General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHillary's major donors
More readable version at:
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=n00000019
Contributor Total Indivs PACs
Citigroup Inc $779,527 $771,527 $8,000
Goldman Sachs $711,490 $701,490 $10,000
JPMorgan Chase $645,994 $638,494 $7,500
DLA Piper $628,030 $601,030 $27,000
EMILY's List $605,174 $601,254 $3,920
Morgan Stanley $543,065 $538,065 $5,000
Time Warner $408,996 $383,996 $25,000
Skadden, Arps $406,640 $402,140 $4,500
Lehman Brothers $362,853 $359,853 $3,000
U.C $329,673 $329,673 $0
Cablevision Systems $315,063 $285,675 $29,388
Kirkland & Ellis $311,441 $294,441 $17,000
Squire Patton Boggs $310,596 $305,158 $5,438
21st Century Fox $302,400 $302,400 $0
National Amusements Inc $297,534 $294,534 $3,000
Ernst & Young $297,142 $277,142 $20,000
Merrill Lynch $292,303 $286,303 $6,000
Credit Suisse Group $290,600 $280,600 $10,000
Corning Inc $276,200 $258,200 $18,000
Greenberg Traurig LLP $273,550 $265,450 $8,100
quinnox
(20,600 posts)for all politicians. People should know exactly where the politicians money in the form of campaign contributions is coming from.
brooklynite
(94,360 posts)...it's all available on the FEC website.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)I meant I think the public should be made more aware of this info for all the politicians.
CrispyQ
(36,424 posts)instead of focusing only on one or two stories for their 24x7 coverage.
1000words
(7,051 posts)Whisp
(24,096 posts)I believed this at one time, what you are trying to do. But I've learned what these lists really mean. I am not a Hillary fan, at all, but this is misleading to post that list without the explanation of who these donors really are.
karynnj
(59,498 posts)At some point, it is just dishonest for people to poster this writing things that imply it is from the company.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)What to do? What to do?
Many of those have donated to Obama at one point or another.
None of them have donated to Nader.
What to do? What to do?
brentspeak
(18,290 posts)is it?
moriah
(8,311 posts)... to recheck the name of the site.
FWIW, I'm getting extremely sick of primary season, and no candidate is officially running yet. I like DU much better when we are actually working to get the candidate our process nominated elected.
Oh well. *sucks it up for the next two years*
1000words
(7,051 posts)You know, the folks who claim to be voice of the poor and working class.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)Bush And Gore Are Exactly The Same!
Bush And Gore Are Exactly The Same!
Bush And Gore Are Exactly The Same!
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)But some thought they were both sponsored by the same oligarchs.
And if H. Clinton-Sachs runs against Jeb Bush, they will not be the same. But they will be close enough to please the oligarchs.
Take a chance for freedom and liberty, dump the Oligarchy Status Quo.
karynnj
(59,498 posts)I thought Nader was wrong in saying they were the same, but I could understand some people who believed it. Gore, the first DLC backed candidate in 1988, was about as conservative as a Democrat got -- except on climate change. Bush, had no real history and he said he was a "compassionate conservative". Bush's strategy was to minimize the difference in their positions.
Nader is now trying to do the same with the entire Democratic party.
However, in 2008, when I really was extremely against HRC and Edwards, when Bush vetoed the extention of the SCHIP, I realized that NO Democrat would have done that --- and all Republicans could. At that moment, even though NJ was not likely to be a swing state, I knew I would both vote and phonebank/canvas for whomever the Democratic was. On different issues, their is a party litmus test. If any are important to anyone, it makes sense to support your party.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)He spent weeks in Florida working repeating this bullshit.
Nader handed an extra 30+ years of control of SCOTUS to the 'Status Quo.'
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)outcome, but you take the easy road and blame one person. Wow, what power Nader had. It's bullcrap and you know it.
But I will lay this out for you right now. We have a similar situation. If H. Clinton, Ms. Wall Street, wins the nomination, the American people are going to roll their eyes and say 8 more years of Wall Street and Goldman-Sachs rule, 8 more years of NSA/CIA control of the country.
If you want to win the election in 2016 then nominate someone all Democrats can support and that isnt H. Clinton-Sachs. You wont have the Nader excuse this time.
corkhead
(6,119 posts)liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)Arne Duncan will punish schools and teachers by tying federal dollars to state standardized tests, but he'll praise Starbucks for offering employees school scholarships. Democrats are way too cozy with corporations. They need to get back to serving the people, not the corporations.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Follow the money.
corkhead
(6,119 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)through it.....and then how could one deal with this disgusting line up.....
But, yeah it gets to be too much. But it's what the PTB want us to do. Tune Out but show up at the polls. After all....She would be the First Female USA President.
I'm female....and I think "SAVE US!"
Zorra
(27,670 posts)whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)election. Money rules and that's H. Clinton-Sachs.
locks
(2,012 posts)before she was Secy of State but in 2012 there was a scandal involving congresspersons doing inside trading of TransCanada stocks. Besides congresspersons, Susan Rice former UN Ambassador and Obama security advisor and her husband held $l.25 million in Transcanada and other Keystone Pipeline contractors. Paul Elliot, Hillary's 2008 deputy campaign manager, is TransCanada's chief lobbyist to the State Dept.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Only a polite thank-you note with hearts and bunnies. Otherwise, Hillary would angrily return the bribes..er..donations.