More money from Goldman Sachs because the annual $600,000 she collected in speaking fees from them wasn't enough.
More money from Goldman Sachs because the annual $600,000 she collected in speaking fees from them wasn't enough.What will Hillary actually fight for?
More money from Goldman Sachs because the annual $600,000 she collected in speaking fees from them wasn't enough.
More money from Goldman Sachs because the annual $600,000 she collected in speaking fees from them wasn't enough.
A Republican SCOTUS already said that unlimited political contributions don't give rise to corruption or appearance thereof.
totally legal now, bro. And we should all be happy that corporations are allowed to buy our elected leaders.
So speaketh SCOTUS
Because Freedom.
Yup, that's the hilarious truth. Democrats voting for someone chosen for them by rich Republicans. Really only Bernie is exempt from this type of corruption because he can prove he isn't taking money from wall street. Hillary will further WS's interests by leaps and bounds if she wins.LOL, leave it to Democrats to let Republicans choose their party's candidate. What a bunch of losers.
Well she certainly must not have any policies otherwise we'd have the repubs and any anti Hillary posters talking about them, now wouldn't we.
/s
We could post a top ten of hillarys policies and you idiots still wouldn't bother discussing them.
LOL, leave it to Democrats to let Republicans choose their party's candidate. What a bunch of losers.
Republican donors are supporting Sanders.
No, they're not, they're supporting Hillary.
https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cid=N00000019&cycle=Career
LOL, Democrats.
Do you believe you are actually helping your preferred candidate by trolling political forums?
Somehow I don't think that someone reading this forum is going to be less likely to vote for Bernie Sanders because of this guy's posts. How would you see that working?
Didn't know you were a closet feminist as linking to that suggests. I stopped reading when they used the term "mansplaining". Only hardcore fem's talk in that code to try and make fun of men because they're insecure about themselves.Actually Sanders's campaign has asked his supporters to stop doing basically exactly what this guy is doing. They say it is damaging their messaging capability.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/the-bernie-bros#.vjz5PV1MK
Actually Sanders's campaign has asked his supporters to stop doing basically exactly what this guy is doing. They say it is damaging their messaging capability.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/the-bernie-bros#.vjz5PV1MK
Contributions over the course of a career are a far better indicator of allegiance than the past 6 months. She's taken $5.5 million in her career from Securities/Investment firms for 4th most by industry followed by Hollywood (wealthy elite), Law Firms (also tied to wealthy elite), and Retired (whatever that means). It's not a secret who she will pay back if elected - the wealthy elite.1. Partisan affiliations not listed.
2. You listed career contributions instead of this cycle.
3. The contribution page you linked to was for senate elections, not the presidential one.
You failed in basically every way it is possible to fail when you tried to link this information and then tried to laugh at other people about it. As usual, another LOL Boberfett has occurred.
No, they're not, they're supporting Hillary.
https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cid=N00000019&cycle=Career
LOL, Democrats.
Contributions over the course of a career are a far better indicator of allegiance than the past 6 months. She's taken $5.5 million in her career from Securities/Investment firms for 4th most by industry followed by Hollywood (wealthy elite), Law Firms (also tied to wealthy elite), and Retired (whatever that means). It's not a secret who she will pay back if elected - the wealthy elite.
https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/indus.php?cycle=2016&id=N00000019&type=f
You are living in a dreamland my friend, Hillary's ties to the financial sector run deep and to discount the past 6 months after 20 years of milking it = mental midgetry at its finest.That's a ridiculous idea. She was a senator in New York, of course you're going to get a lot of law and finance.
All that aside, in this case it is 100% obvious that career contributions should not be used as we are trying to compare who those groups are supporting TODAY.
Emails reveal that Chelsea Clinton’s husband, a private equity expert named Marc Mezvinsky, scored his buddy at Goldman Sachs a meeting with then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Harry Siklas had a client called Neptune Minerals, which is a deep sea mining firm, and Hillary Clinton happened to be in the middle of an attempt to pass the Law of the Sea Treaty to govern deep sea mining.
“I introduced them to GS and the bankers took them on as a client,” Siklas said in an email to Mezvinsky.
Mezvinsky sent the request to Clinton, who told an aide, “Could you have someone follow up on this request, which was forwarded to me?”
“I’ll get on it” said her subordinate Thomas Nides.
I find it interesting and telling that you are calling me an idiot for asking a simple question. I am asking what her stated policies are, I am asking what what will she actually fight for. I see there being huge resistance to most of the things she states she wants to do similar to what we are seeing now.
So what will she spend her time really fighting for?
I also don't like to see her starting at a position that is already compromised from what is really wanted. You don't start talks with what you think is reasonable to the other side when you know they will fight you no matter what. You start with more than you want and a LOT more than you will actually get. This gives room for negotiation, rather than just hope they take the first idea and not have to give anything or make changes.
You are living in a dreamland my friend, Hillary's ties to the financial sector run deep and to discount the past 6 months after 20 years of milking it = mental midgetry at its finest.
You are stupidly naive and ignorant to think that Clinton still doesn't have ties to her buddies at GS and other banks, especially when her daughter and husband are entrenched in that sector. That was just one example of a favor that got called in from GS that Hillary obliged and the public found out about.
You're asking people to predict the future. What has she fought for in the past?
http://www.ontheissues.org/Hillary_Clinton.htm
I don't see her straying far from that.
It's just as important to pick one's battles & to define them to your own advantage, otherwise you're chasing the end of the rainbow & getting nothing done. Progress can only be built on current reality meaning you might want to consider Congress. Bernie's tax plan & UH plan are DOA- I mean not a fucking prayer, amigo. Unobtainium. Dead man walking.
Hillary going on about guns is similar.
Better to put the effort into working whatever winners you can get.
You don't START with only what you think you can get when dealing with a group that is working it's best to get EVERYTHING they want even if they know they can't. You start with everything you want and more, that way when you start to give things up and make changes you don't give everything you want away.
1. Partisan affiliations not listed.
2. You listed career contributions instead of this cycle.
3. The contribution page you linked to was for senate elections, not the presidential one.
You failed in basically every way it is possible to fail when you tried to link this information and then tried to laugh at other people about it. As usual, another LOL Boberfett has occurred.