2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumJeb Bush, Hillary Clinton are Wall Street's favorites, donations show
The former Florida governor who is seeking the Republican presidential nomination received more financial backing than any competitor - Democrat or Republican - from employees of the major Wall Street banks between July and the end of September, campaign filings released on Thursday show.
Employees from Bank of America , Citigroup , Credit Suisse , Goldman Sachs , HSBC , JPMorgan Chase , Morgan Stanley and UBS gave Bush a combined $107,000. He also received the maximum-allowed $2,700 from billionaire hedge fund manager Leon Cooperman.
The sums are miniscule compared to Bush's total haul for the quarter of $13.4 million. But his popularity among financiers is starkly different from his standing in the multitude of national polls.
Bush is seen as a moderate in the crowded Republican field where 14 candidates are competing for the nomination. In every major poll, he trails Donald Trump, Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina, three candidates who have never held elected office.
U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks during a community forum campaign even
The second most popular candidate on Wall Street according to giving patterns is Democratic front-runner and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. She took in nearly $84,000 from employees of the same banks.
Financial industry lobbyists said bankers favored candidates whose rhetoric seemed measured and "non-scary" over unpredictable outsiders, some of whom want dramatic changes such as breaking up big banks.
Full article: http://news.yahoo.com/bush-clinton-wall-streets-favorites-donations-show-063758748--sector.html
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)I am pretty sure he would be much more in bed with them than Jeb even though Jeb would let Wall Street eat crackers in his bed any time they felt like it. I just think Trump would be like that only way more.
On a side note, who would have thunk that GW would have turned out the be the smart one?
dsc
(52,147 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)moobu2
(4,822 posts)If they thought Bernie was going to win the nomination they would be donating to him. That's just the way it works.
gobears10
(310 posts)that she's accepting Wall Street money. A true progressive would return that money, or donate it to a worthy cause.
This is why I think Bernie > Hillary: http://www.advocate.com/politics/2015/10/16/bernie-sanders-gives-martin-shkrelis-donation-hiv-clinic
Instead, the presidential hopeful has donated the sum $2,700, the maximum amount allowed from a private donor to Whitman-Walker Health, a Washington, D.C.-based clinic that specializes in the treatment of HIV patients and the LGBT community, reports the Boston Globe.
We are not keeping the money from this poster boy for drug company greed, said Michael Briggs, the campaign spokesperson of Sanders, about the donation from Martin Shkreli, the CEO of Turing Pharmaceuticals.
Shkreli made headlines in September when he hiked the price of Daraprim, a vital part of treating toxoplasmosis (which disproportionately affects patients with HIV and AIDS), by more than 5,000 percent, from $13.50 to $750 per pill.
BainsBane
(53,012 posts)Not a teller, a janitor, or anyone else, despite the fact their incomes may be a fraction of the average Sanders supporter. The important point is they not work for someone you think unacceptable.
Meanwhile, a true progressive instead supports corporate welfare to the tune of $800 Billion to Lockheed-Martin for the F-35.
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/24583-bernie-sanders-doubles-down-on-f-35-support-days-after-runway-explosion
Profits that come from killing are just so much more noble than banks.
What is pathetic is that you present evidence that big money from Wall Street is going entirely to the GOP, but you twist it to try to claim Clinton is in their pockets, for a grand total of $84,000. That's laughable.
BainsBane
(53,012 posts)Musk made his money from virtual banking. Then there are scads of millionaires, whose support of Bernie has been posted with great enthusiasm on this site. Yet you find example of his turning down money from one person and pretend it is reflective of a trend.
Don't forget Billionaires for Bernie https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/07/15/theres-a-new-super-pac-for-bernie-sanders-it-wants-billionaire-donors/
BainsBane
(53,012 posts)Totally the same, no difference whatsoever.
You just proved Krugman's point: Wall Street money is going almost exclusively to the GOP. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/16/opinion/democrats-republicans-and-wall-street-tycoons.html?_r=2
It's not like Bernie doesn't have a whopping number of 1 percenters supporting him. In fact polls shows his supporters have higher incomes than Clinton's.
trumad
(41,692 posts)Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)They support whoever they think is most likely to win. That's why they support both parties.
Another thing is that is not the only consideration. Walker was said to be backed by the Koch brothers. If $$ was the only factor as so many here present it, then Walker would not have had to drop out.