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
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: About those fundraisers over the course of five or more years... what bothers you more? (Poll) [View all]BlueJazz
(25,348 posts)27. Birds of a feather usually flock together.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
60 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
About those fundraisers over the course of five or more years... what bothers you more? (Poll) [View all]
MADem
Feb 2016
OP
I care about actual issues and policies, and beating the GOP. I remember when Sanders supporters
DanTex
Feb 2016
#1
It isn't debatable - Analysis says the money buys the policies that the money wants
kristopher
Feb 2016
#59
I should hope she kept some of it--I think the idea was to build up a nest egg in case she needs to
MADem
Feb 2016
#7
Well, Clinton isn't the only candidate who addressed Goldman Sachs bankers in exchange for
MADem
Feb 2016
#54
I'm trying to get a sense of how people feel about this. Is it bad, or is it only bad when
MADem
Feb 2016
#57
Cliff notes? Not too hard to do. If you have lots of money, the government....
daleanime
Feb 2016
#58
It's unethical to speak to Wall Streeters/corporatists, and receive money as a consequence?
MADem
Feb 2016
#18
For your own personal gain when you are in office or plan to run, yes it is. nt
Live and Learn
Feb 2016
#19
I can see why you are having trouble with them--but they are not "incomprehensible." They are quite
MADem
Feb 2016
#22
Let's be clear--I don't want to misinterpret your POV. You believe that it was wrong for her
MADem
Feb 2016
#41
She wasn't a FEDERAL EMPLOYEE when she gave those speeches. She was a private citizen.
MADem
Feb 2016
#13
It depends on what was said during the speeches - which is why she should release the transcripts.
Vinca
Feb 2016
#12
Do you think all candidates who speak to Wall Street interests should release the transcripts of
MADem
Feb 2016
#15
Yes . . . if you're speaking to people who give you mountains of money and you are a public figure
Vinca
Feb 2016
#51
Well, one candidate addressed members of Wall Street at private venues for many years.
MADem
Feb 2016
#55
People with the same values usually connect with each other. Except sociopaths, they usually hate..
BlueJazz
Feb 2016
#33
OK--so you are saying that anyone who gives speeches to bankers and other corporate bigwigs
MADem
Feb 2016
#34
No, I'm not saying that. (give speeches to ...) I'm saying that selling yourself to gain money...
BlueJazz
Feb 2016
#42
It's just the appearance of corruption, even it's entirely innocent. I feel that it's bad enough...
BlueJazz
Feb 2016
#46
Perhaps you're a strong enough person to not be influenced by all the money and "Stuff".
BlueJazz
Feb 2016
#49
Do you believe that this association--a politician giving speeches to rich bankers, etc. who pay
MADem
Feb 2016
#35
She was paid personally for those speeches. They've made over 150 million from speeches.
RiverLover
Feb 2016
#30
Why is the poll BS? There are no right or wrong answers. I want to understand how DUers feel
MADem
Feb 2016
#37
I don't have a struggle. I'm just trying to figure out if it's EVER "OK" for Democratic politicians
MADem
Feb 2016
#47
Not for money. And I think their should be a 10 year ban between government service and private
Luminous Animal
Feb 2016
#50