I am not trained enough to retrieve data on candidates’ campaign contributions sources. I am fairly confident it can be done though.
So! Let’s gather this information of the candidates proposing we vote for them, and let’s TRASH the ones who are taking oil company money. Those guys are not going to represent the obvious facts about the world today. They are paid huge sums not to. Face it. Now!
Let’s sabotage candidates who take oil money. :mad:
Oh, you’re serious.
And…
Just that it wasn’t obvious on first read-through. I’ll bow out now.
Are you suggesting I do the same…
Oil is evil, capitalism too, and my mother didn’t breast feed me, and <whine>life isn’t fair</whine>.
I’m sorry to hear that, Dan.
I guess the threadshitting means I have to swallow my own bait.
“But Try2B, all the candidates are taking oil company money.”
“Ah, so doesn’t that make the election a sham? Wouldn’t it be simpler to get everyone together in the town square and burn some incense to Zeus in a show of civic fealty? And just keep track of the ones who refuse as clearly not loyal to the State? It would save a lot of time and expense…”
“Oh come now, you’re being ridiculous (again). People need to believe that this voting thing makes a difference. You know, like they have some say in their government. Democracy? America? Don’t you believe?”
“So you plan to vote Huckabee in '12 then? He is the ‘it feels good to believe things’ candidate after all.”
<crickets>
“Hey, come back!”
This is an unsupported accusation. Woefully naive as well.
It doesn’t matter where the money comes from. You have to watch the ones who act as if they’re bought and paid for.
My assumption is that companies don’t give out money without the expectation of something in return. Is that so wrong?
Try2B Comprehensive, posters aren’t allowed to use the SDMB to recruit others in campaigns. I’ll leave this thread open provided the discussion remains centered on the pros and cons and feasibility of what you are suggesting. If it turns into “here’s a list of candidate who take oil money, don’t vote for them!” I will lock the thread.
If you can’t drink their whisky, take their money, fuck their women, and still vote against them, you don’t belong in Congress.
Sounds good to me. Should we start with this one?
Or does that disrupt the narrative?
What does the OP mean, “trash” and “sabotage” these candidates?
Refuse to vote for them? Write screeds on the Internet? Shake one’s fist angrily at the newspaper each morning? Commit vandalism and assault?
:twitch: – Molly Ivins? TEXAS?? I say, pistols at dawn, sir!
http://www.opensecrets.org/ Here is a list of donors for every senate and house candidate. Have at it.
While your at it get at the ones who watered down the financial bill while taking bank money.
I doubt that it disrupts the narrative for the OP; I do not believe he/she is partisan.
But I admit that I am mildly skeptical that Obama is, as a member of a political party generally anti-big power, and after only four years in the Senate and a year and a half as President, the greatest recipient of BP political money of the last twenty years.
Your link cited the Center for Responsive Politics as its source. Googling the source give me a site called opensecrets.org as the Center’s online resource. That site indicated that the Energy & Natural Resources industry gave about 60% of their political money to Republicans during the 2008 presidential campaign. That information indicates to me that I should be mildly skeptical.
But, once you do, they no longer have any reason to try to bribe you again. So you cut off your supply. It is in your best interest to help those who help you. It’s just not in the voters’ best interest.
And, anyways, the companies now can give you enough campaign money that you can convince the less informed people (i.e. most of them) that doing what the companies want IS in their best interest. I even fell for it last election, because I hate getting involved in something so enraging as politics. (To stay informed, you have to learn about a lot of bad stuff people do.)
He said it first, but that specific wording is Molly Ivins. And I could find three versions of Unruth and I wasn’t sure which was right, so I went for Ivins.
I think this is a shitty way to treat the public, and I am frankly sick to death of it. It needs to stop.
Sabotage candidates who take oil money! :mad: