Maybe swearing off corporate cash is catching on?

Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
Elizabeth Warren is the Judas Steer..Booker, Gillibrand and Harris are the steer.
Click to expand...
LOL Whistle past the graveyard much?

Warren is pretty good and has a clean record when it comes to banking reforms.

Booker, well, he, Harris and Gillibrand are all tainted by their association with Big Banks and Wall Street. Their move to refuse corporate PAC money seems a bit disingenuous. We'll see how well this promise holds up to scrutiny.

Sanders has done nothing to improve his standing with the same people who voted for Clinton and against him in the last primary. Given his statements in Jackson MI on April 4 where he invoked dog whistle politics in wink and a nudge smear of Obama, Sanders doesn't have a chance.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Lol

And you wonder why I don't take you seriously.
Click to expand...
Those people all occupy safe seats. They don't need to worry about a challenger and will easily win without accepting legal donations. Booker, Harris and Gillibrand are in safe seats but are all looking forward to the 2020 primary. They all have associations with big banks and Wall Street. Small wonder they are swearing off corporate PAC money.

You know that there is solid and long term data that shows campaigns with the highest spend have an edge. Small wonder those people who are safe can swear off corporate PAC money.

That said, how much do Democratic campaigns depend upon corporate PACs? From what I tell, most PAC money that goes to Democrats comes from unions. This might be a case of claiming to be virtuous when there was little opportunity in the first place. Like the Christian boy who proclaims the virtue of his virginity when he never got past first base on a date.
 
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Those people all occupy safe seats. They don't need to worry about a challenger and will easily win without accepting legal donations. Booker, Harris and Gillibrand are in safe seats but are all looking forward to the 2020 primary. They all have associations with big banks and Wall Street. Small wonder they are swearing off corporate PAC money.

You know that there is solid and long term data that shows campaigns with the highest spend have an edge. Small wonder those people who are safe can swear off corporate PAC money.

That said, how much do Democratic campaigns depend upon corporate PACs? From what I tell, most PAC money that goes to Democrats comes from unions. This might be a case of claiming to be virtuous when there was little opportunity in the first place. Like the Christian boy who proclaims the virtue of his virginity when he never got past first base on a date.
Click to expand...
Excellent analogy.
 
trippnface

trippnface

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
Warren and Harris ticket. Time to let some women run this country
Click to expand...
I might, maybe, possibly be willing to support Warren.

Kamala Harris is an absolute no. That is pretty funny though that you want to run a politician known for being hard on the banks, with a politician that is known for going easy on the banks.

( message me if you don't know which is which, I know you probably don't know)
 
londonfog

londonfog

Well-Known Member
trippnface said:
I might, maybe, possibly be willing to support Warren.

Kamala Harris is an absolute no. That is pretty funny though that you want to run a politician known for being hard on the banks, with a politician that is known for going easy on the banks.

( message me if you don't know which is which, I know you probably don't know)
Click to expand...
Why in the fuck would I message an idiot like you. I didn't agree with everything Obama did as well. Warren could make Harris see the light on banks.
 
trippnface

trippnface

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
Why in the fuck would I message an idiot like you. I didn't agree with everything Obama did as well. Warren could make Harris see the light on banks.
Click to expand...
lol chill it was sarcasm.

dude Harris is not stupid, she is willfully malicious.

Why attempt to reform the uncaring, when we can just support the naturally progressive?
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
trippnface said:
lol chill it was sarcasm.

dude Harris is not stupid, she is willfully malicious.

Why attempt to reform the uncaring, when we can just support the naturally progressive?
Click to expand...
yawn

none of us americans with a brain give a shit about what you little russian virgin bois are spamming us with
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top