Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
NO! liberal N proud May 2015 #1
If she could and didn't, that would be the end of her viability as a Democratic anything. True Blue Door May 2015 #14
"If she could and didn't, that would be the end of her viability as a Democratic anything." NCTraveler May 2015 #55
$2,000 max...per FEC limits brooklynite May 2015 #88
"Hard money." I'm talking about everything else. True Blue Door May 2015 #91
A candidate PAC can give $2700 max to a candidate... brooklynite May 2015 #93
You don't have to give the money to the candidate for it to serve them. True Blue Door May 2015 #95
So then, IF you supported Bernie with actual money rock May 2015 #94
I only have compassion for such absurdidty. NCTraveler May 2015 #96
Working to suppress the Black vote in 2008 should have ended her viability as a Democratic anything. ieoeja May 2015 #65
We can use that against her then. True Blue Door May 2015 #66
Say what now? Can you source that? Scootaloo May 2015 #83
Hillary kept a firewall between her and the attempt. ieoeja May 2015 #92
This is one of the most ridiculous claims I've seen here lately. pnwmom May 2015 #86
No losing candidate has ever been penalized for that before. nt pnwmom May 2015 #84
Then it's good that we're aiming to change things. True Blue Door May 2015 #89
Does this premise apply to all Democratic candidates or simply Clinton? LanternWaste May 2015 #85
The difference is Clinton has the war chest. True Blue Door May 2015 #90
There are no corporate donors. It is illegal for corporations to donate money to candidates. MohRokTah May 2015 #2
Didn't Citizens United "fix" that? -none May 2015 #6
No jberryhill May 2015 #8
Oh my treestar May 2015 #59
Yep jberryhill May 2015 #72
CU allows corporations to donate to Super-PACs, but not to candidates arcane1 May 2015 #46
But there is no limit to how much they can contribute to those PACs. -none May 2015 #58
Exactly! And we need never know who they were. arcane1 May 2015 #61
Which is worse, and which is why CU is so bad NoJusticeNoPeace May 2015 #77
Exactly! arcane1 May 2015 #79
that is the tiniest, most embarrassing of fig leaves- and everyone acknowledges it. cali May 2015 #53
PAC money can be moved to another candidate. OKNancy May 2015 #3
Good. That means Citizens United can be used against its intended purpose. True Blue Door May 2015 #10
Would you want Bernie tainted with all that dirty money? Buzz Clik May 2015 #4
How would he be "tainted" by money he never compromised to receive? True Blue Door May 2015 #9
If he takes Hillary's money, he takes its baggage. Buzz Clik May 2015 #24
He doesn't have to take a cent of it. In fact, he could loudly reject it. True Blue Door May 2015 #26
By some colorful, deceitful funneling of money through a PAC? Surely not. Buzz Clik May 2015 #45
The only reason to pander to a PAC is if receiving their money is in doubt. True Blue Door May 2015 #71
I have no idea where you stand on this... Buzz Clik May 2015 #76
Yes, I imagine they would be very angry seeing their money helping Sanders. True Blue Door May 2015 #78
So now you're seeing treestar May 2015 #81
If our Party becomes anything like what we need and want it to be True Blue Door May 2015 #87
lol treestar May 2015 #60
How does that follow? True Blue Door May 2015 #74
He could more simply raise it himself treestar May 2015 #80
He can raise what he can raise, but there's no point in letting all that PAC money True Blue Door May 2015 #82
Oh, that would mean Bernie is ready to take corporate money, interesting. Thinkingabout May 2015 #5
You want to raise taxes on corporations, don't you? True Blue Door May 2015 #7
Playing both sides of the street, huh. Well this is what Hillary is doing also, glad you pointed Thinkingabout May 2015 #12
What are you talking about? It's nothing like what Hillary does. True Blue Door May 2015 #15
Maybe I misunderstood your post: Thinkingabout May 2015 #44
But again, not the case. Most of us "receive corporate money" in the form of (shitty) paychecks. True Blue Door May 2015 #54
And there we have it.... Agschmid May 2015 #17
Do you agree? True Blue Door May 2015 #28
It doesn't matter what I think, the whole system is fucked. Agschmid May 2015 #29
Well, I find hope in the fact that we can turn some of this money against itself. True Blue Door May 2015 #33
I bought you this from Amazon, good luck. Agschmid May 2015 #34
If I pull a stunt like this.... NCTraveler May 2015 #57
This message was self-deleted by its author True Blue Door May 2015 #62
You're saying I'm making this more complicated than necessary? True Blue Door May 2015 #63
No, and a leading question at that. Agschmid May 2015 #11
Unfortunately, no. That is why so many candidates run in the R party and stay in to the bitter end. jwirr May 2015 #13
I'm convinced Super-PACs are just a glorified money-laundering scam n/t arcane1 May 2015 #48
Burnie should raise his own cash. why ruin his rep by advocating against campaign big money misterhighwasted May 2015 #16
Then make a big show of rejecting it, and then have the money instead go to PACs. True Blue Door May 2015 #19
Ya well he's not going to have that opportunity anyway. misterhighwasted May 2015 #21
It's not just money. The GOP gets free 24/7 in-kind support from media propaganda. True Blue Door May 2015 #25
You're kidding, right? WinkyDink May 2015 #18
About what? True Blue Door May 2015 #20
slow info day. misterhighwasted May 2015 #22
I am under the belief.. NCTraveler May 2015 #23
I mean money from corporatist elements toward supporting her campaign in any way. True Blue Door May 2015 #27
Those goal posts are moving... Agschmid May 2015 #31
Are you trying to score points or to have a meaningful discussion? True Blue Door May 2015 #36
There are no points to score this isn't a game. Agschmid May 2015 #37
I'm brainstorming ways to divert resources from the other side. True Blue Door May 2015 #41
This is an extremely fluid op in extremely fluid times. NCTraveler May 2015 #39
Would you like some toast for that smarmalade? True Blue Door May 2015 #64
I would never ask for anything more than smarmalade itself. NCTraveler May 2015 #70
Well how about just not being duplicitous. True Blue Door May 2015 #75
Elaborate please. NCTraveler May 2015 #32
Most of the money spent promoting Republican lies never goes anywhere near the GOP. True Blue Door May 2015 #40
Really far off from your op. NCTraveler May 2015 #42
It's almost identical to the OP, just elaborated more broadly. True Blue Door May 2015 #49
I have no clue why you would be upset after all that you have been taught here. NCTraveler May 2015 #52
Fair enough. I'm seeing this through the lens of previous conversations that didn't go as well. True Blue Door May 2015 #56
You ran into a lot of stupid people who couldn't understand simple English. ieoeja May 2015 #68
That's my sense of things. True Blue Door May 2015 #73
they 'suspend' their campaign and no donations are returned. thats why so many 'run for president' Sunlei May 2015 #30
Hmm. Does that offer us opportunities to turn the other side's resources against it? True Blue Door May 2015 #35
not really because most Americans do not care that our Gov. is corrupt and only interested in money. Sunlei May 2015 #38
We have a fluid situation here...... NCTraveler May 2015 #43
Meaning? True Blue Door May 2015 #50
There's a byzantine set of rules about what happens Recursion May 2015 #47
Ah. So there is at least some opportunity in this respect. True Blue Door May 2015 #51
^this^ Hiraeth May 2015 #69
If it is for her campain no but if it is pac money she can donate the legally allowed amount. hrmjustin May 2015 #67
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Does the money Hillary ra...»Reply #24