They're calling it for Romney; they should be calling it for the bankers

[nobody's_hero]

Romney's top contributors:

Goldman Sachs
$535,680

JPMorgan Chase & Co
$375,650

Morgan Stanley
$323,800

Credit Suisse Group
$299,160

Citigroup Inc
$282,765

Bank of America
$277,850

Breakdown:

--- Small Individual Contributions
$7,475,825 (10%)
--- Large Individual Contributions
$66,707,893 (90%) [dayum!]

Ron Paul's top contributors:

US Army
$94,876

US Navy
$69,430

US Air Force
$69,131

Google Inc
$38,699

US Dept of Defense
$29,778

Breakdown:

--- Small Individual Contributions:
$16,119,202 (47%)
--- Large Individual Contributions
$17,128,189 (50%)


Source:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/

My comment: It sure is a good thing that Mitt Romney flip-flopped and now he doesn't support the bailouts. But I do feel a bit sorry about those folks in the financial institutions who are throwing so much money at him, when Mitt doesn't really care about them.

[yeah, I'm being sarcastic]

Ron Paul had better win or Mitt Romney is going to be yet another Republican candidate to give "capitalism" a bad name (bailouts, special interests, corporate welfare), which means that the Democrat who follows Romney is going to be even more socialist. (edit: that's assuming Romney wins, which I don't believe will happen)

I swear it is like this shit is planned.

EDIT: UPDATE: Due to a particularly meaningless technicality pointed out by Fraulein, I should include the disclaimer from opensecrets, to prevent the spread of "misinformation."


This table lists the top donors to this candidate in the 2012 election cycle. The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organizations' PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

Because of contribution limits, organizations that bundle together many individual contributions are often among the top donors to presidential candidates. These contributions can come from the organization's members or employees (and their families). The organization may support one candidate, or hedge its bets by supporting multiple candidates. Groups with national networks of donors - like EMILY's List and Club for Growth - make for particularly big bundlers.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/contrib.php?cycle=2012&id=N00000286

So, as Fraulein points out, these companies aren't "actually" supporting Mitt Romney, it just so happens that people who work there, their family members, company owners, and their PACs are donating to Mitt Romney. It probably doesn't mean anything. :rolleyes:

[PolicyReader]

Planned, you mean as if the same special interests have some influence over each administration?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9geg2EXP1Gk/TxTGvhWhLgI/AAAAAAAABtc/MhFpBf_ILp8/s1600/all.png
:rolleyes: ;)

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/557510_416057378410472_247545411928337_1746178_177 7295384_n.jpg

[nobody's_hero]

Yeah, maybe I left my sarcasm switch on when I went back and posted that last sentence, lol.

[PolicyReader]

Yeah, maybe I left my sarcasm switch on when I went back and posted that last sentence, lol.
Could be, could be. ;) :D

[DerailingDaTrain]

Planned, you mean as if the same special interests have some influence over each administration?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9geg2EXP1Gk/TxTGvhWhLgI/AAAAAAAABtc/MhFpBf_ILp8/s1600/all.png
:rolleyes: ;)

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/557510_416057378410472_247545411928337_1746178_177 7295384_n.jpg

Why in the hell did the University of Cali and Harvard give Obama so much money?

[harikaried]

The even crazier part is that to raise $1 million from Goldman Sachs, that's only 200 people each donating the max married $5000.

[Tyler_Durden]

The even crazier part is that to raise $1 million from Goldman Sachs, that's only 200 people each donating the max married $5000.

I love how Romney's largest Contributor labels it's investors as "muppets", according to the recent expośe by a departing executive. That means the Goldman Sachs execs appointed to Cabinet positions consider the American people to be "muppets" as well.

[Teenager For Ron Paul]

I found that source first a couple weeks ago :cool:

[nobody's_hero]

I found that source first a couple weeks ago :cool:

Well, I wasn't doing it for the credit, lol.

