Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama, the Hedge Funder's Candidate

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 10:57 AM
Original message
Obama, the Hedge Funder's Candidate
From the February 4, 2008 edition
of Fortune Magazine
(not on the web yet - just got the
mag yesterday in the mail)

Barack's Money Attack

Hedge Funds back Obama

Orin Kramer - Boston Provident
Paul Tudor Jones - Tudor Investments
Ken Griffin - Citadel Investment Group
George Soros - Soros Fund Management

This according to Dan Loeb, the general
partner of Third Point LLC and Obama
fundraiser.

------------------------------

Wall Street Money = Corporate Candidate
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 10:58 AM
Response to Original message
1. Getting a little desperate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Its called Panic
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. Hedge Fund in the same sentence
with Edwards sent every Obama
and Clinton supporter into a
tizzy on this board.
Nothing is wrong with Obama being
associated with Hedge Funds. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
2. What's this all about?
But, but, Obama is supposed to be the pure candidate. The "change" candidate, the candiate that does not take money from "special interest" groups. :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. Thank you.
You see the hypocrisy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UALRBSofL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #6
16. Yes I see the hypocrisy
The tragedy is with this kind of thinking people and the MSM don't give the candidates an equal shake and that is why Hillary is going to lose. Seems someone got to the MSM and that is why we never see anything positive about Hillary even though she has done a lot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #16
29. Thank you.
Hillary has a list of
accomplishments that shine.
Sad that this is overlooked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ugdude Donating Member (171 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
4. Obama doesnt take PAC or federal lobbyist money
Hillary is rolling in with the pigs such as insurance companies who fund her.

All of her money comes from PAC and federal lobbyists. Its so sad she has basically no small donors. Obama's money comes from 90% small donation.

I will pay you $1000 if you can show me where Obama gets PAC or fed lobbyist money. $1000. I, unlike your post, am not disingenuous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. LOL
Look at what the OP is about. Wall Street
money backing Obama. You must not be so naive
that you would think that all that financial support
does not expect something in return, not necessarily
money but something. Look at the results of Bush
'paying back favors' to the Big Oil Companies.

I am not disingenuous, I merely quoted a magazine. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ugdude Donating Member (171 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #10
13. You dont want $1000? We all know PAC and fed lobbyists control the government
Obama is going to end that. Hillary is disliked by a lot of people, so no wonder she has to turn to companies to fund her campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #13
21. Yeah right.
Some anonymous keyboard campaigner
is going to actually make good on
some inane bet on an internet discussion
forum.

I was born at night, but not last night. :rofl:

I hardly think Obama will stop the lobbyists if he
will be beholding to his donors like you think Hillary
will have to be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #4
28. How would you like to pay?
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp?Ind=K02

Barack Obama (D)
$76,859


People can do a heck of a lot less damage to their candidates by not using ABSOLUTE words like Obama doesn't take lobbyist money. Yes he does... just to a much lesser extent than Clinton.

Hillary Clinton (D)
$567,950


Now, here is some more light of reality. Clinton doesn't get ALL her money from Lobbyists and PAC's...

90% of CLinton's money is from individual contributions. (http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?id=N00000019&cycle=2008)


99% of Obama's money is from individual contributions. (http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?id=N00009638&cycle=2008)



There is no doubt as to who the cleaner candidate is, but when you make absolute claims, you make you and your candidate look foolish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #28
31. A swing and a miss.
It is about the hypocrisy of
the absolutes being thrown by
both camps.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #31
36. Pass the toad please.
I could really use a lick, because it must be powerful stuff.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lisainmilo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #4
32. tried and NOT true!
Watch Dog Blog: http://citizen.typepad.com/watchdog_blog/bundling/index.html

Candidates still not disclosing: Public Citizens Demands More On Bundlers

Public Citizen today sent letters to the seven major presidential candidates who have yet to provide any insight into how much their top fundraisers have raised. The letters asked the candidates to promptly disclose the names of bundlers who have brought in at least $100,000. The letters note that this minimal standard for disclosure was set by then-Gov. George W. Bush in his 2000 presidential campaign.

All of the candidates who have a realistic chance of capturing their party’s nomination are using bundlers, but only Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have provided any insight into how much their bundlers have raised. Obama names bundlers who have raised at least $50,000, $100,000 and $200,000; Clinton discloses bundlers who have raised at least $100,000.

