Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
.
"There IS massive interference in US elections, from the US corporate sector, who pretty much buy the elections..... You can predict the outcome of an American election, in Congress and Executive, with remarkable precision, simply looking at the single variable of campaign funding".
.
Whoever has more money has more free speech? It`s not an impossible dilemma when first tier countries manage to have elections without the influence of corporate money. Will we ever be a first tier country? No.Hillary spent more money than trump by a huge margin. Also something like 400+ of the S&P 500 companies actively supported her. Silicon Valley went ga-ga for her. 3/4 of a billion dollars.
I know the exception doesn’t disprove the rule and money in elections is s problem but with a massive enough upswell like we saw in 2016 it can be beaten.
But what solution is there? Money is speech. It’s an impossible dilemma. And I believe that’s why some of the branches of our Federal government were intended to be appointed.
If you have to pay for speech, speech isn't free.Hillary spent more money than trump by a huge margin. Also something like 400+ of the S&P 500 companies actively supported her. Silicon Valley went ga-ga for her. 3/4 of a billion dollars.
I know the exception doesn’t disprove the rule and money in elections is s problem but with a massive enough upswell like we saw in 2016 it can be beaten.
But what solution is there? Money is speech. It’s an impossible dilemma. And I believe that’s why some of the branches of our Federal government were intended to be appointed.
.
Strict, short term limits and publicly-funded elections. Things change overnight.If you have to pay for speech, speech isn't free.Hillary spent more money than trump by a huge margin. Also something like 400+ of the S&P 500 companies actively supported her. Silicon Valley went ga-ga for her. 3/4 of a billion dollars.
I know the exception doesn’t disprove the rule and money in elections is s problem but with a massive enough upswell like we saw in 2016 it can be beaten.
But what solution is there? Money is speech. It’s an impossible dilemma. And I believe that’s why some of the branches of our Federal government were intended to be appointed.
.
Free speech is long gone. I didn’t say free speech. I said “speech”. It can cost to speak but I mean money itself is a form of speech. Or at least that is what the Supreme Court has ruled.
You want to take money out of politics? Then take government out of money. There is no way the President or federal government should be this important in the day to day lives of citizens. It’s the way they wanted it and they got it.
The one job it inarguably should be doing...defending our borders...has been made impossible.
Whoever has more money has more free speech? It`s not an impossible dilemma when first tier countries manage to have elections without the influence of corporate money. Will we ever be a first tier country? No.Hillary spent more money than trump by a huge margin. Also something like 400+ of the S&P 500 companies actively supported her. Silicon Valley went ga-ga for her. 3/4 of a billion dollars.
I know the exception doesn’t disprove the rule and money in elections is s problem but with a massive enough upswell like we saw in 2016 it can be beaten.
But what solution is there? Money is speech. It’s an impossible dilemma. And I believe that’s why some of the branches of our Federal government were intended to be appointed.
to the tune of $1.2 - $2.0 BILLION worth.... without spending a penny.Yeah, thanks media for all that great positive coverage that helped elect president Trump.Trump got A LOT of free TV advertising from the News media, more than anyone in the campaigns, all combined together...Hillary spent more money than trump by a huge margin. Also something like 400+ of the S&P 500 companies actively supported her. Silicon Valley went ga-ga for her. 3/4 of a billion dollars.
I know the exception doesn’t disprove the rule and money in elections is s problem but with a massive enough upswell like we saw in 2016 it can be beaten.
But what solution is there? Money is speech. It’s an impossible dilemma. And I believe that’s why some of the branches of our Federal government were intended to be appointed.
Trump also got the FREE Russian help with Trolls and Bots, and wikileaks help, and Trump also got all the money that Robert Mercer put in to help him in a back door manner, and Trump got the illegal Russian oligarch money spent on the NRA advertising for him and against Hillary, and Trump got the illegal campaign help from the National Enquirer...
And let us not forget Cambridge Analytica and their help, with stolen lists of Face book users.
so, please spare us that lie of Trump's that his campaign spent less.... maybe out of his own pocket he spent less, but others were spending the money on him, ILLEGALLY.
Do you believe it would be impossible to stop big business from influencing our elected officials by contributing massive amounts to their campaigns?Hillary spent more money than trump by a huge margin. Also something like 400+ of the S&P 500 companies actively supported her. Silicon Valley went ga-ga for her. 3/4 of a billion dollars.
I know the exception doesn’t disprove the rule and money in elections is s problem but with a massive enough upswell like we saw in 2016 it can be beaten.
