Despite their rheoric, Democrats outraised Republicans by nearly 50%

[Anarchist420]

Link: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=38862

 

[theeedude]

Democrats weren't the ones appointing judges who overturned disclosure requirements.

 

[Jhhnn]

That's just official spending, money given directly to parties and candidates. Before it's over, righties will likely exceed spending from Dems by a wide margin, given the influx of outside money made possible by the Citizens United decision-

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/10/campaign-spending-update

They're just getting warmed up...

 

[techs]

Yes, right wing wacko websites are where I always go to get the real information on campaign donations.

I completely ignore respected publications like the NY Times that quote actual figures showing the Republicans far outspending the Democrats this year.

In fact, I am tempted to anoint the thread poster as the perfect example of someone who is really concerned about the truth and useful discussion of the issues.

And I highly respect the thread poster as an unbiased poster and someone who should be taken seriously.

/NOT
/NOT
/NOT
/NOT

 

[Amused]

Yes, right wing wacko websites are where I always go to get the real information on campaign donations.

I completely ignore respected publications like the NY Times that quote actual figures showing the Republicans far outspending the Democrats this year.

In fact, I am tempted to anoint the thread poster as the perfect example of someone who is really concerned about the truth and useful discussion of the issues.

And I highly respect the thread poster as an unbiased poster and someone who should be taken seriously.

/NOT
/NOT
/NOT
/NOT

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2111686

No, you just post leftwing wacko websites to get the "real information on campagin donations."

Fucking hypocritical partisan douche.

 

[cubby1223]

My own anecdotal evidence from the Chicago area where there is the big Gubernatorial race & U.S. Senate race, the attack ads on tv & radio are slanted about 3:1 to the Democrats.

But the real point I have is all the attack ads from all four camps are so insanely stupid, misleading, and pandering to the dumb/ignorant crowd of society... But they are from outside groups buying the ads, so the candidates still get to stand at the podium and say "my campaign is 100% positive, not like my opponent's negative campaign."

I hate politics and I can't wait for this crap to be over with.

 

[ElFenix]

Democrats weren't the ones appointing judges who overturned disclosure requirements.

which case was that?

 

[FerrelGeek]

My own anecdotal evidence from the Chicago area where there is the big Gubernatorial race & U.S. Senate race, the attack ads on tv & radio are slanted about 3:1 to the Democrats.

But the real point I have is all the attack ads from all four camps are so insanely stupid, misleading, and pandering to the dumb/ignorant crowd of society... But they are from outside groups buying the ads, so the candidates still get to stand at the podium and say "my campaign is 100% positive, not like my opponent's negative campaign."

I hate politics and I can't wait for this crap to be over with.

What break??? The 2012 campaign starts 11/3/2010.

 

[Thump553]

Outside of Linda McMahon (who is spending $50,000,000+ of her own money) the vast majority of political ads I see on TV here are from vaguely named third party organizations-like the so-called Campaign For Liberty whose site the OP linked to.

 

[werepossum]

which case was that?

The one in his mind, apparently.

 

[PeshakJang]

Yes, right wing wacko websites are where I always go to get the real information on campaign donations.

I completely ignore respected publications like the NY Times that quote actual figures showing the Republicans far outspending the Democrats this year.

In fact, I am tempted to anoint the thread poster as the perfect example of someone who is really concerned about the truth and useful discussion of the issues.

And I highly respect the thread poster as an unbiased poster and someone who should be taken seriously.

/NOT
/NOT
/NOT
/NOT

Don't worry... nobody expects you to put forth any effort to think for yourself. We've actually come to expect quite the opposite.

-Of top 20 PAC contributions to candidates, all but 3 have given significantly more to Democrats for 2009-2010

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/toppacs.php

-Of the top 20 PACs raising the most money, all but 4 donate almost exclusively to Democrats.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/toppacs.php?Type=R&cycle=2010&filter=P

-Of the top 20 PACs spending the most money, all but the bottom 3 give almost exclusively to Democrats, with a ratio of about 25:1 in dollar terms.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/toppacs.php?cycle=2010&Type=E&filter=P

-Of the over $12 million coming from foreign-connected PACs, more than half went to Democrats.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/foreign.php

-Of the 568 registered 527 organizations in 2010, receipts as well as expenditures have favored Democrats. Going back to 2004 and the years since, it has sometimes been 2:1 in favor of Democrats in both categories.

http://www.opensecrets.org/527s/index.php

Look at almost any other number of statistics, and you will see that across the board, the largest donors are labor unions, giving almost exclusively to Democrats.

So what were you saying Techs? You don't like thinking for yourself? Don't worry, somebody already did the work for you.

 

[Anarchist420]

I think the Democrats are more corporatist than the Republicans. neither party iis good, but I think the Republicans care more about the poor than the Democrats. Case in point, Obama's advisors are all ivy League-educated, and they're advising him to take from the tax-payer, when his advisors, who have more than enough resources to do help the poor are not doing so at all.

The same point can be made when you look at who donates more to charities. the Democrats may pay more in taxes, but the Republicans actually do more good for the poor.

 

[PeshakJang]

I think the Democrats are more corporatist than the Republicans. neither party iis good, but I think the Republicans care more about the poor than the Democrats. Case in point, Obama's advisors are all ivy League-educated, and they're advising him to take from the tax-payer, when his advisors, who have more than enough resources to do help the poor are not doing so at all.

The same point can be made when you look at who donates more to charities. the Democrats may pay more in taxes, but the Republicans actually do more good for the poor.

Hey... that's not what John Stewart's writers tell him to say every night, so it must be a lie.