The eventual winner of this presidential election will almost certainly feel a debt of gratitude to his or her bundlers. Voters have a right to know who these superfundraisers are before they choose which candidate to send to the Oval Office.



Chicago Tribune:http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-070725obama,1,5894874.story?coll=chi_tab01_layout

<snip>

But the Obama fundraising operation provides a contrast to an image that the campaign has ceaselessly cultivated as a movement powered by everyday Americans.

Among the high-level fundraisers on a list that the Obama campaign posted on its Web site late Tuesday is Kenneth Griffin, head of the Chicago-based hedge fund Citadel Investment Group LLC and among Mayor Richard Daley's top financial patrons. Griffin's $1.4 billion pay in 2006 made him the second highest-paid hedge fund manager in the country, according to Institutional Investor's Alpha Magazine.

Though it is unclear how much Griffin has raised for Obama, employees of his firm have donated at least $169,000, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan watchdog group.

The Obama campaign disclosed the names of 120 major fundraisers who had attracted at least $50,000 in contributions to Obama by June 30 through their appeals to friends, family and business associates. Together with a list released at the end of the first quarter, the campaign has identified 260 people who have raised that amount or more.

Half the fundraisers live in just three metropolitan regions that are seats of financial or political power: Washington, New York and Chicago. Obama's home base of Chicago accounts for the largest proportion of the large fundraisers, about a fifth, according to a Tribune analysis.

Along with many corporate executives, the newly disclosed Obama fundraisers include a smattering of entertainment industry figures. Lawrence Bender, co-producer of Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" and most of Quentin Tarantino's movies, is on the list. So is Hollywood agent Ari Emanuel, brother of Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) and the model for the Ari Gold character on HBO's "Entourage." Fox Filmed Entertainment Chairman Thomas Rothman and BET President and CEO Debra Lee also are among them.

Those major fundraisers, sometimes called bundlers, have an outsized importance in financing the campaign.

Though it is impossible to know exactly how much of the $58 million Obama raised during the first half of the year came by way of bundlers, those on the list would not be there if they had not raised at least $50,000. That means at least $13 million of his year-to-date total came through bundlers, and the total is probably much higher.

Despite the media attention the campaign has grabbed by attracting 258,000 donors—in many cases people of modest means who have given over the Internet—a much smaller group of large donors provides most of the funds for the campaign. And those large donors are best tapped through fundraisers who can call on networks of acquaintances and business associates who can easily write big checks.

The bundlers are crucial to raising money for a presidential primary campaign because federal law limits individuals to contributions of no more than $2,300 per candidate.

Sixty percent of the Obama campaign's funds come from people who have given at least $1,000, the kind of donors who are most often recruited by bundlers. Less than 30 percent of his contributions came from people who gave less than $200.(emphasized)


<snip>


Executive Intelligence Review: http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2007/3418bids_dem_candidate.html

Bidding War for the 2008 Dem Candidate

by Anita Gallagher

The financial industry, dominated by the "financial locust" hedge funds, has launched an unprecedented "acquisition drive" to buy up the field of 2008 Democratic candidates for President.

Democratic Presidential front-runners Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama have raised $26 million and $25 million, respectively, for first quarter 2007, a full year ahead of the first primaries. In the first quarter of April 2003, the then-Democratic front-runners John Kerry raised $7 million, and Howard Dean, $2.6 million—less than 20% of the money of the current two leaders.

The financial sector is the biggest contributor to both, except for the intertwined legal industry, contributing $1.2 million to Clinton, and $1.12 to Obama, by conservative estimate. These take the form of "bundled" contributions from individual employees in 140-150 financial firms, who are organized by the firms' leadership to contribute to selected candidates. These figures do not capture the substantial fundraising carried out by these big-buck powerhouses outside their firms, in social networks, or by family members.

Lyndon LaRouche has raised the question, "Who owns the candidate to be chosen?" in his paper "`Ask the Man Who Owns One.'" A case in point is LaRouche's Spring 2005 warning that the American auto industry was going under, and his proposed "Emergency Recovery Act of 2006" for Federal credit to retool, and save, the industry's unused capacity to produce infrastructure. Democratic Party leaders—including Senators Clinton, head of the Senate Caucus on Industry, and Obama—did absolutely nothing to stop the hedge-fund takeover of auto, listening instead to takeover specialist Felix Rohatyn, whose pedigree goes back to fascist financiers in World War II. Scores of auto plants closed, and 140,000 auto workers lost their jobs as a result. So, who is buying up the Democratic Party?


