Ship of Fools

the difference is who is giving the money, and how it is being "raised". clinton and obama are out there working for it, not sitting in smoke filled board rooms kissing corporate bottom

***Reply***
I'm sure there is plenty of bottom kissing on all sides of the isle, maybe not entirely to corporations but more toward labor unions. Sleezy under the table deals are seem to be more and more the norm when raising campaign money, from whom to whom the sleezy deals are made seems to be the only real differance.

Come on Meagan, you have to be intellectually honest here...

Most politicians rais money the exact same ways. Various fundraisng through the internet, dinners, rallys etc.

It has longed been advertized that Republicans get their funding from comparatively few large donars. This is actually less true of the Republican party than of the Democratic.

Im not being partisan here, its simply a fact. The percentage of individuals who give up to 2000 and below usually favors Republicans ranging from anything to 3 to 8%. Now if you up the contribution to 10,000 Dems beat republicans by 1%. If you go up to 95,000 dollars, Dems beat our Republicans by 8%.

If you look at the top industries and Political Action committes for 2006 you will find that you have to get down to the 6th place giver (Health Professional,which gives 62% to republicans) before you find one that leans republican.

By contrast the second largest giver (Lawyers and Law firms) gives almost 70% of their 123,597,449 to Democratic candidates

Of the top 20 listed by opensecrets.org 6 favor democrats, 9 favor republicans, and five are on the fence with 3 of those tipping toward the dems.

When you break it down by sector Republicans do very well with Finance, Insurance and Real estate. taking 54% of the take.

Democrats do best with second place lawyers and lobbyists taking 66%.

When considering donors to Democrats were supposed to imagine teachers and union members, but we are supposed to ignore billionsaires like George Sorros and the Hollywood elite.

Bottom line is that if we are being fair, than we acknowledge that all politicians essentially raise money the same way. Who they target is different.

But to claim that Obama and Hillary are working for it, while McCain, Guiliani, and Thompson are simply sitting in cigar filled rooms, requires proof which Im afraid your are going to find doesnt exsist meagan.

All of this can be checked at opensecrets.com

***Reply***
Ohh, my first political debate. I'm all a-flutter.
PS: I make it my policy to post things exactly as they come to me. With the exception of uncalled for profanity or biggotry what you send me is what will end up on my page. This post was a bit of an exception, there were a few typos that made this post very difficult to understand so I made corrections. Nick, if you take offense please let me know. I have your origional post saved and will post it "as is" if you like.

No problem on the typo, I appreciate the help...

And congrats on your first debate!! But you got an easy one, Meagan and I keep it civil...which is to say that I keep it civil when debating Meagan and Meagan keeps it civil when debating anyone.

What's interesting is that how much money these people raised seems to be the most important thing the media can tell us about them.

How much money they have raised and how they look, that's what's important for a politician these days.

***Reply***
A recent poll (I don't remember by who, Routers maybe) asked a random group of 1,000 people what they knew about the candidates. For over the overwhelming majority they knew about how much money Clinton and Obama had raised and that Juliani had once had an affair. Less than 10% actually knew how these candidates felt about issues such as immigration, abortion, the war, or the economy. The similarity our political hopefulls are becoming to a Hollywood celebrity is disheartening.