Page 3 of 46 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
13
... LastLast
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    We won because he had 30 billion in anonymous of state corporate donations. So yeah, not good for democracy.

    Wait a minute. A liberal is complaining about campaign money when Obama has received more money than any president in history?

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by TofuBeast View Post
    Walker outspent Barett 7-1.


    The majority probably got what they wanted. But Walker definitely had the money on his side. He has a few out of state billionaire business tycoons supporting him.
    What was the amount of spending for all democratic candidates vs Walker?

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Vutar View Post
    Wait a minute. A liberal is complaining about campaign money when Obama has received more money than any president in history?
    Obama didn't outspend McCain 7 to 1 with foreign money either.

  4. #44
    Old God conscript's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Jonesville, Michigan
    Posts
    10,403
    Quote Originally Posted by ptwonline View Post
    Actually, CNN seems to be only superficially like Fox. You see, CNN pretends to be neutral by presenting both sides, even though they're just being propoganda stooges for both sides. Fox barely even tries to pretend about their hyper partisanship, and tell their viewers exactly what they want to hear regardless of fact.
    Like Fox News giving Romney several hundred thousand dollars in free advertising last week by running that 4 minute anti-Obama film about change over the last four year. Fair and balanced. lol Everyone realizes CNN is a joke, just look at their major coverage of the Queen's ceremony the other day, but people actually take Fox seriously as a news organization.

    ---------- Post added 2012-06-05 at 11:14 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobdoletoo View Post
    What was the amount of spending for all democratic candidates vs Walker?
    Still not even remotely close to Walker's money.

  5. #45
    Well this is horrenously disappointing news to hear...

  6. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Obama didn't outspend McCain 7 to 1 with foreign money either.

    You may want to look into facts, and by facts I don't mean MSNBC or Foxnews. You are a very misguided individual.

  7. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    We won because he had 30 billion in anonymous of state corporate donations. So yeah, not good for democracy.
    30 Billion? Me thinks you (intentionally) accidentally used a "B" instead of an "M"....and even then overstated.

    However, I'm sure all the money funneling into B.O.'s campaing coffers is A-OK and is in support of democracy.

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by conscript View Post
    How on earth is he wrong and making excuses? If money didn't influence elections Citizens United wouldn't be a discussion and how much money you spend wouldn't correlate pretty clearly with election results.

    Prove it. But you cant

  9. #49
    61-39 is a landslide. I think if it was 51-49 you could legitimately say that the money was an issue here but when you lost by 22 points its time to stop talking about campaign finance.

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by Sylvre View Post
    61-39 is a landslide. I think if it was 51-49 you could legitimately say that the money was an issue here but when you lost by 22 points its time to stop talking about campaign finance.
    I agree with this but, grasping at straws/creating straw men is what people like to do. Nice to see that common sense won out in this election.

  11. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Oh please don't be naive. How do you think you communicate your platform?
    Nobody needs a tv ad to make up there mind. They are already decided if they were going to vote. Nobody even gives a shit about tv politics ads.


    Where is the information? Oh wait..it proves I am right so you wont show it!

  12. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Maleficus View Post
    30 Billion? Me thinks you (intentionally) accidentally used a "B" instead of an "M"....and even then overstated.
    Million, yes. And no, 30 million
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1554292.html

    However, I'm sure all the money funneling into B.O.'s campaing coffers is A-OK and is in support of democracy.
    Strawman fallacies are more pervasic than cockroaches in new york on this board.

  13. #53
    Glad to know that what people want really doesn't matter as long as you have tens of millions (Billions in the Presidency race coming up) of dollars.

    Find it funny that nearly every issue Walker proposed polls negatively in the majority, and yet he wins.

    Wisconsin must be masochists.

  14. #54
    Can any of you people trying to blame democratic party loss on money explain why obama had 6 fundraisers last week in states bordering Wisconsin and not in Wisconsin? The leader of your party who has more fundraisers then any President ever, does not even try to raise money in Wisconsin. Why did he not go to Wisconsin when going from Michigan to Minnesota? You complain about money but the leader of your party is not even trying to help? But the republicans used more money.....because the democrats decided it was a war they could not win and did not support it.

  15. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Sylvre View Post
    61-39 is a landslide. I think if it was 51-49 you could legitimately say that the money was an issue here but when you lost by 22 points its time to stop talking about campaign finance.
    Pretty much, but the excuses have to come from somewhere! It cant be that the people actually wanted walker!

    ---------- Post added 2012-06-05 at 10:21 PM ----------

    My side lost, thus it is the fault of something other then our canidate being worse! What should be blame this time!

  16. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Bobdoletoo View Post
    Can any of you people trying to blame democratic party loss on money explain why obama had 6 fundraisers last week in states bordering Wisconsin and not in Wisconsin? The leader of your party who has more fundraisers then any President ever, does not even try to raise money in Wisconsin. Why did he not go to Wisconsin when going from Michigan to Minnesota? You complain about money but the leader of your party is not even trying to help? But the republicans used more money.....because the democrats decided it was a war they could not win and did not support it.
    To not get involved in a race that historically was bound to go pretty badly for democrats?

  17. #57
    Both political parties are bought out.

    Money influences politics in huge ways. Not only does it provide the candidates with more billboards, commercials, advertisements, etc which help them get elected. But these candidates will now support and comply with what these corporations and extremely wealthy people want. Which is more money for them and less money for everybody else.

    They're not going to pass a law if it goes against their donor's interests.

  18. #58
    I'm very proud of Wisconsin voters right now. They did the right thing. This stupid recall should never have happened, but the unions are so terrified of losing their cash cows (ie forced participation) that they overplayed their hand. Now their coffers are empty (yes, walker out pent Barrett, but the unions dropped 30 mil on the recall alone, much of that from the evil " out of state"), and their membership is down something like 50% since people aren't being forced to join. Good things are ahead for the state if it can continue to get out from under the crushing weight of greedy unions.

    Of course, I'm not going to count this election over just yet. Knowing how dems and unions operate, I'm sure a few boxes of ballots are waiting to be "found" in some ones car once they know how many they need.

  19. #59
    you know whats funny? I think walker is a POS and should not have been elected. But it happened, excuses are like..well you get the rest.

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Caiada View Post
    To not get involved in a race that historically was bound to go pretty badly for democrats?
    So you are saying that the leader of your party can not help an election. The media said this was going to be a really close election, why would obama not help?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •