• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Kochs Plan to Spend $900 Million on 2016 Campaign

Which side gets the most money remains unclear. What is clear is that tv is going to absolutely suck with a tidal wave of those commercials designed for IQs of 45.
 
Which side gets the most money remains unclear. What is clear is that tv is going to absolutely suck with a tidal wave of those commercials designed for IQs of 45.

Oh, they do not just stick to TV. My state was in play in 2012. "Americans for <<insert any term you want here>>" just about worked my poor mail carrier to death. Between September and the election, I bet I was averaging a good 12-15 political mailers per week and, when we bothered to answer the telephone, at least 3 or 4 polling calls a week, people from other states (read union workers)/college volunteers canvasing our neighborhood every few weeks. It was insane. The week before the election, we had to turn the ringer on the telephone off--non-stop pollsters and robo-callers.
 
And they do this due to their love for their country. Thoughts are?

Kochs Plan to Spend $900 Million on 2016 Campaign

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/27/u...lumn-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

The political network overseen by the conservative billionaires Charles G. and David H. Koch plans to spend close to $900 million on the 2016 campaign, an unparalelled effort by outside groups to shape a presidential election that is already on track to be the most expensive in history.

The goal, revealed Monday at the Kochs’ annual winter donor retreat near Palm Springs, Calif., would effectively allow their political organization to operate at the same financial scale as the Democratic and Republican parties. In the last presidential election, the Republican National Committee and the party’s two congressional campaign committees spent a total of $657 million.

How much of it will be in dark money where we won't know that they are spending?

This country is becoming an oligarchy.
 
Out of curiosity, if someone really liked "Brand X" peanut butter and decided to initiate a campaign to get more people to like the brand would you have a problem with that? What if they spent $900M to get you to change from "Brand Y" to their preferred brand?

... not exactly the same thing....
 
So what?

The only people that change their vote because of campaign ads are political morons and/or the weak...I don't care who they vote for.

Besides, whomever either party puts up will absolutely suck anyway.

Let them spend their money, maybe the ads will offer a passing interest - more so then the tripe that pass for ads now.
 
Last edited:
How much of it will be in dark money where we won't know that they are spending?

This country is becoming an oligarchy.

dark money doesn't mean you won't know where it's being spent... it means you won't know who the donors are.
 
And the connection is? Sticky fingers? Ya must be it- sticky fingers.

The point is, that 900 million bucks is going into the pockets of American citizens. Remember how excited folks were about the stealfromus bill?
 
Quote Originally Posted by OrphanSlug "Why does money from the left get a pass but Koch money gets scrutiny?"

1. With some exceptions (ie. Soros) money from the left comes from organizations representing thousands of people who made modest donations, not just a handful of extremely rich people.

2. Most of the causes championed by the left do not financially benefit a small number of people. Most of the causes championed by the right do financially benefit only a small number of people who are already rich and powerful.

1. I'm not saying you are entirely wrong here, but why should wealthy people be told to hold back where as collections of other wealth is acceptable? Soros is no better than the Koch brothers, yet only the latter gets mention on the floor of the Senate with such passionate disdain for "buying elections."

2. Here I completely disagree. Modern politics is all about treasury promises. Less contribution in taxation, more in spending, or some terrible combination of the two. And financial benefit is part of the problem, it equates to buying votes no matter if we are talking about the right protecting wealth for votes or the left protecting spending for votes. In the end, we see debt go up. It is just way too argumentative to suggest left policies benefit the average voter or a large percentage of the populace, so their money is more honest than money from the right. Sometime yes, mostly no.
 
Out of curiosity, if someone really liked "Brand X" peanut butter and decided to initiate a campaign to get more people to like the brand would you have a problem with that? What if they spent $900M to get you to change from "Brand Y" to their preferred brand?

It depends on whether the "preferred brand" is laced with a slow acting poison that their ads did not reveal. That is what the Koch's are doing.
 
It depends on whether the "preferred brand" is laced with a slow acting poison that their ads did not reveal. That is what the Koch's are doing.

Some might say the same thing about Soros.
 
If I had back all the money I've spent on Powerball tickets through the years, I'd be able to buy a private island.

Why a private island? To be totally reclusive?
 
I wonder how many billions leftist and unions will spend, but then again its only bad when agent of Liberty spend money to advance their views and values..
 
And they do this due to their love for their country. Thoughts are?

Kochs Plan to Spend $900 Million on 2016 Campaign

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/27/u...lumn-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

The political network overseen by the conservative billionaires Charles G. and David H. Koch plans to spend close to $900 million on the 2016 campaign, an unparalelled effort by outside groups to shape a presidential election that is already on track to be the most expensive in history.

The goal, revealed Monday at the Kochs’ annual winter donor retreat near Palm Springs, Calif., would effectively allow their political organization to operate at the same financial scale as the Democratic and Republican parties. In the last presidential election, the Republican National Committee and the party’s two congressional campaign committees spent a total of $657 million.


I wonder how much George Soros and other wealthy liberals are spending on their guys?
 
I don't have a problem with anyone making big money as long as they don't encroach on my rights or freedoms.
I see such wealth disparity as evidence they've already been exploiting the population.
 
How much of it will be in dark money where we won't know that they are spending?

This country is becoming an oligarchy.

There's nothing new under the sun.

In 1898, the trio of Rockerfeller, JP Morgan, and Andrew Carnegie essentially "bought" the presidency for William McKinley.

Their money and influence were far greater than anything we see today.

We survived then, and we'll be OK now as well.
 
Out of curiosity, if someone really liked "Brand X" peanut butter and decided to initiate a campaign to get more people to like the brand would you have a problem with that? What if they spent $900M to get you to change from "Brand Y" to their preferred brand?

They'd just as crazy and most of us would think they have waaaay too much money and a completely out of kilter world view on what 900 million would be best used for.

So let's be honest, Brand X or Brand Y is moot, the Koch Kooks spend 900 MILLION dollars because they think they will get far more from Brand X for spending the money than any 'for the good of the people'... :roll:
 
I can help with that. You would be more likely to get struck by lightning on a clear day *and* attacked by a shark while standing in 2 feet of ocean water all at the same time than winning the Powerball.


Not bad enough of odds considering lightning can strike from 10 miles away and some sharks can easily navigate 2 feet of water.
 
Not bad enough of odds considering lightning can strike from 10 miles away and some sharks can easily navigate 2 feet of water.

Tthe odds are not as good as you think. You have about a 1 and 11 million chance of being attacked by a shark standing in 2 feet of water, and about a 1 and 3 million chance of being struck by lightning (when there is supposed to be lightning.)

Odds of hitting the powerball grand prize, about 1 and 175 million. Good luck!
 
I wonder how much George Soros and other wealthy liberals are spending on their guys?

They're not. They are nobly sacrificing of themselves and devoting their own resources to public education and the improvement of the disenfranchised and systemically prejudiced against. Oh, and you're a racist. :mrgreen:




So, actually bothering to read part of the article, it looks like the Kochs aren't spending $900 million, it looks like they are trying to get 300 of their fellow donors all in together to come up with a joint sum of $889 million over the course of the campaign. The interesting part to me is:

...At least five potential presidential candidates were invited this year, and four attended, including Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin. On Sunday evening, three of them — Senators Marco Rubio of Florida, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Ted Cruz of Texas — took part in a candidate forum on economic issues....

So, no Romney, no Bush, no Christie. Of those four, Walker and Rubio are the most likely to pick up the majority of donor support.
 
Back
Top Bottom