Citizens United Update

[Crashk]

anonymous not open - unions cannot do it non-publically

No only are Republicons out spending Dem with anonymous money but the money is coming from foreign interests who want Reps to legislate for them and not the American people.

How can any true American agree with foreign interests running this country? The money is coming from foreign companies, many of them state run in communist countries. Do you really think they will invest in something that will not bring them a big return?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I'm just using your source. He said there is a 3-2 advantage and it could grow even larger over time. It's not terribly complex. You keep saying that they are spending the same amount, but it just isn't true.

No moron, I said you are cherry picking ONE PERSONS quote from the article and ignoring what the rest of the article states. Like I said, you ignore what contradicts your stupid little parrot points.

The article also states that Dem groups have $250mm

The article also states that the $300mm for Reps is a HIGH END estimate

The article also states that Reps are giving more to outside groups because they don't trust Steele

But you ignore those points and cling to the one your masters told you to chant.

 

[Bonestorm]

No moron, I said you are cherry picking ONE PERSONS quote from the article and ignoring what the rest of the article states. Like I said, you ignore what contradicts your stupid little parrot points.

I'm relying on the guy that that the article cites as an authority on the subject. If the author of the article (and let's get real, it's the Daily Fucking Caller) found him reliable enough to cite as an authority, what basis do you have for discounting what he has to say?

The article also states that Dem groups have $250mm

The article also states that the $300mm for Reps is a HIGH END estimate

Well, that's just plain horseshit. Based on reports from the Daily Caller in July that appear at the end of the "article," there is a list totaling a shade over $300 million. That's not by any means the high end estimate. The high end estimates are actually around $400. And guess what, if the Republican groups have $400 million and Democratic groups have $250 million, that's a ratio of roughly 3:2, like the expert said.

The article also states that Reps are giving more to outside groups because they don't trust Steele

There are many many many ways to circumvent the RNC without giving to outside groups. The trouble is that direct contributions to candidates, committees and PACs are capped and require disclosure, whereas giving mony to American Crossroads or the Chamber of Commerce is uncapped and anonymous. Steele isn't really a factor here.

But you ignore those points and cling to the one your masters told you to chant.

Fargle Bargle.

 

[Don Quixote]

I'm shocked:




At long last interest groups bankrolled by anonymous corporations can freely spend assloads of money on elections, just like the founders intended. Hooray!


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/03/AR2010100303664.html

the us chamber of commerce accepts money from foreign corporations into the same account that it uses to pay for attack adds on democrats and it lobbied against a bill in congress to give tax breaks to us corporations that did not outsource jobs

is this the us chamber of commerce or the china/india/kenya/indonesia chamber of commerce

 

[cawacko]

the us chamber of commerce accepts money from foreign corporations into the same account that it uses to pay for attack adds on democrats and it lobbied against a bill in congress to give tax breaks to us corporations that did not outsource jobs

is this the us chamber of commerce or the china/india/kenya/indonesia chamber of commerce

i'm nitpicking but I think you mean off-shoring jobs.

For example many companies in the Bay Area outsource jobs to third parties or set up back offices in other parts of the U.S. I don't think the government is trying to give tax breaks to companies that keep all jobs at their HQ's just to keep jobs in the U.S.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I'm relying on the guy that that the article cites as an authority on the subject. If the author of the article (and let's get real, it's the Daily Fucking Caller) found him reliable enough to cite as an authority, what basis do you have for discounting what he has to say?

On the basis that the very same article from the very same author quotes the other points that I highlighted. You know, the ones you continue to fucking ignore because it doesn't fit what your masters told you.

Well, that's just plain horseshit. Based on reports from the Daily Caller in July that appear at the end of the "article," there is a list totaling a shade over $300 million. That's not by any means the high end estimate. The high end estimates are actually around $400. And guess what, if the Republican groups have $400 million and Democratic groups have $250 million, that's a ratio of roughly 3:2, like the expert said.

LMAO... and there is a TOTAL listing of $250mm for the Dems... so it is $300mm to $250mm. Hardly the 'vast majority' line of bullshit you keep trying to parrot. Thanks for finally admitting it.

Do tell us where you got the $400 million high end estimates. You just keep on spinning.