What set me off was reading this column on a prominent Georgia political blog:

http://www.peachpundit.com/2012/04/04/mitt-romney-presumptive-nominee/


Mitt Romney is not yet ready to say it, but those grounded in reality should be. After sweeping Maryland, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia, Mitt Romney is the only candidate in the race for the Republican nomination with any evidence of forward momentum. Romney takes at least 83 delegates from Tuesday’s contests. Santorum will likely get 6. Gingrich and Paul continue their “convention strategy” with no additional delegates to take to the convention.

In a sign that the Republican National Committee is also recognizing the reality of both having a presumptive nominee and his need for campaign cash, the RNC and Romney’s team announced on Tuesday that they will begin joint fundraising efforts. After a bruising and expensive primary season, Romney will need to reload his warchest, and the RNC could use more funds as well. The general election campaign will not come cheap, and they’re a month or two behind the original plan to have a nominee.

The author suggests that Romney is going to need more money now that he's the "presumptive" nominee. There's more at the link if you feel like reading it, but, really, it's not worth it.

I just have to *facepalm*. Romney has never been hurting for financial support at any point during his campaign. But if republicans want to throw their own hard earned money at him so that Romney will take their tax dollars and give it back to these corporations if he's elected, I'm not going to get between them and their determination to be gullible. Neither Romney nor the RNC will be getting a penny from me.

[PolicyReader]

Well, I wasn't doing it for the credit, lol.

What set me off was reading this column on a prominent Georgia political blog:

http://www.peachpundit.com/2012/04/04/mitt-romney-presumptive-nominee/



The author suggests that Romney is going to need more money now that he's the nominee. There's more at the link if you feel like reading it, but, really, it's not worth it.

I just have to *facepalm*. Romney has never been hurting for financial support at any point during his campaign. But if republicans want to throw their own hard earned money at him so that Romney will take their tax dollars and give it back to these corporations if he's elected, I'm not going to get between them and their determination to be gullible. Neither Romney nor the RNC will be getting a penny from me.
Romney needs more money, maybe he shouldn't have spent it on that elevator for his cars? :p Or maybe if he'd bought some form of coherent core or message but his whole pitch is "Elect me, I'm someone, and I'm not Obama" <--- And even there he fails to be totally honest since functionally he pretty much is Obama

Anyway I can totally see how that'd set you off, so many folks are trying to prematurely end this race, no surprise there they were trying to do it before this race started. :rolleyes:
Even some in our own camp have been throwing in the towel. Now don't get me wrong I'm all for working at a local level as well
but for those who are waving the "let's just work within the GOP for another ten to twenty years and then..." flag, as well as anyone else who'd like to give up on this election well I have one simple response
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/557873_395458710472345_328415557176661_1480355_226 054787_n.jpg

[Tyler_Durden]

Romney needs more money, maybe he shouldn't have spent it on that elevator for his cars? :p Or maybe if he'd bought some form of coherent core or message but his whole pitch is "Elect me, I'm someone, and I'm not Obama" <--- And even there he fails to be totally honest since functionally he pretty much is Obama

Anyway I can totally see how that'd set you off, so many folks are trying to prematurely end this race, no surprise there they were trying to do it before this race started. :rolleyes:
Even some in our own camp have been throwing in the towel. Now don't get me wrong I'm all for working at a local level as well
but for those who are waving the "let's just work within the GOP for another ten to twenty years and then..." flag, as well as anyone else who'd like to give up on this election well I have one simple response
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/557873_395458710472345_328415557176661_1480355_226 054787_n.jpg

Mr. Swann, Your most recent +rep earned me my 5th bar and I just noticed we are now very close to our 5000th post. keep up the good work. :)

[nobody's_hero]

PolicyReader is Ben Swann?

[PolicyReader]

Mr. Swann, Your most recent +rep earned me my 5th bar and I just noticed we are now very close to our 5000th post. keep up the good work. :)
Excellent, keep up the good work need to push past 5k before close of April ;)


PolicyReader is Ben Swann?
Tyler_Durden is Ben Swann, but some individuals allege that we are in fact one person ;)


In related news Ben Swann finds this hilarious
https://t.co/OxbXHlM1

[thoughtomator]

https://twitter.com/#!/icanhasbailout/status/187623231174348800

#Romney2012Slogans "You have to elect it to find out what's in it"

[nobody's_hero]

EDITED:
***okay I guess I'm getting too silly, where is the thread on the UCLA rally?***

Someone should be posting youtube videos as it is going on. We're slipping. We used to be all over this stuff.

[nobody's_hero]

https://twitter.com/#!/icanhasbailout/status/187623231174348800

#Romney2012Slogans "You have to elect it to find out what's in it"

LOL

[PolicyReader]

https://twitter.com/#!/icanhasbailout/status/187623231174348800

#Romney2012Slogans "You have to elect it to find out what's in it"
RT'ed

[Fraulein]

Ron Paul's top contributors:

US Army
$94,876

US Navy
$69,430

US Air Force
$69,131

US Dept of Defense
$29,778

This is wrong. Completely wrong actually.

The US Army, Air Force, Navy and Dept of Defense are NOT top contributors of Ron Paul.

Those stats apply to individual soldiers, airman, sailors and contractors.

As an active duty airman I donated to the Paul campaign, but that doesnt mean you can call it an Air Force contribution.

Stop spreading misinformation, it damages your credibilty and could do great harm to the Paul campaign if exposed.

[Tyler_Durden]

This is wrong. Completely wrong actually.

The US Army, Air Force, Navy and Dept of Defense are NOT top contributors of Ron Paul.

Those stats apply to individual soldiers, airman, sailors and contractors.

As an active duty airman I donated to the Paul campaign, but that doesnt mean you can call it an Air Force contribution.

Stop spreading misinformation, it damages your credibilty and could do great harm to the Paul campaign if exposed.

You should take your complaint up with open secrets.org. (I'm on a tablet otherwise I would have embedded the actual chart):

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/contrib.php?cycle=2012&id=N00005906

[Lafayette]

This is wrong. Completely wrong actually.

The US Army, Air Force, Navy and Dept of Defense are NOT top contributors of Ron Paul.

Those stats apply to individual soldiers, airman, sailors and contractors.

As an active duty airman I donated to the Paul campaign, but that doesnt mean you can call it an Air Force contribution.

Stop spreading misinformation, it damages your credibilty and could do great harm to the Paul campaign if exposed.



You say you donated to Paul, if you did and you filled out the donation form correctly and your donation for the quarter was larger than $200 dollars you would be listed under the FEC donation filings as ...

John Doe - US Air Force/Airmen/Officer/etc - $200.00

You are confusing companies and organizations with employees who work for said companies and organizations. No the US Air Force did not forgo buying a lazer guided missile and donate that money to Paul, in that re guard you are correct.

Your semi new here, so for future reference understand the subject before you comment on it it and accuse others of spreading lies. Though judging by your red reputation bar its likely you will continue to leap before you look.

[Fraulein]

You should take your complaint up with open secrets.org. (I'm on a tablet otherwise I would have embedded the actual chart):

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/contrib.php?cycle=2012&id=N00005906

First of all it's not "my" complaint. I have no stake in this I'm just pointing out a fact.

Second of all, regardless of the original source people still have a responsibility to fact-check or conduct due diligence before spreading information around the internet.

[Tyler_Durden]

PolicyReader is Ben Swann?

Yes! Thought everybody knew that by now!

[Fraulein]

You say you donated to Paul, if you did and you filled out the donation form correctly and your donation for the quarter was larger than $200 dollars you would be listed under the FEC donation filings as ...

John Doe - US Air Force/Airmen/Officer/etc - $200.00

You are confusing companies and organizations with employees who work for said companies and organizations. No the US Air Force did not forgo buying a lazer guided missile and donate that money to Paul, in that re guard you are correct.

