Recently I came across a chart documenting the political donations given to republicans and democrats in the last 20 years. The person who sent me the chart used it to imply that, seeing as the majority of donations went to Dems, Democrats were more “crooked” than their counterparts. Is this really accurate? :dubious:
Why would donations imply that they have to necessarily be crooked? The person who sent the chart clearly has an agenda.
Open Secrets is a pretty good site that my company compliance office used and I have no reason to believe that the information presented is inaccurate. Union money tends to go to Democrats. Corporate money tends to go more Republican.
Keep in mind that corporations cannot donate directly to candidates. There are company PACs like GM PAC where employees can donate money. The PAC then sends money to candidates that might be more amenable to helping out GM. That can be to Republicans or Democrats.
A chart that says “top all-time donors” is not the same as all donors. There has been an increasingly tendency for millions of individuals to donate small amounts of money that collectively add up to more than the big corporate donations.
The chart also doesn’t explain donations to whom. The presidential campaign? All members of Congress? The national party organizations? State and local parties? What does a donation on that chart mean?
And why start in 1989? That may be for a good reason. But the Republicans held the presidency for 16 of the previous 20 years. If the chart covered that it would certainly look different.
In addition, the amounts given have risen greatly over time. You can’t compare the costs of earlier campaigns with more recent ones. The Democrats have been far more successful in winning seats and raising money in the most recent and most expensive campaigns. That alone is enough to swing the totals.
In short, this chart is perfect expression of what I say here frequently. Facts are meaningless without context. Context is everything. I’m sure that chart is presenting facts. But what do those facts really mean? What conclusions can you reach from them? The person who sent you the chart reached one conclusion. That conclusion is probably false and certainly biased. You now have an opportunity to challenge that person as to what the chart really means by asking some astute questions. Have at it.
Actually, the most “crooked” politicians would be those where the conationa were NOT documented on any chart.