2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumGeorge Clooney: The Clinton campaign has not been very good at explaining, and this is the truth
Sanders, who wants to reform the campaign finance system, has criticized Clinton for holding pricey fundraisers hosted by the Clooneys in both San Francisco and Los Angeles. Tickets for the Los Angeles event, which was co-hosted by Jeffrey and Marilyn Katzenberg, Steven Spielberg and Kate Capshaw and Haim and Cheryl Saban, were priced at $33,400 per person. A couple wishing to co-chair the event in San Francisco had to pony up $353,000.
Asked whether he thought the pricing was appropriate in an interview on Meet the Press, Clooney gave a convoluted explanation.
Yes. I think its an obscene amount of money. I think that, you know, we had some protesters last night when we pulled up in San Francisco and theyre right to protest. Theyre absolutely right. It is an obscene amount of money. The Sanders campaign when they talk about it is absolutely right. Its ridiculous that we should have this kind of money in politics. I agree completely.
But, he added, the money raised was going to help other Democrats. (What the]) Clinton campaign has not been very good at explaining is this and this is the truth, he said: the overwhelming amount of money that were raising, and it is a lot, but the overwhelming amount of the money that were raising is not going to Hillary to run for president; its going to the Democratic ticket.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)Thanks for highlighting the key words.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Does DWS get to pick and choose who gets the money down-ticket? Maybe those loyal Super-Duper Delegates will get more. Clinton represents the culture of corruption we need to get out of our government.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)from the "corrupt" DNC.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)"Collusion between the Clinton campaign and the DNC allowed Hillary Clinton to buy the loyalty of 33 state Democratic parties last summer. Montana was one of those states. It sold itself for $64,100."
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/04/01/how-hillary-clinton-bought-the-loyalty-of-33-state-democratic-parties/
The corrupt culture is supported by Clinton and supporters while the progressive wing of our party are fighting to get Big Fat Cat Money out of our government.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)to get support for Clinton. Sanders didn't get any corrupt money. The DNC bought Super-Delegate votes. Corruption that you seem to rationalize as ok because it suits you.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts)that's what Jeff Weaver said on MSNBC. Link to April 2 article with detail of how it works.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/04/01/how-hillary-clinton-bought-the-loyalty-of-33-state-democratic-parties/
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)running against 2 openly gay candidates. There was a third, for full disclosure.
And all he did is make is possible to check a box to donate a small amount to those candidates.
Who chose them?
Why?
Simply because they supported Sanders and not because of their policy positions or bios?
Because they were running against gay candidates?
You asked a great question and it can be turned against Sanders quite easily.
Why hasn't Sanders done any of the actual fundraising HE AGREED to do?
BTW, Sanders received money raised by Clinton and didn't turn it down.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)This is corruption at it's worst. We need to get the cheaters and liars out. Get the Big Fat Cat Money out of our government.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)That is, the money that doesn't go to Hillary, and apparently some of it going to Hillary shouldn't be.
But...the DNC is neoliberal establishment, so the money they get to invest in the party is still going to be used on corporate dems first. That's what we need. A stronger establishment.
If that money were being equally distributed to all dems running, it would be nice, but it still doesn't change the narrative.
We need to change this politics for money game. Every year it is getting excessively worse. We are wasting soooo much on campaigns when we have so many other more urgent needs for that kind of money. We need to go back to public financing of candidates and kill Citizens United, and Hillary is not going to even try. She is so good at the money game, and it has helped her so much, she is never going to give it up (that sounds like a rick astley song...someone should use that for a meme).
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)money from the "establishment," too.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2580925
WASHINGTON (AP) New York Sen. Hillary Clinton shared her wealth in March, doling out $190,000 in contributions to Democrats in Iowa, New Hampshire and elsewhere, according to a campaign report filed late Thursday.
Clinton's political action committee, HILLPAC, raised $272,477 and spent $327,484 in March, according to the group's filing to the Federal Election Commission.
