2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSanders is now tied for delegates elected by voters, 51 to 51... So Clintons LOVE Citizen's United!
And wouldn't you know it, even though the disastrous Citizen's United decision by the SCOTUS horrifies Democrats by allowing flow of unlimited cash to super PACs from millionaires, billionaires, and even corporations...... It doesn't horrify the Clinton camp..... T.H.A.T.. MUCH!!!
These super PACs can take in as much money as they want, free from campaign finance limits adhered to by candidates.
Bernie Sander's campaign does not HAVE a super PAC, and we don't WANT one.
The Clinton campaign has several.
When this campaign began, those Clinton super PACs were supposed to stay on the sidelines during the primaries. That is no longer the case.
This is how the oligarchy has them by the short hairs. They're bidding their master well, aren't they?
daleanime
(17,796 posts)yes they do.
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)because yours is giving you bad info
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)1) SuperPacs are not legally allowed to coordinate directly with the campaigns themselves and yet David Brock, the slime merchant is doing just that, by using a his typically sleazy tactics to take advantage of a loophole so clearly misused that even the Republicans aren't trying to use it.
2) The OP neglected to mention that the DNC chair not only arbitrarily reversed the ban he put in place on PAC money infusing the DLC, but then directly after doing so cut a huge check from the DLC SuperPac to one of Hillary's SuperPacs.
The info is not so much "bad" as you imply, but rather it is incomplete info.
I give the OP the benefit of the doubt about that as the main goal was not to point out such minutia but rather to put a spotlight on another of Hillary's many lies, this one where she promised to hold back the SupePac money until the GE, a promise broken quite recently and well known enough that even some of the MSM reported on it.
In the 10 days since Bernie Sanders thumped Clinton in the New Hampshire Democratic primary, the pro-Clinton superPAC Priorities USA Action has spent $1.3 million on her behalf.
The money went for radio ads in South Carolina, which holds its Democratic primary on Feb. 27, plus digital ads and direct mail for future Democratic contests in Arkansas, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana and Tennessee.
http://www.npr.org/2016/02/18/467216044/with-democratic-primary-fight-closer-pro-clinton-superpac-amps-it-up
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)I'm sure you're furiously looking for it...
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Unless you say there is...
Still looking?
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)The truth is simply the truth.
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)You stated an opinion, which is sorely lacking not only facts but evidence.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)You do know the difference, don't you?
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)Facts are backed up with evidence, not because you said so.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)You obviously see something that won't hunt. Do tell us what it is.
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)But instead of actually provide proof to back up your claims you'd rather be obtuse.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)for my "silly ass OP"...
Allocation Open/
Closed
(2,382 Needed to Win) - 4763 500 70 - -
Delegates Won - 4051 51 51
Superdelegates - (712) 449 19
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/democratic_delegate_count.html
The definition of obtuse is someone who can't understand references to back up facts, even after they're presented.
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)Got it, thanks for clarifying.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Just your response.
kristopher
(29,798 posts)By Matea Gold May 12, 2015
Hillary Clintons campaign plans to work in tight conjunction with an independent rapid-response group financed by unlimited donations, another novel form of political outsourcing that has emerged as a dominant practice in the 2016 presidential race.
On Tuesday, Correct the Record, a pro-Clinton rapid-response operation, announced it was splitting off from its parent American Bridge and will work in coordination with the Clinton campaign as a stand-alone super PAC. The groups move was first reported by the New York Times.
That befuddled many campaign finance experts, who noted that super PACs, by definition, are political committees that solely do independent expenditures, which cannot be coordinated with a candidate or political party. Several said the relationship between the campaign and the super PAC would test the legal limits.
But Correct the Record believes it can avoid the coordination ban by relying on a 2006 Federal Election Commission regulation that declared that content posted online for free, such as blogs, is off limits from regulation. The Internet exemption said that such free postings do not constitute campaign expenditures, allowing independent groups to consult with candidates about the content they post on their sites. By adopting the measure, the FEC limited its online jurisdiction to regulating paid political ads.
The rules totally exempt individuals who engage in political activity on the Internet from the restrictions of the campaign finance laws....
By REENA FLORES CBS NEWS May 13, 2015, 10:00 AM
Hillary Clinton's campaign intends to coordinate directly with a newly formed super PAC able to receive unlimited donations, according to a Washington Post report.
The Democratic presidential candidate's campaign will work in conjunction with Correct the Record, an independent rapid-response team, previously a part of super PAC American Bridge, which conducts opposition research on Republican presidential candidates and possible GOP presidential candidates. The New York Times first reported Tuesday that Correct the Record would split from its parent organization to support the Clinton campaign.
Though Federal Election Commission (FEC) rules prohibit direct coordination between super PACs and declared candidates, Correct the Record believes it will be able to coordinate with Clinton without violating campaign finance regulations.
The FEC restricts paid internet political advertisements, making them subject to campaign spending limits and disclosure requirements. However, a 2006 FEC rule exempts "public communications" -- like unpaid posts on websites or blogs -- from such regulations. The rules were initially implemented as a safeguard against regulating the free speech of bloggers and other internet communications...
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)It points out that even with all that money the H campaign isn't doing what everyone thought it would do.
Even the big money pundits are getting around to acknowledging Bernie, finally, and that after they had crowned H months ago.
They sure are in a tizzy... like the H campaign is.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Money/money/money/Money/money/money/Money/money/money/Money/money/money/Money/money/money/Money/money/money/Money/money/money/vMoney/money/money/Money/money/money/Money/money/
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)But then they do expect the girl (H) to pay them back dearly with contracts.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)"Facts are backed up with evidence, not because you said so."
merrily
(45,251 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)It's the SAME of shitty weathervane!
Spin... Dodge.... LIE..... spin.... lather.... rinse.... repeat!
merrily
(45,251 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)If I were able to, I'd parody that song a bit!
kgnu_fan
(3,021 posts)sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)gets money from the DNC, which was mostly
meant for lower office holders.
azmom
(5,208 posts)Our anger. It's anti-democratic.
Response to MrMickeysMom (Original post)
iandhr This message was self-deleted by its author.
azmom
(5,208 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)But, that's a different thread, isn't it?
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)It's the current rules of the road, like it or not. The Republicans have planned to spend billions on their eventual nominee. Now that Justice Scalia has passed, the money flowing in from the Right will be obscene. They realize that, due to the rapidly changing demographics in this country, they will only be able to ram their Fascist agenda down our throats by way of the Judiciary Branch. That's the whole ballgame to them. For us, the only chance to get rid of Citizens United is for a Democrat to reshape the Supreme Court. This is the absolute worst time to get sanctimonious about money and place our nominee in handcuffs while the Republicans shovel us under a pile of dirt.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)For the right to reshape the Supreme Court in their vision as a great big Forrest fire. At first glance, it might sound counterintuitive to set a fire yourself in order to create a fire line to starve the fire of fuel. But fireman out west do that all the time. If a Republican gets to reshape the Supreme Court, Citizens United will be with us for a generation.
AZ Progressive
(3,411 posts)Citizens United?
jonjon
(68 posts)Of course not. That would be biting the hand that feeds her!
"The Snake was quickly revived by the warmth, and resuming its
natural instincts, bit its benefactor, inflicting on him a mortal wound.
"Oh," cried the Farmer, "Why did you bite me after I saved you?"
"You knew I was a snake when you picked me up," answered the Snake. "
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Will Hillary Clinton do all she can to push for the overturning of Citizen's United?
That includes SC justices, laws, and support of a constitutional amendment.
senz
(11,945 posts)They are in, of, and for the 1%, the oligarchy. This is whom they identify with and whom they serve.
They are in the Democratic Party to siphon off votes from real Democrats/democrats. If they snooker the people into trusting them and win, they will assume the reins of government for the oligarchy and only for the oligarchy.
The people be damned.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)I'll be damned!
JGug1
(320 posts)No, the Clintons don't "love" super pacs. They are playing the game as it is being played today. I'm getting bored with these STUPID posts dissing Hillary Clinton. She is the most qualified, the most experienced candidate running. I love Bernie but I expect and hope that Hillary will win the nomination. If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. Super pacs are legal. Good lord willing, they won't be sometime after the next election and with Scalia gone. For now, if you don't play by the present rules, you lose.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)That type of logic is the reason that lobbying was successful enough to control what was once understood as "we are a nation of laws"...
The laws that enable a free society to decide by what means it's leadership is elected have been bastardized. And, you're trying to convince yourself that anyone who doesn't get in line with how this has been bastardized "can't take then HEAT".
How lost can you be? 25 posts since 2007, and you come out with this horse shit, "Good lord willing"?
You're going to need more than that. Here... Here's a pillow before your return to your Soma Holiday.
gwheezie
(3,580 posts)Since it was about her.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Then, she supported it by allowing herself funds made available BY it.
Of course, she wasn't for it before she was... but didn't have to take advantage of that. Yet, she's taken the money available BECAUSE of this bad law.
The interesting thing is that Bernie Sanders had the same choice. But he has seen all these years what that portends... That is at the base of where this nation's legislators and executives have landed. So, why should either Democrat take advantage of what IS made available to BOTH of them?
It's neck and neck IN SPITE of Bernie's never giving IN to Citizen's United!
libodem
(19,288 posts)A Horse That's On Fire!!!!
She's Feeling the Bern. Scorch.