Bernie Sanders blasts the George Clooney Fund Raiser for Hillary
-
Democrat
Colorado Springs, CO
Are you sure you want to delete this post?
On Friday, George Clooney held a fund raiser for Hillary Clinton with "obscene amounts of money" such as $353,400 a couple to be a “co-chair” of the event. Of course, this event was blasted by Sanders and his supporters as another example of big money buying elections. On Meet the Press, Clooney agreed that the sums were indeed obscene, but here's the rest of the story that the media failed to mention. Most all the money being raised for Clinton, according to Clooney, will "actually go to down-ticket Democrats running for Congress. If a Democratic president could get the right justice appointed to the supreme court, he argued, then the US could again begin to separate money from politics." “We need to take the Senate back because we need to confirm a supreme court justice, because that fifth vote on the supreme court can overturn Citizens United and get this obscene, ridiculous amount of money out so I never have to do a fundraiser again.” “I think Citizens United is one of the worst laws passed since I’ve been around.” Clooney also pointed out in the interview, that the Koch brothers have committed to spending hundreds of millions of dollars on Congressional, state and local elections, and that without big fund raisers such as his with Hillary as the guest, then the Koch brothers will have their way largely unopposed. This is another example of what Hillary is doing to help the Democratic Party win back the House and Senate. Bernie and the Bernie supporters call it obscene: "It is obscene that Secretary Clinton keeps going to big money people to fund her campaign," Sanders said to CNN. Okay, Bernie, yes we all agree that the sums of money are obscene. But Hillary is stepping up to the plate to help raise this money for Democrats to retake back Congress. When you are up against the Koch money machine, it's not going to happen at $15 to $ 50 a head that Sanders charges. Sanders should thank Hillary if he wins the nomination and Democrats also retake the Senate because of the Clooney/Hillary fund raising.
-
-
Democrat
Colorado Springs, CO
-
-
-
Democrat
Colorado Springs, CO
-
Are you sure you want to delete this post?
Schmidt Wrote:Dutch -- You need a reality check. The Republicans are playing the big money game. If Democrats do not play that game they lose. Of course, Bernie is the exception, but Bernie is not raising money for other Democrats (except perhaps three that pass his purity test). If Democrats would suddenly say, no more SuperPacs, no more donations from corporations or bankers, no more donations that exceed $100, and blah blah, blah...they would lose big time all over America. Republicans would control everything. Money talks and there are very few candidates that can do what Bernie has done in promising a political revolution. You show me a candidate (other than Bernie) that doesn't solicit money through Pacs and SuperPacs and corporations, and I'll bet that candidate is either sitting in a gerrymandered district with no opposition or is a loser. As much as you hate playing that game, it is the rules of the game now. Play by your own sense of moralistic self righteous rules and you f**kin lose. Get real. Sure Schmidt, you got it right. But that is exactly what is wrong with this country. In other words everything is "bought" here; a never ending corruption is the result. Why can other countries elect people and government with hardly any money involvement. How about elections based on "brains" and "intellect"? That is the reason we "muddle" along; ask Obama who tried, but got few results, who's also fed up with the "system" and its games.
-
Are you sure you want to delete this post?
I couldn't agree with more more, Schmidt. Secretary Clinton understands that the President is not a king and can't just waive a magic wand to get whatever they want. Democrats have to meet fire with fire. There is no way we're going to overturn Citizens United if we don't get a fifth justice on the Supreme Court that will vote to overturn it. We get that justice by electing a Democrat to the Presidency and retake the Senate. Senator Sanders has not explained his down ballot strategy. One Democratic Senator has endorsed him compared to 40 for Secretary Clinton. How would a President Sanders be able to enact his agenda if members of the party he caucuses with aren't on board with his agenda? No Sanders supporter has been able to explain that to me. Bernie Sanders populist message resonates with me, but I also understand how this government operates. If he doesn't have people who are willing to write the bills needed to enact his agenda then how in the world would he ever be able to make good on any of his promises? It's civics 101--the Legislature writes bills; the Executive signs or vetoes them into law; the Courts decide if the laws are Constitutional. No President can get any part of their agenda passed if they don't have a Congress that backs them up.
-
-
-
Democrat
Colorado Springs, CO
-
Are you sure you want to delete this post?
pr Wrote: Give us one reason why Bernie should support any of these down candidates? They all suck! None of them are supporting him they are all Hillary robots and drones. It has nothing to do with who Bernie supports because that's not how this country works. If those robots and drones aren't elected then the Democrats will lose any chance to win the Senate or make inroads in the House. A President Sanders without a super majority of Democrats in the Senate and a majority in the House will be as worthless as a three dollar bill. pr Wrote: The only true Democrat running is Bernie the rest are Republican lite (better than Republicans, true but still terrible candidates).
There's no such thing as a "true" Democrat. We are not a monolith like the Republican Party. A Democrat running in a swing state like Pennsylvania or Ohio has little to zero chance of getting elected if they are running on a socialist platform. That's just a fact. Swing states win national elections; not the deep blue states. If you want to move to a state that has an awesome progressive agenda then move out to the glorious Pacific Northwest, but you're lying to yourself if you think that model could be implemented nationwide. At least not at this point in history. Maybe he will move out to Oregon or Washington if he isn't the nominee this year. Both states would elect him to governor in a heart beat. pr Wrote: Dutch is 100% correct - take your rose colored Hillary glasses off and at face reality. We have all said we will vote for her if she is the candidate, as bad as she is, what more do you expect - shall we prostate ourselves at her feet (as Schmidt has done) and thank the Lord for delivering her to us?
I think Schmidt (and hopefully I) have tried to explain how politics works in this country. As a die hard progressive, I love Senator Sanders positions; as someone who understands the political realities in a country of over 300 million people, I don't see how he would ever be able to make good on any of his promises.
-
-
-
Are you sure you want to delete this post?
You don't really think any of Bernie's supporters expect him to be able to do anymore than Obama was able to do, do you? It's not about what he can or cannot do (other than fill the Supreme Court with good people) it's all about the appearance of change and getting people to expect and demand it. The only thing we will get with Hillary is more of the same old cronyism we've had for decades. Bernie doesn't has a chance in hell of winning the nomination anyhow, it's all rigged for the establishment, we all know that. Bernie can and has played a major roll in exposing Hillary and all the other faux, Neo-Dems for what the really are and really stand for and that alone is well worth supporting him. Without Bernie pushing Hillary to the Left it would be difficult to tell her apart from the Conservatives. Of course, once she is elected, she will all of a sudden go right back to her old ways, people be damned, but at least Bernie has started a spark that, hopefully, will begin a forest fire.
|