relatively few work in the traditional ranks of corporate America, or hail from dynasties of inherited wealth. Most built their own businesses, parlaying talent and an appetite for risk into huge wealth: They founded hedge funds in New York, bought up undervalued oil leases in Texas, made blockbusters in Hollywood. More than a dozen of the elite donors were born outside the United States, immigrating from countries like Cuba, the old Soviet Union, Pakistan, India and Israel.
But regardless of industry, the families investing the most in presidential politics overwhelmingly lean right, contributing tens of millions of dollars to support Republican candidates who have pledged to pare regulations; cut taxes on income, capital gains and inheritances; and shrink entitlement programs. While such measures would help protect their own wealth, the donors describe their embrace of them more broadly, as the surest means of promoting economic growth and preserving a system that would allow others to prosper, too.
Mostly Backing Republicans
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/11/us/politics/2016-presidential-election-super-pac-donors.html?mabReward=A5&action=click&pgtype=Homepage®ion=CColumn&module=Recommendation&src=rechp&WT.nav=RecEngine&_r=0
The Families Funding the 2016 election
They are overwhelmingly white, rich, older and male, in a nation that is being remade by the young, by women, and by black and brown voters. Across a sprawling country, they reside in an archipelago of wealth, exclusive neighborhoods dotting a handful of cities and towns. And in an economy that has minted billionaires in a dizzying array of industries, most made their fortunes in just two: finance and energy.
Now they are deploying their vast wealth in the political arena, providing almost half of all the seed money raised to support Democratic and Republican presidential candidates. Just 158 families, along with companies they own or control, contributed $176 million in the first phase of the campaign, a New York Times investigation found. Not since before Watergate have so few people and businesses provided so much early money in a campaign, most of it through channels legalized by the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision five years ago.
These donors’ fortunes reflect the shifting composition of the country’s economic elite. Relatively few work in the traditional ranks of corporate America, or hail from dynasties of inherited wealth. Most built their own businesses, parlaying talent and an appetite for risk into huge wealth: They founded hedge funds in New York, bought up undervalued oil leases in Texas, made blockbusters in Hollywood. More than a dozen of the elite donors were born outside the United States, immigrating from countries like Cuba, the old Soviet Union, Pakistan, India and Israel.
But regardless of industry, the families investing the most in presidential politics overwhelmingly lean right, contributing tens of millions of dollars to support Republican candidates who have pledged to pare regulations; cut taxes on income, capital gains and inheritances; and shrink entitlement programs. While such measures would help protect their own wealth, the donors describe their embrace of them more broadly, as the surest means of promoting economic growth and preserving a system that would allow others to prosper, too.
Mostly Backing Republicans
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/11/us/politics/2016-presidential-election-super-pac-donors.html?mabReward=A5&action=click&pgtype=Homepage®ion=CColumn&module=Recommendation&src=rechp&WT.nav=RecEngine&_r=0
Posted in these groups: 
Politics
Election 2016
Politics Election 2016
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 8
5
5
0
COL Ted Mc Just another NYT hit piece pushing regulation over campaign financing. Ignoring the millions funneled from Unions into the Dem party, Soro's, Gates, Buffet foundations.
(5)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
LTC John Shaw - Colonel; The rats don't come out of their holes if you shine lights on them.
(1)
(0)
SrA Art Siatkowsky
COL Ted Mc - seems like your getting all in things that to an athiest shouldnt matter. Its all chemicals remember? Or do you pretend politics matter in the absolutely random accidental existence? Try wandering around drunk and see if you end up in that bar by accident…. Order your drink and enjoy but dont act like you finding that bar was predestined....its like everything else in your philosophy…. Simply a random accidental occurrence.
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
SrA Art Siatkowsky - Airman; I will decide what matters to me - not you.
Alternatively - "Who are you to decide what God tells me matters?".
Alternatively - "Who are you to decide what God tells me matters?".
(0)
(0)
SrA Art Siatkowsky
Of course you decide what matters to you but you defend the argument that its all just chemicals so im simply pointing out the hypocrisy of you acting as though something matters…. In this case Hillary's suspicious communist donors…. Of course you can say it matters but it doesnt fit with your worldview that its all just chemicals. Thats the hypocrisy of humanism that the earlier post was about. Its kind of like a politician saying he is against child sex slaves then going home to his kiddie porn dungeon in the basement.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
SMSgt Tony Barnes
PVT James Strait - I've don't the research...and actually there are very few substantiated cases of vote manipulation. Voter manipulation is a different matter.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
0
0
0
Abolished the EPA, Education, IRS, and many other government agency to appease the rich so they can get richer...seems like a legit reason. The poor will still vote for the Republican even though a tax cut is not going to make a significant difference in their income when we are talking a few hundred dollars a year when compared to thousands and millions a rich person would received. Then again, to entice the poor to vote for the Republican so they can work for the rich...take a stance on 2nd Amendment, Pro-Life, and repeat lies until it's basically accepted by the mass.
This is how my father-in-law who's on social security vote...he vote for the Republican because he's very religious and the Republican gives him a sense that it's the party of god since so many evangelical support the GOP. The only amusing thing about this is that he's the one who's going to suffer when his SSI is cut as his food stamp has already been cut. Yet he blamed the Democrat, because he's too ignorant to believe that a party of god for god would do such a thing to the poor people.
This is how my father-in-law who's on social security vote...he vote for the Republican because he's very religious and the Republican gives him a sense that it's the party of god since so many evangelical support the GOP. The only amusing thing about this is that he's the one who's going to suffer when his SSI is cut as his food stamp has already been cut. Yet he blamed the Democrat, because he's too ignorant to believe that a party of god for god would do such a thing to the poor people.
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
Cpl Tou Lee Yang - Corporal; At least that's better than voting [Republican/Democrat] "Because that's the way my Daddy voted and that's the way I've always voted.".
(0)
(0)
Cpl Tou Lee Yang
I'm first generation Hmong in America. My mother never voted because she never took the time to get her citizenship. I used to vote Republican because I was told to while in the military because Republican are the one that gives the military a pay raise every year.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
The Bilderberg Group has been around since 1954. Is there any solid evidence that they have done anything good or bad?
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
MCPO Roger Collins - Master Chief; Not really.
Of course that could mean EITHER that they haven't OR that they are being successful in covering up the nefarious work of their secret conspiracy.
Couldn't it?
BTW, the official website of this "secret" group is located here
http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/index.html
(but everyone knows that that isn't the real one - right?)
Of course that could mean EITHER that they haven't OR that they are being successful in covering up the nefarious work of their secret conspiracy.
Couldn't it?
BTW, the official website of this "secret" group is located here
http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/index.html
(but everyone knows that that isn't the real one - right?)
Bilderberg Meetings | The official website
Founded in 1954, Bilderberg is an annual conference designed to foster dialogue between Europe and North America. Every year, between 120-150 political leaders and experts from industry, finance, academia and the media are invited to take part in the conference. About two thirds of the participants come from Europe and the rest from North America; one third from politics and government and the rest from other fields. The conference is a forum...
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Of course, let's not forget that 14 if the top 25 campaign contributors are labor unions..... Don't they represent those non millionaires/ billionaires? Odd they're not mentioned in the post.
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
SSG Gerhard S. - Staff; That's just the other side of the coin (and the coin is a bad penny).
(1)
(0)
SSG Gerhard S.
I don't disagree with the bad coin analogy. I would suggest that we have so much money going into politics, from businesses, and Unions alike, that the solution is to discourage these quid pro quo donations through a sea change in our regulatory system. It is favorable laws and regulations that so many large donors seek from politicians businesses and Unions alike. Get back to a nation of laws that act generally, and away from the regulatory politics of pull, and we will find far fewer willing to throw money at politicians who can do little for them.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Interesting. I guess class warfare helps sell newspapers. I can think of actual stories of actual interest about those actually subverting our electoral process that I would much rather see them expose. How about groups represented by armed thugs posted outside polling places, groups that the Department of Justice shields? How about unions demanding dues from all members that they then contribute to political campaigns that many of their membership abhor? How about organizations subsisting on federal grants a large portion of which are funneled back to candidates who will then vote for more grants? How about these?
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
CPT Jack Durish - Captain; At this stage in America's life, it looks like BOTH parties are more concerned with defeating the other than they are about the legality of the means used or the effect of the country.
With the looming of "electronic voting" I can expect that the party with the best hackers will be the ones to win the elections.
Of preference I'd rather see ballots cast the old fashioned way (hand marked paper ballots) even if that does delay the media's ability to announce who won the election by a few hours. [I'd also like to see a blackout on announcing vote counts until all the polls had closed - but that's another matter entirely.]
With the looming of "electronic voting" I can expect that the party with the best hackers will be the ones to win the elections.
Of preference I'd rather see ballots cast the old fashioned way (hand marked paper ballots) even if that does delay the media's ability to announce who won the election by a few hours. [I'd also like to see a blackout on announcing vote counts until all the polls had closed - but that's another matter entirely.]
(0)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
COL Ted Mc - Once upon a time in America, sheriffs conducted elections following Sunday church services. They'd set up a table with a candidate at each end and a recording secretary in the middle. Each voter would present themselves to be acknowledged as a lawful citizen and then announce their choice. The chosen candidate would rise and thank the voter, then the next voter would take their place at the table. Now I know that secret ballots are supposed to prevent undue influence but hell, I know just about everybody's vote. They tell me...
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
It is their money, let them spend it the way they want. lol unless they are funded by government .... that is a different issue. lol
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google