<snip>

How Independent Is Barack Obama?
The following hedge funds contributed to Obama's $25 million: The Blackstone Group, $42,000 (see Peter Cooper apartments note, above); Bain Capital, $6,900; Centerbridge Partners, which was formed by ex-Blackstone employees, $7,100; Fortress Investment Group, $6,900; Grosvenor Capital Management, $9,200; Soros Fund Management, $6,200; Tiger Management, $9,200; The Carlyle Group, which manages $56 billion, and will launch its own hedge fund in May; and New York Capital Management, $18,400; Ariel, $47,000.

Investment firms and buy-out specialists also contributed to Obama: Goldman Sachs, $120,000; Credit Suisse, $44,200; Lazard (managed by auto bankruptcy fixer Felix Rohatyn for decades), $12,700; UBS, the Zurich-based bank, $141,000; Lehman Brothers, $33,800; Merrill Lynch, $30,000; Morgan Stanley, $30,600; Chicago-based investment firm Henry Crown & Co., $24,600, and many others.










:think: :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluerthanblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
7. what does Chelsea do for a living?
No candidate is untouched by the outside interests.

peace~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. Wow!
I did not realize Chelsea was
running for President?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. SHe works for a company who has been a big donor to Hillary
for the Senate and Presidential race. But don't let the facts get in the way
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #12
17. Chelsea is not running.
Both Clinton and Obama get money
from Hedge Funds. So many here call
Hillary the corporate candidate. That
is a tad hypocritical when Wall Street
money is backing someone whose camp claims
Hillary is the corporate candidate.
Obama should either be referred to
as a corporate candidate or, Hillary should
no longer be referred to that way.

It amazes me, I have not chosen a candidate
and anything I post gets most negativity from
the Obama camp unless it completely is in tune
with their mantra. Yes We Can - drown you out,
slur you, piss you off, ignore you, call you stupid,
call you a liar, etc etc.

Boiled down to the bones, neither is very different.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. But the Hedge Fund Company Contributes to Hillary
Are you going to ignore that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #19
40. Not ignoring that fact.
Just see it wrong that
it is OK to refer to her
that way and it is not Ok
to refer to Obama that way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluerthanblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #17
26. boiled down to the bones- are your standards equal?
Are you looking at them both equally?

Does what either candidates 'supporters' do, really give you any true insight into the candidate themself? Are they really only the voices of anonymous posters on some internet community- where people often act out?

peace~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #26
42. When it comes to most
issues, it is simply nuances
and minor things that make the
difference.
I honestly think Hillary has more
experience and is better prepared
to face the Repuke attacks.
No, the actions of the supporters
do not make my decision for me,
especially on an internet forum.
Now, if I see the same kind of actions
in public and in face to face discussions,
I may be effected by a candidates supporters'
actions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:07 AM
Response to Original message
8. Doesn't Chelsea work for a Hedge Fund Company?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ugdude Donating Member (171 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Hahaha. Shut down
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #9
14. Not.
Chelsea is not running.

Hahaha. Shut up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluerthanblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #14
22. No CitizenJane she isn't- but you cannot deny
that her career, and her future are not important to Hillary. I'd think far less of Hillary if they weren't. Neither can you deny that Chelsea (who I admire and like A LOT) is not very involved in her mom's campaign - MUCH to the benefit of Hillary- and rightly so.

You say that when you post stuff about the candidates that "Obama supporters" come out swinging- If this is swinging- what is it that you would want to hear? How do "Hillary supporters" respond to articles that you post which questionably cast her in a bad light? You may say you are neutral, you may even think you are, but very few people who claim neutrality truly are.

Think about that ok?

peace~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sniffa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #22
30. And is Chelsea even qualified for that job?
What was her major again?

Hey, could you scratch my back?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #30
34. I dunno.
I didn't interview her.

If you want me to scratch
your back, you gotta come
over here and take your shirt
off. I have nice long nails.

:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluerthanblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #30
35. I have no doubt that she is- and I think she's a very
smart, resilient, poised, and beautiful young woman. I have no problem with Chelsea, or her positive effect on her Mom's campaign. As someone who has a good job working for a Hedge-Fund Company, her career is something that connects Hillary in a personal way, to the "Hedge Fund" industry. That in and of itself doesn't really mean anything- but the OP's sole purpose is to cast suspicion on Obama- which is often what people do, when they are trying to deflect attention away from them self. IMO


peace~

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #35
41. How can I cast suspicion posting
facts provided by an Obama fundraiser?
If it is wrong, it came from an Obama
supporter to start with. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #22
38. As a mother,
Chelsea's future and career are important
to Hillary. I, as a mother, feel the same
way about my son and daughter. I give them advice
and direction, I give them moral support, and I
want the best for them in their career.
The info above came directly from an Obama fundraiser.
I would think the Obama supporters would have been
more aware of it and not taken such offense at having
it pointed out. It is not a lie, it is not a point of
view, it is a fact - Hedge funder's are backing Obama.
If anything, I would have guessed the Obama supporters
would have suggested that perhaps Wall Street is ready
for a change but, I was wrong. Most cannot see past the
fact to look at the nuances of the issue. Hope and change
are nice but....talk is cheap, it takes action to make change.

As far as my neutrality, it is neutral dislike for what is
left in the race. My list went from Al Gore to Biden to leaning
towards Edwards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluerthanblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #38
44. sorry- skip the post below- I guess
I'm impatient this morning.

Thank you for your response- I'm a Mom too- and I agree with what you say. As for the article, I really don't know what the "right reaction" to it would be- Obama has received contributions from people who work for hedge funds- If what you are looking for in terms of "change" is someone whose supporters have no personal baggage at all, I think you'll go to your grave wanting, to be honest.

The candidates really can't control who comes out to support them. I've met some Obama, and Hillary supporters who seem to help their opposition more- :shrug: but hey- it's America.

I don't like the personal attacks that are happening. I try not to contribute to them. But I'm sure that sometimes I do. We need to try and remember that we all have to come together and move forward somehow this fall.

Thanks for replying.

I hope you find some answers.
:hi:
peace~

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluerthanblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #22
39. hello??
Any response CJ?-

I'm interested in having a discussion, not throwing out 'sound bites'-

peace~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #39
43. It is right above your post.
Sorry I am slow. I only
have a dial-up connection
on a hard-wired rotary line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluerthanblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. sorry- I'm impatient- :) eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #45
46. Not a problem.
:hi:

And thanks for reasonable
discussion. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:13 AM
Response to Original message
15. John Edwards worked for a hedge fund. Was he Mr. Corporatist?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #15
18. On DU he was, by
many Obama supporters and
by many Clinton supporters.
The point I am trying to make
is - the hypocrisy in
saying it is a bad thing for other
candidates but is OK if it is your
candidate of choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. Was that a fair attack on John Edwards? I'm only asking what you believe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #20
24. It is fair to attack any candidate with a valid point.
So yes. I still state that my intent is
to point out the hypocrisy.

I am still undecided. I was an Al Gore
holdout to the bitter end. I then chose
Biden due to his foreigh relations expertise
and I think we need some of that in the White
House. I was leaning towards Edwards after that
and will probably vote for him in the primaries.
After that - my vote is up for grabs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. That's a tautology. Of course valid things are fair.
Generally, when someone is pointing out hypocrisy, they say they're pointing out hypocrisy in the OP. As it stands, it just looks hypocritical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #25
33. It seemed to me
that it proved the point, in
a manner of speaking. The
condescending snarky responses
by many instead of actually debate.
I thank you for intellectual discourse
on a board that is sorely lacking it
these days. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
23. Isn't that where Princess Chelsea snags her SIX figure salary?
Edited on Sun Feb-03-08 11:30 AM by ShortnFiery
HEDGE FUNDS!!! :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #23
27. Chelsea is not running.
If you had read the whole
thread you would have seen
this point has been made,
instead of, 'ah ha! reply,
type furiously, add smiley,
hit enter, sit back and chuckle
at my attempted pwnage'.

Geez, it is impossible to reasonably
debate any issue with some people. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bread_and_roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 11:52 AM
Response to Original message
37. If either one were serious about clean elections
they would have run on public funding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Triana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #37
47. BINGO!
Give this poster an Oscar 'cause that is the answer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. Yes!
I have to wonder if the
funding is why Edwards
suspended his campaign
instead of dropping out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 09:01 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC