• 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

Geoist said:
I think there is a bit of a difference between speaking out on the candidate/issue you support and throwing nearly a billion dollars to influence elections. Our 'democracy' is becoming more and more of a joke, everyday.
Click to expand...

Actually, the US Supreme Court rightly believes that the act of spending money is a form of free speech - very democratic.
 
Unrepresented said:
After searching, it appears to be a summary of his foundation's advertising campaign against minimum wage increases, rather than a direct quote.

Point remains, he's still anti-worker.

Tell me more about how lowering the already poverty level minimum hourly wage will increase workers' pay.
Click to expand...

Taken out of context, point fails.
 
TerryOfromCA said:

And how much have thug unions spent on Democrat campaigns over the decades. . . . without the consent of the dues payers I might add?

Yah, when its working for the Democrats they keep their yaps shut.
But when some Republican donors come along they all start to snivel like beee-atches.
Click to expand...



can anyone tell us what the United Autoworkers Union contributed directly to Obama in '08 and '12?

In one forum we have outrage that the Koch's plan t spen $900 million, on another we have outrage that a possible contender for the Dipmocratic nomination is promising to end the Koch brothers ability to contribute...


And, gee, for some reason no one is talking about Soros and his buddies, the UAW, the NEA, the civil service unions and Obama's wall street friends who made millions on the bank collapse.

Like most things "progressive" the angst is aimed in one direction only.......
 
Fenton said:
Yep, the Left lost its monopoly and they don't like it one bit.

" Unions represent people " , even though if your'e in a Union you have no say how your Union dues are spent.
Click to expand...
You possess a fundamental misunderstanding of unions. Unions are not despotic dictators you submit to. They are organizations that are voted on by members for both contracts and representatives.
 
CMPancake said:
Are you upset with guys like Soros and the Koch brothers funding elections and buying our politicians?. . . .
Click to expand...

No, I'm a capitalist. If you've got it, spend it I say.

The exception is the unions, because they take the money they force out of dues payers, money that should be going to help the member, and they give it to one political party that many of those dues payers do not support!! That is BAD.

But the rich donors? That does not bother me. What bothers me is the Liberal hypocrites who are cool with Soros and Gates but think the Koch's are the devil.
 
TerryOfromCA said:
No, I'm a capitalist. If you've got it, spend it I say.

The exception is the unions, because they take the money they force out of dues payers, money that should be going to help the member, and they give it to one political party that many of those dues payers do not support!! That is BAD.

But the rich donors? That does not bother me. What bothers me is the Liberal hypocrites who are cool with Soros and Gates but think the Koch's are the devil.
Click to expand...

Unions put money towards pro-union candidates...just as corporations put money towards candidates that support legislation that benefits them.
 
JasperL said:
Here's what you said, "Great. If there is tons of evidence of their money forcing a politician to cast a vote on legislation in a way that he wouldn't have voted without their influence, then it should be easy for you to post tons of links showing that."

Forgetting the straw man "forcing" - either the money influences/changes votes or it doesn't. Seems self evident the money has a tremendous influence, causes recipients of big money to vote in the interests of donors, which is why sophisticated donors who travel in circles we're not part of give $billions every year, and spend $billions more in lobbying. Do you agree or not?
Click to expand...

So you just assume the Koch money has forced politicians to change their vote - you have no proof of it, and your rationale is "well they spent the money!".

Come back when you have evidence.
 
cpwill said:
No. This may be difficult for some to grasp, but it's actually okay if people or organizations want to spend their own money on advocacy.
Click to expand...

Fine, but that applies to Soros as well. Unions are people according to Citizens United, so them too.

I'm just saying that if you like the money the Kochs are spending, complaining about Soros is rather comical.
 
TerryOfromCA said:
No, I'm a capitalist. If you've got it, spend it I say.

The exception is the unions, because they take the money they force out of dues payers, money that should be going to help the member, and they give it to one political party that many of those dues payers do not support!! That is BAD.

But the rich donors? That does not bother me. What bothers me is the Liberal hypocrites who are cool with Soros and Gates but think the Koch's are the devil.
Click to expand...

Unions are people
 
TerryOfromCA said:

And how much have thug unions spent on Democrat campaigns over the decades. . . . without the consent of the dues payers I might add?

Yah, when its working for the Democrats they keep their yaps shut.
But when some Republican donors come along they all start to snivel like beee-atches.
Click to expand...

Unions represent 14.6 working Americans, the Kochs represent two people. Unions are democratic organizations. Any member can attend meetings, run for union offices etc.
 
tres borrachos said:
So you just assume the Koch money has forced politicians to change their vote - you have no proof of it, and your rationale is "well they spent the money!".

Come back when you have evidence.
Click to expand...
The fact that you choose to ignore evidence presented shows you are not interested in proof of any sort.
 
tres borrachos said:
Why shouldn't people be swayed by political ads?
Click to expand...

Political advertisements offer too little information (if any), often misrepresent the facts and appeal to emotions.
 
Fearandloathing said:
can anyone tell us what the United Autoworkers Union contributed directly to Obama in '08 and '12?

In one forum we have outrage that the Koch's plan t spen $900 million, on another we have outrage that a possible contender for the Dipmocratic nomination is promising to end the Koch brothers ability to contribute...


And, gee, for some reason no one is talking about Soros and his buddies, the UAW, the NEA, the civil service unions and Obama's wall street friends who made millions on the bank collapse.

Like most things "progressive" the angst is aimed in one direction only.......
Click to expand...

More of the same: Shame on Soros and the Unions, good on the Kochs. News flash - if you like money being spent on politics, the same rules apply for liberal organizations as well.
 
rocket88 said:
Fine, but that applies to Soros as well. Unions are people according to Citizens United, so them too.

I'm just saying that if you like the money the Kochs are spending, complaining about Soros is rather comical.
Click to expand...

I agree with you here. Unions, Soros, Gwyneth Paltrow, Karl Rove's PAC, all of them are considered people. And as such, they should all get to donate what they want without criticism. I don't care who unions donate to, or who Jay-Z donates to, or who the Koch Brothers donate to. Unless everyone stops donating or being allowed to donate, and I don't see that happening.
 
Hard Truth said:
Unions represent 14.6 working Americans, the Kochs represent two people. Unions are democratic organizations. Any member can attend meetings, run for union offices etc.
Click to expand...

If I understand Terry's point correctly, a handful of people in the Unions decide how all of their members' dues are donated. The Koch Brothers aren't spending anyone else's money. It doesn't matter if there are 2 of them or 387443756 of them. It's their money.
 
tres borrachos said:
I agree with you here. Unions, Soros, Gwyneth Paltrow, Karl Rove's PAC, all of them are considered people. And as such, they should all get to donate what they want without criticism. I don't care who unions donate to, or who Jay-Z donates to, or who the Koch Brothers donate to. Unless everyone stops donating or being allowed to donate, and I don't see that happening.
Click to expand...

I do, however, support playing a little "watch the money" sometimes. What I hate is that most of these corporations hide behind PACs with silly names like "Citizens for Good Stuff" instead of "(Insert coporation name here) supports (candidate)." I guess it's their right, but I wish they would show some stones.
 
rocket88 said:
I do, however, support playing a little "watch the money" sometimes. What I hate is that most of these corporations hide behind PACs with silly names like "Citizens for Good Stuff" instead of "(Insert coporation name here) supports (candidate)." I guess it's their right, but I wish they would show some stones.
Click to expand...

I agree with you here. It starts to get murky, and it should be made plain.

I'm refusing to make any PAC donations in 2016 and whatever I do decide will go directly to the candidate/candidates.
 
For three years (2011 - 14) - I worked in state government here in Michigan as chief of staff for a legislator. I was not surprised that a legislator could be bought - but the surprise came in how cheap they were for sale. $500 bucks gets you a whole lot of cooperation and you move to the front of the line.
 
Hard Truth said:
Unions represent 14.6 working Americans, the Kochs represent two people. Unions are democratic organizations. Any member can attend meetings, run for union offices etc.
Click to expand...

Actually, given their support, they likely represent more people than the total membership in unions you reference.
 
JANFU said:
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.
Click to expand...

So what you are saying is that all people are like Gruber described the liberal base and are easily swayed by advertising? I don't think the Koch Brothers pull the lever for anyone in the voting booth nor do I believe they vote on any legislation on the Congressional floor so let them spend their money. Liberals do it all the time, just ask your union leadership. You could spend billions supporting Obama or Hillary and never get my vote but then again like most Conservatives I am better informed and educated.
 
Unrepresented said:
After searching, it appears to be a summary of his foundation's advertising campaign against minimum wage increases, rather than a direct quote.

Point remains, he's still anti-worker.

Tell me more about how lowering the already poverty level minimum hourly wage will increase workers' pay.
Click to expand...


The Government can raise wages but they have no control over the unintended consequences ( actually I think Obama knows its economically detrimental to raise the minimum wage ) of arbitrary cost increases on Businesses and consumers.

When Businesses react to the arbitrary and forced cost increases by laying off or raising the prices of their Goods snd services the left just ignores it outright, or blames it on someone else.

When huge tax increases drive out wealth and prosperity and jobs and industries they blame it on the " free market " or the evil greedy rich.

Lol...France elected a idiot Socialist who raised taxes on the wealthy to punitive levels. Imagine, in our highly technical world where huge amounts of wealth can be pushed around from account to account at the click of a button, Hollande actually thought these guys were going to sit there and take it.

Whar a moron

Progressives put value on intent, not on results. When results of their foolish initiatives DO show up they ignore the or blame someone else.

And when those unintended consequences show up they usually wind up hurting the people rhe left pretends to represent the mist.
 
tres borrachos said:
The Koch brothers aren't looking to take away any of my rights that I'm aware of. What rights of yours are they looking to take away or even impede?
Click to expand...

They want to take away your right to use local government to enact regulations:

ALEC has long pushed bills like the “Living Wage Preemption Act" to block city, county, or local governments from enacting progressive economic initiatives like a higher minimum wage. - See more at: An Embattled ALEC, Buoyed by Election Results, Lays Blueprint for 2015 | PR Watch

Forbidding local governments from limiting pesticide use. Environment, Energy, and Agriculture - ALEC Exposed

The residents of Denton, Texas, had a remarkable victory over Big Oil in the midterm elections, becoming the first town in Texas to pass a ban on hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking. But now state officials with ties to energy interests and to the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), the pay-to-play corporate bill mill, are threatening to undermine local democracy by refusing to follow the ban. - See more at: ALEC and Big Oil Work to Overturn Denton Fracking Ban | PR Watch
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom