General Discussion

True Blue Door

(2,969 posts)

71. The only reason to pander to a PAC is if receiving their money is in doubt.

Fri May 8, 2015, 02:10 PM

May 2015

If the PAC was formed specifically to support a candidate, even without their permission, there's no quid pro quo. There's not even an association. There's just money being put to work blocking the power of other money to shout down the issues you want the campaign to be about.

An honest campaign can't be heard if the entire media is shrieking 24/7 propaganda and the truth is spoken quietly because it lacks the resources to do otherwise. A space must be cleared for the issues to shine through the noise.

Obama did that in 2008, but only by attracting small donors in addition to the sleazier stuff. If Sanders wants only small donors, then the other kind of work still has to be done somehow, canceling the noise that would otherwise drown out the message.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

96 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Does the money Hillary raises from corporate donors revert to another candidate if she loses? [View all] True Blue Door May 2015 OP

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