2016 Postmortem

Depaysement

(1,835 posts)

73. Can I second your plonk?

Reply to Phlem (Reply #54)

Mon Jul 13, 2015, 09:17 PM

Jul 2015

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

143 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Looks like the "Hillary's top donors are banks" meme needs to be debunked for the 200th time... [View all] DanTex Jul 2015 OP

I'm recing this 'debunking' for exposure. PoliticAverse Jul 2015 #1

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Jul 2015 #3

The "debunk" is bunk. It's the same difference if Citibank writes the checks or gives bonus to rhett o rick Jul 2015 #16

Really? You have evidence that Citibank gives bonuses to people in order to get them to write DanTex Jul 2015 #19

What difference does it make if Citibank writes the check or all of it's exec's write the checks? rhett o rick Jul 2015 #21

OK, so no evidence. Another conspiracy theory. Good to know. DanTex Jul 2015 #22

"Banks are corporations that care about nothing but profit." < Which would give them the best motive jtuck004 Jul 2015 #42

If they do it what possible evidence would there be? zeemike Jul 2015 #48

It's the best kind of conspiracy theory... impossible to prove! DanTex Jul 2015 #63

It's also the best kind of conspiracy...one impossible to prove. zeemike Jul 2015 #79

Your pushing the meme that it isn't the big banks that support Clinton but just their rhett o rick Jul 2015 #112

During my 45-year working career, I worked for several large corporations, I was never asked... George II Jul 2015 #83

Well there you have it then, anecdotal evidence it never happens. zeemike Jul 2015 #87

Let's see the breakdown of Sanders' contributors employers for his NATIONAL contributions... George II Jul 2015 #100

Well what you see as a problem I see as a solution zeemike Jul 2015 #108

A candidate without a national presence will only win 3 electoral votes. George II Jul 2015 #109

You mean like Carter, Clinton, and Obama did? zeemike Jul 2015 #113

pretty much stupidicus Jul 2015 #45

However, it�s worth noting that this data refers to cumulative donations as far back as the 1980s... AlbertCat Jul 2015 #55

Funny how republican arguments such as these tymorial Jul 2015 #58

Those numbers are for ALL employees, not just executives. George II Jul 2015 #81

Yes, Hillary gets campaign contributions from companies headquartered in NY Thinkingabout Jul 2015 #2

Huge sums, actually. Bubzer Jul 2015 #62

Well that's not based in reality... Agschmid Jul 2015 #94

Allow me to clarify Bubzer Jul 2015 #129

What difference does it make?! I'm sure all those very well paid individuals brewens Jul 2015 #4

. Agschmid Jul 2015 #95

Well aware of that. And of what it really says. Wilms Jul 2015 #5

Well, most Democrats period prefer Hillary to Sanders. DanTex Jul 2015 #20

Straight up. Wilms Jul 2015 #27

...now tell me... DanTex Jul 2015 #31

Great song. Agschmid Jul 2015 #96

So, then, all bankers are Democrats? Bubzer Jul 2015 #65

Some are. For example, the ones that donated to Hillary. DanTex Jul 2015 #70

I'd venture an easy majority of Banksters are conservative (if not 3 out of 4). Bubzer Jul 2015 #80

Some are Dems on social issues Depaysement Jul 2015 #71

Of course the banks themselves don't cut big donation checks. Avalux Jul 2015 #6

How does this improve the situation for Clinton? OpenSecrets, Bernie Sanders: Jefferson23 Jul 2015 #7

What situation needs improving? DanTex Jul 2015 #8

Ok. n/t Jefferson23 Jul 2015 #25

Oh, of course. And most people in Vermont must work for unions, right? Makes sense! senz Jul 2015 #43

My neighbor who works for the Bank of New York is a huge Hillary fan! Walk away Jul 2015 #9

Many years ago I worked for the Bank of New York and was never "asked" to contribute... George II Jul 2015 #52

The Bank didn't ask for anything. Walk away Jul 2015 #116

No they didn't. In fact in 43 years of working not a single employer asked me... George II Jul 2015 #118

Of course. But good luck convincing the folks wearing those tin foil hats.... Walk away Jul 2015 #126

Since we're talking millions and millions of dollars, that's got to be thousand and thousands.... George II Jul 2015 #127

Or just the fringe element of our party who suspect conspiracy.... Walk away Jul 2015 #128

I am puzzled CTBlueboy Jul 2015 #10

Exactly. London Lover Man Jul 2015 #12

You can debunk this type of crapola 2,000,000 times ... NanceGreggs Jul 2015 #11

It's called BUNDLING. In 2008, the HRC campaign called their bundlers "Hillraisers" progressoid Jul 2015 #13

The "debunk" is bunk. While Citibank doesn't write the checks themselves, their employees rhett o rick Jul 2015 #14

Aha. So the new meme is that all 25,000 Citibank employees in New York state are DanTex Jul 2015 #18

... Phlem Jul 2015 #54

Can I second your plonk? Depaysement Jul 2015 #73

! Phlem Jul 2015 #74

You are just stating a bunch of jibberish. The bottom line is that the big banks rhett o rick Jul 2015 #110

It's still very telling when so many of your donors work for banks. HappyPlace Jul 2015 #101

You are exactly correct. The working people support Sen Sanders while the banksters support rhett o rick Jul 2015 #111

It also doesn't include money given to the candidates' Super-PACs. arcane1 Jul 2015 #15

So it's bankers, and not banks, that are going to run her white house. Well in that case Doctor_J Jul 2015 #17

No, Hillary Clinton is going to run her White House. George II Jul 2015 #104

Message auto-removed Name removed Jul 2015 #23

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Jul 2015 #24

Message auto-removed Name removed Jul 2015 #28

It also is a reflection of campaign donations from 1999 to 2016. sufrommich Jul 2015 #26

How's this thread working out for you, DanTex? Scootaloo Jul 2015 #29

Well, the Hillary bashing swarm is here, of course. A conspiracy theory here, willful ignorance DanTex Jul 2015 #32

Gotcha. Facts counter to yours are "bashing' and "conspiracy theory" Scootaloo Jul 2015 #34

The conspiracy theory is that the banks are coercing the contributions with financial DanTex Jul 2015 #37

You're sounding kind of like Mitt Romney there, DanTex Scootaloo Jul 2015 #39

The exact opposite, in fact. I'm kind of disappointed in you here. DanTex Jul 2015 #41

So, what, all this money comes from tellers and janitors? Scootaloo Jul 2015 #44

It comes from individuals employed at the corporations. DanTex Jul 2015 #46

If you are as naive (which is unlikely) as your posts indicate, I have the deed to a bridge.... HERVEPA Jul 2015 #90

Actually, it's math. Banks don't hire people so bad at it that they can't figure out that DanTex Jul 2015 #93

It is when it's given through a corporate bundle.Any lobbying for pro-corporate interests thereafter ancianita Jul 2015 #134

The money is not given in a corporate bundle. It's being given by individuals. Not corporations. DanTex Jul 2015 #136

Most people don't know what you know, and I can tell you that it happens way more than any of ancianita Jul 2015 #137

Citibank execs know what I know, though. And can afford lawyers. DanTex Jul 2015 #138

Are their names on any "real" donor list you insist the OP chart doesn't represent? ancianita Jul 2015 #139

I don't understand the question. The OP chart represents donations from employees DanTex Jul 2015 #140

You don't distinguish the interests of the bundlers's names from those individuals within it. That's ancianita Jul 2015 #142

Oh, bundlers. No it doesn't list bundlers and it doesn't show what fraction of the contributions DanTex Jul 2015 #143

Fox news wants their saying back. HERVEPA Jul 2015 #88

So let me get this straight - bank executives are Exilednight Jul 2015 #30

I'm pretty sure the bank employees that donated to Hillary support her. DanTex Jul 2015 #33

According to the records, those "employees" are mostly executives. Exilednight Jul 2015 #92

A lot of those folks are contributing to other candidates too. Organizations typically Hoyt Jul 2015 #35

*facepalm* Man from Pickens Jul 2015 #36

"the fact that bankers overwhelmingly choose HRC is no accident - she's their candidate" Bubzer Jul 2015 #72

kicking frylock Jul 2015 #38

Gee, it's so interesting .... senz Jul 2015 #40

See below...... George II Jul 2015 #49

People don't understand that according campaign finance law, contributions over a certain amount.... George II Jul 2015 #47

Sure. Phlem Jul 2015 #61

Yes. George II Jul 2015 #69

Good luck with that! Phlem Jul 2015 #76

None of "the friends she keeps" can contribute more than $2700. George II Jul 2015 #77

You are completely missing my point. Phlem Jul 2015 #84

The geographic distribution of Hillary donors by zip code is interesting. senz Jul 2015 #50

Here's something else from that site, which explains how they know who the employers are.... George II Jul 2015 #51

BOOM! As always, the LEFT needs to lie to score points! MannyGoldstein Jul 2015 #53

Funny, isn't it? I thought the "left" would know the difference between corporations and people. DanTex Jul 2015 #60

Dude, do your self a favor and take a breath. Phlem Jul 2015 #85

You might not, but Manny does... DanTex Jul 2015 #86

While I can't speak for Manny Phlem Jul 2015 #89

Manny can speak for himself. DanTex Jul 2015 #91

Read it. Phlem Jul 2015 #98

I did. It says "2008". DanTex Jul 2015 #99

alright then. Difference of opinion. Valid. Phlem Jul 2015 #103

NOWHERE did he say he wished McC had won. kath Jul 2015 #105

Question: if you could reverse one election, which would it be. Answer: 2008. DanTex Jul 2015 #107

Possibly the most damming thing I've ever seen on DU MannyGoldstein Jul 2015 #114

Clarifying is the word that I'd use. DanTex Jul 2015 #122

Nah, we pretty much all know. zappaman Jul 2015 #123

Are you referring to Hillary preferring McCain over Obama? Ino Jul 2015 #120

No. Hillary endorse Obama and campaigned for him, in case you forgot. DanTex Jul 2015 #121

Only after she was eliminated. Ino Jul 2015 #124

Not as clearly as Manny. And I suspect many others on the far left. DanTex Jul 2015 #125

I hate when I agree with one of your posts. bravenak Jul 2015 #115

lol tymorial Jul 2015 #56

KnR and good luck. All they want is truthiness, not actual facts. Hekate Jul 2015 #57

Bankers... Not Banks. BANKERS Motown_Johnny Jul 2015 #59

so the gaping differences in "who" and "how much" are all good to go, then? MisterP Jul 2015 #64

Well, the difference in total fundraising is one of the reasons that Hillary is much better DanTex Jul 2015 #68

Her foundation accepted $81m from tax cheats and sex offenders, OnyxCollie Jul 2015 #66

I see banksters on one side and unions on the other Feeling the Bern Jul 2015 #67

Surely you're not that naive, but just in case ... GeorgeGist Jul 2015 #75

Corporations and people are different. I was under the impression that people DanTex Jul 2015 #78

KnR for clarity and exposure Sheepshank Jul 2015 #82

What manner of foaming self delusion be this? whatchamacallit Jul 2015 #97

Absolutely true HassleCat Jul 2015 #102

As as seasoned "donation getter" I have devised a counter argument to this thought Capn Sunshine Jul 2015 #106

I didn't realized that Bernie Sanders rejects all money from anyone who works at a bank. DanTex Jul 2015 #119

Maybe Bernie Sanders should take out an ad stating that anyone working for a bank.... Walk away Jul 2015 #117

Recent donor breakdowns show HRC's 17% are $200 or less, while Bernies' are 75% at $200 or less. ancianita Jul 2015 #130

That's because Bernie raised hardly any money from donations of over $200. DanTex Jul 2015 #131

All factually true, but my RECENT numbers undergird the OP chart's use in calling out union PACs ancianita Jul 2015 #132

The chart is most definitely not a "visual representation of corporate PACs for Hillary". DanTex Jul 2015 #133

Okay,I'll study it. Hill's hard put to erase the names that are the corporate aegis for individuals. ancianita Jul 2015 #135

You're not going to convince right wingers. It isn't even worth the time. NCTraveler Jul 2015 #141