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

Showing Original Post only (View all)

liberal N proud

(61,165 posts)
Fri Apr 8, 2016, 05:27 AM Apr 2016

Sanders uses padded data to back up his claim [View all]

Sen. Bernie Sanders uses padded data to back up his claim that “Hillary Clinton received $4.5 million from the fossil fuel industry.”

The figure relies on a tortured definition of fossil fuel money. It includes contributions donated by lobbyists who represent many clients other than oil or gas companies. It also includes money those lobbyists raised from other donors who have nothing to do with the oil and gas industry.

And most of the $4.5 million total is tied to donations made to a super PAC supporting Clinton — which Clinton does not control — by two people who run investment funds that include investments in oil and gas companies. But those investments represent a fraction of the overall investment portfolio.

The issue of fossil fuel money going to the Clinton campaign reemerged when a Greenpeace activist questioned Clinton at a campaign rally in New York on March 31 about whether she would “act on your word to reject fossil fuel money in the future in your campaign?”

Clinton responded, “I do not have — I have money from people who work for fossil fuel companies. … I am so sick of the Sanders campaign lying about me! I’m sick of it!”

As we wrote back in December, Clinton has received relatively little in contributions from oil and gas company employees (and nothing from the companies themselves, as that would be illegal). That hasn’t changed. According to more recent data cited by Sanders, contributions from oil and gas industry employees accounts for 0.2 percent of the nearly $160 million raised by the Clinton campaign so far.


http://www.factcheck.org/2016/04/clintons-fossil-fuel-money-revisited/

64 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Post removed Post removed Apr 2016 #1
And if a Hillary supporter knows something about anything, it's lying. IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #3
Yup, at this point anything for a Hillary supporter is false until proven true jfern Apr 2016 #4
For those just awakening from a 30 year nap, here's an update ... salinsky Apr 2016 #7
Obama hasn't had any trouble with them. IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #10
There's no doubt about it ... salinsky Apr 2016 #19
An obstructionist congress is not a vast right wing conspiracy. IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #21
Not a RW conspircacy pinebox Apr 2016 #43
I'm pretty sure the government of Saudi Arabia is in the fossil fuels industry AgerolanAmerican Apr 2016 #2
Dang it - those weren't supposed to be in the fossil fuel category - IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #6
Yes this smear must stick because I've said it enough times that it has to be true Dem2 Apr 2016 #28
How dare we think for ourselves? How dare we not be stupid? IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #33
Greenpeace screwed up Dem2 Apr 2016 #34
I don't believe you. I believe the very clear numbers from Greenpeace. IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #38
Hey believe whatever you want Dem2 Apr 2016 #42
I admit my partisan bias on many issues, including Hillary being a bold faced liar. IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #45
No offense, but Dem2 Apr 2016 #46
Short version: IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #47
So you're hoping to "disqualify" Hillary by hook or by crook Dem2 Apr 2016 #50
No. The thread is about HONESTY. IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #53
OK Dem2 Apr 2016 #57
Yes it must be true because because because Dem2 Apr 2016 #27
Wow - now we have to educate Hillary supporters on common knowledge? IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #37
This is so arrogant and full of crap Dem2 Apr 2016 #40
Wikipedia = arrogant? And full of crap? IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #41
Enjoy the bubble Dem2 Apr 2016 #44
The "he's different" veil is falling off of Sanders fast, he's losing more than just this primary uponit7771 Apr 2016 #5
Yup ... salinsky Apr 2016 #8
Sanders is just another lying politician Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #9
Yes, turns out he's just like Hillary... Human101948 Apr 2016 #11
Who gives a shit? We knew about Hillary going into the primary. All this promise of revolution... Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #18
Only because people like you are obstructiionists... Human101948 Apr 2016 #30
If you want a revolution, you damned well find a leader. Sanders isn't it. Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #31
You're probably right, but Hillary is just more of the same... Human101948 Apr 2016 #35
Three Pinocchios lying again? itsrobert Apr 2016 #12
This is data Greenpeace did a lot of research to obtain. pdsimdars Apr 2016 #13
WOW liberal N proud Apr 2016 #14
Some people still try to say Hillary is truthful after the last few decades. Motown_Johnny Apr 2016 #15
Absolutely. The desperation is growing as the claims are getting crazier. Sanders rhett o rick Apr 2016 #16
Sanders nailed it on breaking up the banks... liberal N proud Apr 2016 #20
Cherry picking. His comment was about a specific case that he wasn't familiar with. rhett o rick Apr 2016 #23
So, we're gonna disqualify Sanders because he did not know about a certain case? PatrickforO Apr 2016 #58
The main theme of his campaign is beaking up bank liberal N proud Apr 2016 #59
He does have a plan in spite of this particular effort to say he does not PatrickforO Apr 2016 #60
If I am going to be an expert on something, I had better know everything about it liberal N proud Apr 2016 #61
Yes. Because everyone knows what she was inferring... IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #22
That is BS liberal N proud Apr 2016 #25
You have your opinion, and the other 75% of the country has theirs. IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #29
^^THIS^^ n/t Admiral Loinpresser Apr 2016 #54
What? How can it be? "His Pureness" is being less than truthful? Surya Gayatri Apr 2016 #17
Hillary has the highest negatives in history...and you just can't ignore that... Human101948 Apr 2016 #32
Thanks for finding this. LAS14 Apr 2016 #24
It sounds like those three pinocchios were well-earned Dem2 Apr 2016 #26
K&R mcar Apr 2016 #36
It's a big bus...there goes Factcheck! WhiteTara Apr 2016 #39
Are you still stuck on trying to justify Hillary's ties to the fossil fuel industry? Avalux Apr 2016 #48
The truth is that Bernie is a liar? liberal N proud Apr 2016 #49
LOLOL nice try. Hillary is the liar, projection isn't working. n/t Avalux Apr 2016 #51
Three Pinnochios. Not one , not two ..but THREE. Nt pkdu Apr 2016 #52
Three Pinnochios says otherwise here! liberal N proud Apr 2016 #56
But you know what? HassleCat Apr 2016 #55
Great post, liberal N proud! greatlaurel Apr 2016 #62
Sanders can be as disingenous in his attacks as any Republican CajunBlazer Apr 2016 #63
Thank you liberal N proud! DemonGoddess Apr 2016 #64
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Sanders uses padded data ...»Reply #0