But what solution is there? Money is speech. It’s an impossible dilemma. And I believe that’s why some of the branches of our Federal government were intended to be appointed.
yeah, sure!you left out hillary got help from the networks, fbi, and justice department.Trump got A LOT of free TV advertising from the News media, more than anyone in the campaigns, all combined together...Hillary spent more money than trump by a huge margin. Also something like 400+ of the S&P 500 companies actively supported her. Silicon Valley went ga-ga for her. 3/4 of a billion dollars.
I know the exception doesn’t disprove the rule and money in elections is s problem but with a massive enough upswell like we saw in 2016 it can be beaten.
But what solution is there? Money is speech. It’s an impossible dilemma. And I believe that’s why some of the branches of our Federal government were intended to be appointed.
Trump also got the FREE Russian help with Trolls and Bots, and wikileaks help, and Trump also got all the money that Robert Mercer put in to help him in a back door manner, and Trump got the illegal Russian oligarch money spent on the NRA advertising for him and against Hillary, and Trump got the illegal campaign help from the National Enquirer...
And let us not forget Cambridge Analytica and their help, with stolen lists of Face book users.
so, please spare us that lie of Trump's that his campaign spent less.... maybe out of his own pocket he spent less, but others were spending the money on him, ILLEGALLY.
This has nothing to do with anything except that I think it's funny:SHIT, right, Noam, sorry.Noam, show some respect.
.
Strict, short term limits and publicly-funded elections. Things change overnight.If you have to pay for speech, speech isn't free.Hillary spent more money than trump by a huge margin. Also something like 400+ of the S&P 500 companies actively supported her. Silicon Valley went ga-ga for her. 3/4 of a billion dollars.
I know the exception doesn’t disprove the rule and money in elections is s problem but with a massive enough upswell like we saw in 2016 it can be beaten.
But what solution is there? Money is speech. It’s an impossible dilemma. And I believe that’s why some of the branches of our Federal government were intended to be appointed.
.
Free speech is long gone. I didn’t say free speech. I said “speech”. It can cost to speak but I mean money itself is a form of speech. Or at least that is what the Supreme Court has ruled.
You want to take money out of politics? Then take government out of money. There is no way the President or federal government should be this important in the day to day lives of citizens. It’s the way they wanted it and they got it.
The one job it inarguably should be doing...defending our borders...has been made impossible.
When the dust has settled after that, we see what else needs to be done.
.
Strict, short term limits and publicly-funded elections. Things change overnight.If you have to pay for speech, speech isn't free.Hillary spent more money than trump by a huge margin. Also something like 400+ of the S&P 500 companies actively supported her. Silicon Valley went ga-ga for her. 3/4 of a billion dollars.
I know the exception doesn’t disprove the rule and money in elections is s problem but with a massive enough upswell like we saw in 2016 it can be beaten.
But what solution is there? Money is speech. It’s an impossible dilemma. And I believe that’s why some of the branches of our Federal government were intended to be appointed.
.
Free speech is long gone. I didn’t say free speech. I said “speech”. It can cost to speak but I mean money itself is a form of speech. Or at least that is what the Supreme Court has ruled.
You want to take money out of politics? Then take government out of money. There is no way the President or federal government should be this important in the day to day lives of citizens. It’s the way they wanted it and they got it.
The one job it inarguably should be doing...defending our borders...has been made impossible.
When the dust has settled after that, we see what else needs to be done.
.
Noam, show some respect.
HERE are the super pacs of BIG GUNS that contributed to Trump's campaign...
some of these biggies, ended up with positions in the Trump Admin.
DO NOT LET TRUMP LIES on it, make liars out of all of you!
By Deborah D'Souza
Updated Oct 21, 2016
Donald Trump doesn't want to be seen as anyone's puppet. Unlike his rival Hillary Clinton, he has disavowed super PACs, the fundraising organizations that attract millions in donations from wealthy supporters.The Republican candidate, who has put in $8 million of his own money and guaranteed loans worth $47 million to fund his campaign, has argued that he can't be controlled by special interests this way. But that didn't stop supporters from donating millions to pro-Trump super PACs this last quarter. (See also, Top 10 Contributors to the Clinton Campaign)
The following are the top donors to Trump's campaign:
1. Robert Mercer, Renaissance Technologies - $13.5 million
The CEO of New York-based hedge fund Renaissance Technologies has contributed millions of his fortune to conservative causes over the years. This election cycle, Mercer had started a super PAC to support Ted Cruz and Trump's campaign manager Kellyanne Conway managed it. When Cruz dropped out, Mercer changed the name of the super PAC from Keep the Promise 1 to Make America Number 1 and focused on supporting Trump's campaign.
2. Sheldon Adelson and Miriam Adelson, Las Vegas Sands Corporation (LVS) - $10 million
Casino magnate Sheldon Adelson is the CEO of Las Vegas Sands Corporation. He and his wife both gave $5 million each to the Future45 super PAC. Adelson also gave $1.5 million to the Republican National Convention this year. (See also, Republican National Convention 2016 Donor's Names Released)
3. Linda McMahon, World Wrestling Entertainment Inc. (WWE) - $6 million
Linda McMahon co-founded the WWE franchise with her husband Vince. She gave $6 million to the pro-Trump super PAC Rebuilding America Now, making her one of the biggest donors to Trump. McMahon, who runs a company that promotes women in business, has called Trump's comments about women "deplorable." She and her husband have given $5 million to the the Trump Foundation in the past, according to The Washington Post.
4. Bernard Marcus, Retired - $7 million
87-year-old Bernard Marcus is the co-founder and former CEO of Home Depot. He currently sits on the board of the Republican Jewish Coalition. He gave to the Rebuilding America Now and Make America Number 1 super PAC.
5. Geoffrey Palmer, G.H. Palmer Associates - $2 million
Palmer is a real estate magnate whose buildings in Los Angeles are known for their characteristic "fauxtalian" style. He donated to Trump's campaign through the Rebuilding America Now super PAC.
6. Ronald M Cameron, Mountaire Corp. - $2 million
Cameron is CEO of an Arkansas-based poultry company called Mountaire Corp. He previously contributed $3 million to Mike Huckabee's bid for president and donated to the pro-Trump Rebuilding America Now super PAC.
7. Peter Thiel, Palantir Technologies - $1.25 million
Venture capitalist Peter Thiel plans to donate to Donald Trump's campaign through super PACs and the official campaign committee, according to a spokesperson. As a delegate for Trump at the Republican National Convention, Thiel delivered a speech in which he expressed his frustration with America's "broken economy." Thiel is also a director at Facebook (FB). See also, (Mark Zuckerberg Responds to Peter Thiel's Donation to Donald Trump )
8. Walter Buckley Jr, Actua Corporation (ACTA) - $1 million
Buckley is the CEO of Actua Corporation, a publicly traded venture capital firm that acquires and builds cloud companies. He donated to the Rebuilding America Now super PAC.
9. Cherna Moskowitz, Hawaiian Gardens Casino - $1 million
Cherna Moskowitz is the president of Hawaiian Gardens Casino and the Irving Moskowitz Fundation. She donated to Mercer's Maker America Number 1 super PAC. News stories, including one published by Mother Jones in 2000, have said the Moskowitzs operated a bingo club in an impoverished town as a non-profit and used the funds to support Jewish settlers in Palestine. In a report about Cherna's late husband Irving's death, The Times of Israel wrote, "Moskowitz donated millions of dollars to the Elad Foundation and Ateret Cohanim, two groups that have helped some 3,000 Israeli Jews move into the Old City and surrounding Arab neighborhoods in East Jerusalem."
10. Peter Zieve, Electroimpact - $1 million
Peter Zieve is the founder and president of Electroimpact, a manufacturing firm that counts Boeing and Airbus among its customers. In April, The Seattle Times published offensive emails sent by Zieve to his employees. Congratulating an employee on a the birth of a child, Zieve wrote, “I note that 381,000 terrorist savages have gotten into Europe this year and if we don’t make more babies the light will go out on civilization.” He gave money to Rebuilding America Now.
Top 10 Donors to the Trump Campaign (FB, WWE)
Funding helps you get your message out and take voters to the polls.I think it was in Freakanomics, where they compared elections in different years between the same candidates with varying levels of money.Both, I'd think.
.
And money had little if any impact.
No, it was meant the interests of the state whose congress elected them.The senate was intended, partially, to represent the wealthier class. Right?
The FBI Comey, secured her DEFEAT with his long dissertation, all negative, for her exoneration, no less... and then his news on reopening the investigation 10 days before the election, sealed the deal of her loss....
In the mean time, the FBI was investigating Trump and team for aiding and abetting the Russians, and NOT ONE WORD from the FBI on it....
you can pretend all you want. but it ain't gonna change the ACTUAL FACTS.
he certainly was NOT a die-hard Clinton fan.... their mutual dislikes of each other, goes back decades.The FBI Comey, secured her DEFEAT with his long dissertation, all negative, for her exoneration, no less... and then his news on reopening the investigation 10 days before the election, sealed the deal of her loss....
In the mean time, the FBI was investigating Trump and team for aiding and abetting the Russians, and NOT ONE WORD from the FBI on it....
you can pretend all you want. but it ain't gonna change the ACTUAL FACTS.
Yeah, that Comey is just a die hard Trumpster, lol.
No, it was meant the interests of the state whose congress elected them.The senate was intended, partially, to represent the wealthier class. Right?