I'm not confusing anything with the matter at hand. The chart lists the U.S. Army as one of the top contributors to the Ron Paul campaign.
This is not a matter of semantics, it is flat out wrong.


Your semi new here, so for future reference understand the subject before you comment on it it and accuse others of spreading lies. Though judging by your red reputation bar its likely you will continue to leap before you look.

I'm "semi new" here but at least I don't commit ad-hominem and appeal to tradition fallacies. What a shame, that kind of stuff gets exposed enough around here that you think people would have learned by now.

[Tyler_Durden]

I'm not confusing anything with the matter at hand. The chart lists the U.S. Army as one of the top contributors to the Ron Paul campaign. This is not a matter of semantics, it is flat out wrong.

I'm "semi new" here but at least I don't commit ad-hominem and appeal to tradition fallacies. What a shame, that kind of stuff gets exposed enough around here that you think people would have learned by now.

I'm unaware of anything useful you've ever posted to RPF. Are you sure you're in the right place?

[PolicyReader]

This is wrong. Completely wrong actually.

The US Army, Air Force, Navy and Dept of Defense are NOT top contributors of Ron Paul.

Those stats apply to individual soldiers, airman, sailors and contractors.

As an active duty airman I donated to the Paul campaign, but that doesnt mean you can call it an Air Force contribution.

Stop spreading misinformation, it damages your credibilty and could do great harm to the Paul campaign if exposed.
This is how all finical donation reporting that I've seen is presented. I have up to this time not encountered a single case of confusion with regards to this subject.
How would you recommend such information be formatted? Are there any official sources you could link to which use the method you advocate? (an example would be nice)

[Fraulein]

I'm unaware of anything useful you've ever posted to RPF. Are you sure you're in the right place?

Abusive ad hominem (also called personal abuse or personal attacks) usually involves insulting or belittling one's opponent in order to attack his claim or invalidate his argument, but can also involve pointing out true character flaws or actions that are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions.

You can read more in-depth through the following link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

[Tyler_Durden]

I'm "semi new" here but at least I don't commit ad-hominem.....


Abusive ad hominem (also called personal abuse or personal attacks) usually involves insulting or belittling one's opponent in order to attack his claim or invalidate his argument, but can also involve pointing out true character flaws or actions that are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions.

You can read more in-depth through the following link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem




Fuck me no Fuck you Motherfucker.

I been working my ass off for first a lot longer than you so take that shit up your ass and smoke it motherfucker asshole.

Is this ad-hominem ^^? Not sure. I grew up hating hominy. I like sweet corn though. :D

[J_White]

http://i.imgur.com/vO2Qw.png

[unknown]

For the status-quo, for the establishment.

[PolicyReader]

http://i.imgur.com/vO2Qw.png

This should be part of our tweet push :)

[nobody's_hero]

This is wrong. Completely wrong actually.

The US Army, Air Force, Navy and Dept of Defense are NOT top contributors of Ron Paul.

Those stats apply to individual soldiers, airman, sailors and contractors.

As an active duty airman I donated to the Paul campaign, but that doesnt mean you can call it an Air Force contribution.

Stop spreading misinformation, it damages your credibilty and could do great harm to the Paul campaign if exposed.

Oh come on. I know that.

You don't think that this is in any way indicative of who those companies support?

So what if it was made by individual donors? You don't think that these people are expecting that Mitt remembers them and saves their employment the next time a bailout is needed?

There's all sorts of loopholes that companies can use to support candidates without actually 'supporting them'. This is the best indicator we have of whose money is going where.

I've updated the original post to include the disclaimer put out by opensecrets. But really, I think you'd have to be fairly naive not to think that the banks are trying to influence Romney. I thought it was pretty well understood that the American people don't control our elected officials. But I apologize if I tricked anyone who thought otherwise. I wouldn't want their gullibility to damage my credibility.