SNIP
Clinton spokeswoman Ann Lewis said the donations were aimed at strong candidates in key election battles around the country. She said the Iowa and New Hampshire donations were part of a larger effort to help Democratic candidates for governor in 2006.
The Senate Democrats' campaign committee, the House Democrats' campaign committee and the national committee each received $15,000.
Two congressmen trying to make it to the Senate also got boosts from Clinton. Rep. Bernie Sanders, who is running for the seat held by retiring Vermont lawmaker Jim Jeffords, received $10,000, as did Harold Ford Jr., of Tennessee, who is campaigning for the seat being vacated by Majority Leader Bill Frist.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)At that time he was not running on a revolution. He was still using the same system everyone else was. There is no way to win against the system without a revolution. That's why this revolution is so big. No one had tried to fight the system before. Nobody had the balls to stand up to it.
Bernie's got balls.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)Here is a book that was published about him in 1989.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Peoples-Republic-Vermont-Revolution/dp/093305078X
The People's Republic: Vermont and the Sanders Revolution
Greg Guma's exploration of the "revolution" goes far beyond Sanders and his impact on Burlington. The factors behind the initial surprise victory, the tension between leftist ideals and pragmatic politics, the evolution of an effective political coaliton outside the two-party system -- all these topics and more Guma investigates, with an eye on global political implications as well as the immediate local impact. The People's Republic is for all those interested in progressive politics and political history, not to mention those in places where a similar "revolution" is possible.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)Which is what it will take to make any changes to the national system.
pnwmom
(108,990 posts)He was refusing to be part of the "establishment."
And yet he was happy to take money from Hillary.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)But then you know that, and this is one of the silliest games I've seen played here yet.
You are all wasting my time and I'm done with your stupid crap.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)That's definitely false.
djean111
(14,255 posts)I do not believe that.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)he wants it both ways. He wants to be a lib and he wants to support corruption.
panader0
(25,816 posts)BreakfastClub
(765 posts)they hated us for our freedom? Give me a break.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)support the status quo." Which of course we all know means "corruption".
This primary has two sides. Those that want to end the culture of corruption and the Clinton side.
CentralCoaster
(1,163 posts)I'm going to just put a check in the box:
√ Hillary- disqualified, poor judgment.
ismnotwasm
(41,998 posts)It's very easy to under-estimate the conspiracy theory woo woo crap that proliferates all over the Internet, not to mention politics as seen in memes. I do get why Hillary doesn't over-explain-- she can't explain enough for her detractors. This however, is something that could have used a few words. I can't believe Clooney got protested for a Denocratic fundraiser, but I adore his response.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)in government. Even Clooney recognizes it. The Clinton side embraces it. "The ends justify the means."
ismnotwasm
(41,998 posts)ThePhilosopher04
(1,732 posts)I see a distinction with no difference. That's why Bernie is right to control who he chooses to raise money for instead of a blank check to the DNC. All he has to do is tweet to his followers that a certain candidate needs help and Bernie Nation will spring into action for that candidate. We're already seeing it with Tim Canova vs DWS. He can also target other establishment Dems who need to be primaried.
ismnotwasm
(41,998 posts)I don't think so.
ThePhilosopher04
(1,732 posts)Now we have an organized movement and vehicle to fight it. Ain't America great!
ismnotwasm
(41,998 posts)djean111
(14,255 posts)openly supports her GOP cronies against other Democrats. Sorry, but no more money from me to the DNC. Not that it was ever very much. That new Democrat Coalition is advised by the Third Way, and getting bigger. I will absolutely not enable that.
ismnotwasm
(41,998 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)Party deals it tells us that the states collect the money from rich donors and forward it to the DNC who sends most of it to Hillary's Victory Fund. Only a small portion of the collected money goes back to the states who can give it to local candidates.
This is a way to launder the money that was once banned by President Obama.
This is a sick joke on the people of the US and maybe even of people like Clooney.
