How 31,385 people fund national elections

[questionmark]

Everyone knows that a relatively small number of wealthy people donate the lion’s share of money to political campaigns. But, you probably never suspected just how small that group actually is.

Thanks to the amazing Sunlight Foundation, we now know that just 31,385 people — one tenth of one percent of the overall U.S. population — are responsible for nearly 30 percent of the $6 billion (yes, billion with a “b”) contributed to federal campaigns and committees in the 2012 election.

While the numbers are mind-boggling, one of the charts that Sunlight built to visualize them is even more telling.

Read more

[Kowalski]

From the article:

The nation’s biggest campaign donors have little in common with average Americans. They hail predominantly from big cities, such as New York and Washington. They work for blue-chip corporations, such as Goldman Sachs and Microsoft. One in five works in the finance, insurance and real estate sector. One in 10 works in law or lobbying. The median contribution from this group of elite donors? $26,584. That’s a little more than half the median family income in the United States.”

[danielost]

I didn't know that thirty percent was a lion's share. I would have thought fifty one percent or higher. Not all of them donate to the republican party. Two of the riches back democrats.

[questionmark]

I didn't know that thirty percent was a lion's share. I would have thought fifty one percent or higher. Not all of them donate to the republican party. Two of the riches back democrats.

As usual you have not read the article, have you?

Who is talking about Republicans here?

[Kowalski]

I didn't know that thirty percent was a lion's share. I would have thought fifty one percent or higher. Not all of them donate to the republican party. Two of the riches back democrats.

Actually, the same companies, like Goldman Sachs, fund both parties.

http://files.aboveto.../zi500334d7.jpg

Like Obama, Mitt Romney is a wind-up doll for Wall Street and the bankers. There is virtually no difference between them despite all the fetid air from the GOP propaganda macThis is revealed by a quick look at Romney’s top contributors. An Open Secrets page on top Romney contributors reads like a Who’s Who of Wall Street and the financial cartel. The top contributor is Goldman Sachs, followed by Credit Suisse Group, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, UBS, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and Barclays – major players in the Wall Street and City of London bankster constellation.

Bain Capital is also on the list. It is a “financial services” and investment firm co-founded by Romney. Bain owns the establishment media propaganda conglomerate Clear Channel, which explains why “conservative” talk show hosts like Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin are supporting Romney, especially with the strong showing of Ron Paul in the primaries. Both Savage (real name Weiner) and Levin have gone so far as to call Paul a threat to the country.

In December, Mitt refused to release the identity of his “bundlers,” or people who gather contributions from many individuals in an organization or community and give the cash to the campaign.

In other words, the above list is only the tip of the iceberg. Romney’s lack of transparency about his bundlers indicates he is getting money from sources that want their identity concealed.

In November, it was reported that Jimmy Lee, a veteran Wall Street investment banker, and three other top executives at JPMorgan Chase & Co hosted a $2,500-per-person reception for Romney.

“I am committed to doing all that I can to help his campaign because I also believe he is the strongest challenger to President Obama,” Lee told Reuters. Lee said he has known Romney for almost all of his Wall Street career and that he made one of the first loans to Romney at Bain Capital.

Link: http://www.infowars....n-contributors/

Edited June 29, 2013 by Kowalski

[danielost]

As usual you have not read the article, have you?

Who is talking about Republicans here?

You usually do when it is percived as bad.

Barcleys should not be contributing to any american race, he same with all the oher foreogn companies or coumtries.

[questionmark]

You usually do when it is percived as bad.

Barcleys should not be contributing to any american race, he same with all the oher foreogn companies or coumtries.

As many foreign companies they get around it by creating an American subsidiary. Very legal then.

[Rafterman]

Well as long as we allow non-stop campaigning and as long as it costs billions to get elected president, nothing is going to change.

[F3SS]

I don't think there's anything outrageous behind this. I was expecting to see like 80% or something. 31,000 people is to big o be an elite inside group and considering there are millions of millionaires that number isn't brow raising. Then we have probably 31m regular people making small donations. I'm just not seeing any mind boggling news here.

Edited July 1, 2013 by F3SS

[MiskatonicGrad]

again another reason our founders vested so little power in the federal government easier to fix a couple elections than a couple hundred.

[questionmark]

again another reason our founders vested so little power in the federal government easier to fix a couple elections than a couple hundred.

Not much different there. Same game, less money.

[Frank Merton]

I don't know that money controls most elections. It is used to get name recognition, and it certainly serves to bury any substance, but I have seen many elections around the world where the loser outspent the winner, sometimes by a lot.

[questionmark]

I don't know that money controls most elections. It is used to get name recognition, and it certainly serves to bury any substance, but I have seen many elections around the world where the loser outspent the winner, sometimes by a lot.

Quite true, the problem is that certain special interest finance both sides, a good old American specialty: we don't care who wins, at the end there will be some favors to cash in.

[SHaYap]

Its not the money comes with preconditions ... it is the preconditions that draws the money ... either way ... the preconditions is influenced

[lightly]

ya, ^ what he said. ... who are the largest donors and what interest do they represent? ... it's 'representative government gone awry .

[danielost]

This thread name is why the founding fathers invented lobbist. That way the normal person could compete with the rich. For the most part it works. It is just the rich get the headlines. Usually, negtive headlines like the title of this thread. As I have said before. They are using the exact words that hitler used against the jew and the black.

Edited July 3, 2013 by danielost