There are many many many ways to circumvent the RNC without giving to outside groups.

lmao... and giving to the outside groups is ONE OF THOSE WAYS MORON.

The trouble is that direct contributions to candidates, committees and PACs are capped and require disclosure, whereas giving mony to American Crossroads or the Chamber of Commerce is uncapped and anonymous. Steele isn't really a factor here.

Please... humor us with your source for such a proclamation that Steele isn't a factor and that people are contributing so they won't have to be reported.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Please... humor us with your source for such a proclamation that Steele isn't a factor and that people are contributing so they won't have to be reported.

Hey dick, the point is that it IS a loophole.

 

[Bonestorm]

On the basis that the very same article from the very same author quotes the other points that I highlighted. You know, the ones you continue to fucking ignore because it doesn't fit what your masters told you.

Right, the $300 million number that the Daily Caller pulled out of thin air. Didn't this argument all start with you being upset that the Washington Post didn't show it's work? Yet, here we are . . .

LMAO... and there is a TOTAL listing of $250mm for the Dems... so it is $300mm to $250mm. Hardly the 'vast majority' line of bullshit you keep trying to parrot. Thanks for finally admitting it.

Do tell us where you got the $400 million high end estimates. You just keep on spinning.

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/08/27/conservative-groups-400-millio/

Right, $400 million for Republicans, $250 million for Democrats. A roughly 3:2 ratio, which can be characterized as a vast majority or a large majority. Fuck, I'll settle for "healthy majority" so long as you drop the bullshit about spending the same amount. Agreed.

I mean, Christ, even using the bullshit $300 million number Republican groups are outspending the Democratic groups by about 20%.

lmao... and giving to the outside groups is ONE OF THOSE WAYS MORON.

So is giving directly to candidates. So is giving to PACs. So is giving to the NRSC and the NRCC. The trouble is that giving to these sources is capped and public whereas giving to third-parties is uncapped and anonymous.

Please... humor us with your source for such a proclamation that Steele isn't a factor and that people are contributing so they won't have to be reported.

Steele isn't the most significant factor, though I'll admit he is a factor.

 

[Canceled2]

Sen. Murray: Lobbyists’ Second Favorite Senator Behind Reid
By Josh Feit, Wednesday, October 6, 2010

A report by Opensecrets.org (the nonpartisan shop in D.C. that crunches Federal Election Commission campaign contribution numbers) released a list of candidates this week showing the top recipients of contributions from lobbyists this election season. UPDATE: Openscecrets goofed. The ranking is based on contributions from 2005-2010—the last term.

U.S. Sen. Patty Murray is No. 2 on the senate side so far, getting $665,950 in contributions from lobbyists. (U.S. Sen. Harry Reid is No. 1 on the list.)

The Seattle Times had a report in July showing that lobbyists were the top group of contributors to Sen. Murray’s campaign.

The latest campaign finance reports—covering July, August, and September fundraising—are due this month.

As we reported previously, lobbyists are the biggest donors to Murray's campaign and to M-PAC, her leadership political-action committee. Lawyers are a close second, with $664,000 in contributions. Through end of July, Murray has raised a total of $13.1 million for her reelection and PAC.


Here's Reid

 

[Canceled2]

Here is a snapshot of Murray (D) VS Rossi (R) in campaign money. Remember that both candidates are getting ads from outside sources as well.

Murray has 4 times the capital of Rossi

 

[DamnYankee]

I know you hate Soros, I hate Cheney, so what, put that aside for a minute and try to understand what your party is doing.

"Previously, it has been reported that foreign firms like BP, Shell Oil, and Siemens are active members of the Chamber. But on a larger scale, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce appears to rely heavily on fundraising from firms all over the world, including China, India, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, Russia, and many other places. Of course, because the Chamber successfully lobbied to kill campaign finance reforms aimed at establishing transparency, the Chamber does not have to reveal any of the funding for its ad campaigns. Dues-paying members of the Chamber could potentially be sending additional funds this year to help air more attack ads against Democrats."
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/05/foreign-chamber-commerce/

Do you want your party and this country run by foreign interests?

First of all, my Party is the Conservative Party. These foreign interests ain't buying in no matter what. Second, Soros is one man, the COC represents tens of thousands. Do you really want him controlling your Party?