Not to mention that in that deal the states pledge their Super-Delegates to Hillary.
I do not ever remember this being done where the State Parties preempt their voters by sending huge amounts of money to one candidate and freeze the decisions of the Super-Delegates. This is totally shameful.
vintx
(1,748 posts)She's lucky there are so many gullible people. Especially so many rich ones.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)Democratic Parties. It is on this site.
Uncle Joe
(58,389 posts)ismnotwasm
(41,998 posts)Beneficiaries
Recipient Party Type** Office Sought Total
Clinton, Hillary D C Pres $4,440,000
DNC Services Corp D P $2,263,436
Democratic Party of Wisconsin D P $207,278
Democratic Party of Oklahoma D P $140,000
Democratic Party of New Hampshire D P $74,700
Democratic Party of Pennsylvania D P $70,500
Democratic Party of Texas D P $69,100
Democratic Executive Cmte of Florida D P $66,200
Democratic Party of Nevada D P $66,200
Democratic Party of Colorado D P $66,000
Democratic Party of Ohio D P $66,000
Democratic Cmte of Utah D P $64,100
Democratic Party of Alaska D P $64,100
Democratic Party of Mississippi D P $64,100
Democratic Party of Montana D P $64,100
Democratic Party of Oregon D P $64,100
Democratic Party of South Carolina D P $64,100
Democratic Party of Tennessee D P $64,100
Democratic State Cmte of Massachusetts D P $64,100
Georgia Federal Elections Cmte D P $64,100
Idaho State Democratic Party D P $64,100
Michigan Democratic State Central Cmte D P $64,100
Minnesota Democratic Farmer Labor Party D P $64,100
Missouri Democratic State Cmte D P $64,100
Rhode Island Democratic State Cmte D P $64,100
West Virginia State Democratic Exec Cmte D P $64,100
Wyoming State Democratic Central Cmte D P $64,100
Democratic Party of North Carolina D P $64,000
Democratic State Central Cmte/Louisiana D P $64,000
Indiana Democratic Congressional Victory Cmte D P $64,000
Democratic Party of Arkansas D P $63,000
Maine Democratic State Cmte D P $59,800
Democratic Party of Virginia D P $43,500
* denotes an incumbent
jwirr
(39,215 posts)dinkytron
(568 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)Yurovsky
(2,064 posts)😡
grasswire
(50,130 posts)...must be immediately returned to the DNC and that largely goes to support Clinton's campaign.
DNC changed the rules this year. First time it is done this way. Now the state campaign must RETURN most of the money to DNC to support Clinton.
Laundering, of a sort.
Under handed.
MSNBC today wonders if Clooney didn't know that fact.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts)Pointing out that Clooney forgot to say, or doesn't know, that the money goes to the DNC ultimately.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)Response to Miles Archer (Original post)
felix_numinous This message was self-deleted by its author.
salinsky
(1,065 posts)... I'd rather party with Clooney than get a handshake from the Pope, any day of the week.
DebbieCDC
(2,543 posts)Lucinda
(31,170 posts)mhatrw
(10,786 posts)It is a nothing but shell corporate to allow Hillary Clinton to get around the personal contribution limits on all of her top 1% supporters.
Zira
(1,054 posts)Didn't anyone ever teach you that if you stand next to Kissinger and support him, you look bad?
I'm guessing a whole lot of Hollywood just isn't all that into you anymore or you wouldn't be trying to disassociate with Hillary and her 1% campaign financing. Too late. Deal with the fallout.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)The public doesn't need to know what she plans to do. You have to be on her side of the noise machine to learn that.
JustABozoOnThisBus
(23,362 posts)She should merely be carried to her coronation, roses (or dollar bills) strewn in her path.
ridgenvalley
(58 posts)he chooses. Is that so wrong? I give plenty to Dem candidates, but I don't need DWS doling it out for me.
Methinks Georgy Porgy is feeling a bit contrite.
Zen Democrat
(5,901 posts)Maybe she told George something different.