+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Two Presidential Candidates That Stand No Chance of Winning Have Spent $250 Million

  1. Link to Post #1
    United States Avalon Member rgray222's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th September 2010
    Posts
    1,114
    Thanks
    3,150
    Thanked 7,962 times in 1,012 posts

    Default Two Presidential Candidates That Stand No Chance of Winning Have Spent $250 Million



    Former New York City Mayor and 2020 contender Mike Bloomberg has already spent $200 million on his campaign in advertisements alone. Bloomberg has been in the 2020 race for only about seven weeks, but his ad buys have almost surpassed the rest of the 2020 field combined. He will be spending an additional $10 million on a 60-second spot during the Superbowl and an additional $10-15 million in the run-up to the Superbowl.



    Tom Steyer, the former hedge fund investor turned impeachment activist, announced that he has spent $141 million. Mr. Steyer positioned himself as a populist outsider, railing against corporate interests that he described as holding too much sway over the political system.



    Neither one of these two billionaires were able to spend their way into the presidential debates and it appears that all their money will not allow them to buy a seat in the Oval Office.  Here are two smart guys with egos that apparently match the size of their bank accounts. Their efforts seem to be nothing more than Don Quixote jousting with windmills. In my mind, there is not a chance on Planet Earth that they will ever win the presidential race in Nov 2020.

    This post is NOT about being on the left or the right, nor is it just about the USA. I am hoping that people focus on the vast sums of money being spent by candidates in a cause that has been lost before it ever got started. The sheer absurdity of spending this kind of money borders on lunacy.

    I was reading a story about a $100 million donation that will pay for all medical students tuition at NYU. This is what started me thinking about wasting this kind of money on a lost effort. After compounding interest this will allow the school to pay for all med students in the future.  

    Quote In a surprise announcement today, the New York University School of Medicine said that it will pay the tuition of all its students regardless of merit or financial need, becoming the first major American medical school to do so. NYU made the announcement at its annual White Coat Ceremony, where new students are presented with white lab coats to mark the start of their medical education.

    “Thanks to the extraordinary generosity of our trustees, alumni, and friends, our hope—and expectation—is that by making medical school accessible to a broader range of applicants, we will be a catalyst for transforming medical education nationwide,” said Kenneth G. Langone, chair of NYU Langone Health’s board of trustees.

    Together with his wife Elaine, Langone, who made his $3.5 billion fortune as a co-founder of Home Depot, has given $100 million to fund the tuition package.
    It really is not important that these guys are Republican, Democrat or Independent. What is important that nobody seems to be talking about is the insanity of throwing these vast sums of money at lost causes. There are so many wonderful things that could be done with this money other than handing it over to corporate advertising executives on wall street.

    Any thoughts
    Last edited by rgray222; 14th January 2020 at 04:25.

  2. The Following 21 Users Say Thank You to rgray222 For This Post:

    anandacate (3rd February 2020), Ba-ba-Ra (14th January 2020), Bill Ryan (14th January 2020), Blacklight43 (3rd February 2020), Bluegreen (14th January 2020), enigma3 (14th January 2020), Ernie Nemeth (14th January 2020), Franny (14th January 2020), justntime2learn (14th January 2020), mountain_jim (14th January 2020), Ol' Roy (15th January 2020), onevoice (14th January 2020), peterpam (14th January 2020), Sadieblue (15th January 2020), Sammy (15th January 2020), Satori (14th January 2020), Star Mariner (14th January 2020), Sunny-side-up (4th February 2020), Tintin (14th January 2020), toppy (14th January 2020), Victoria (14th January 2020)

  3. Link to Post #2
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    11,693
    Thanks
    27,921
    Thanked 50,536 times in 10,236 posts

    Default Re: Two Presidential Candidates That Stand No Chance of Winning Have Spent $250 Million

    I happened across a video on youtube the other day which piqued my curiosity about an non-profit called Represent US
    https://represent.us/about/
    I had never heard of it before, but what they say about political reform sounded good.
    In the video, narrated in part by Jennifer Lawrence, the idea shared is that members of Congress are so busy raising funds to get re-elected that they are totally beholden to donors, and of course, lobbyists, and so they no longer actually represent the people at all.


    Their plan is to transcend party lines and get a coalition together powerful enough to get reform laws passed state by state that would eventually lead to changing national laws.

    From their website:
    "We bring together conservatives, progressives, and everyone in between to pass powerful anti-corruption laws that stop political bribery, end secret money, and fix our broken elections.
    A powerful movement of independents, progressives, and conservatives is building on America’s long tradition of pursuing federal reform through the states.

    In 2018, twenty-three transformative anti-corruption laws, from anti-gerrymandering and ranked choice voting to sweeping ethics and transparency laws, were passed in cities and states—more than in any other year in our nation’s history. "

    There are a bunch of celebrities on board, which could help build good PR though that part didn't really impress me at all.

    Then I saw this article:
    https://capitalresearch.org/article/...-us-represent/ which critiques Represent US:
    by Matt Middleton
    3/7/18
    "Editor’s Note: Correction to the Clean Elections Law in Arizona, only part of which was struck down as “unconstitutional”

    On February 15th, actress Jennifer Lawrence announced that she would be taking a break from Hollywood to focus on politics. As part of her effort to gear up for the November midterm elections, Lawrence has partnered with a little covered, “non-partisan” group called Represent.Us. The unsurprising shift in focus comes after she suggested last year that the deadly hurricanes in Texas, Florida, and Puerto Rico were “Mother Nature’s rage and wrath” in revenge for Donald Trump’s election in 2016.

    Founded in 2008, Represent.Us is a tax-exempt organization with both 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) education and advocacy arms. Using Represent.Us’ tax-exempt status, the organization has focused its capital on advocating for policies that remove money from politics and put an end to the country’s “broken elections.” Represent.Us calls on supporters to fight for so-called “American Anti-Corruption Acts” at local, state, and federal levels to in-part change how elections are funded.

    Despite the Represent.Us’ vague goal of removing money from politics, the organization is openly funded by proceeds from groups that are notoriously active in funding political advocacy and causes like the Tides Foundation, Park Foundation, Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Sixteen Thirty Fund, and many other left-of-center groups. In 2016 alone, Represent.Us received over $5 million in donor contributions and grants.

    Ironically, Represent.Us’ own principles mean these groups should personify the exact “money in politics” problem Represent.Us claims to fight against.

    Each of the foundations and funds listed above have contributed over $100,000 to Represent.Us. Funding from these groups also goes to support the work of Black Lives Matter, Media Matters, Demos, Planned Parenthood, and other like minded organizations.

    Josh Silver, Represent.Us’s founder, is a veteran political operative. In 1998 Silver was the campaign manager for the successful Clean Elections ballot initiative in Arizona. The initiative became state law in 1999 and called for a 5-member commission to decide the amount of money publicly financed politicians would receive in response to private campaign contributions made to other candidates. The law subsequently raised state taxes to publicly finance the remaining election imbalances between political candidates. In 2011, after a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling, the portion of the Clean Elections Law that supported matching private campaign contributions with state public financing was ruled unconstitutional. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority’s opinion:

    Arizona’s program gives money to a candidate in direct response to the campaign speech of an opposing candidate or an independent group. It does this when the opposing candidate has chosen not to accept public financing, and has engaged in political speech above a level set by the State. The professed purpose of the state law is to cause a sufficient number of candidates to sign up for public financing… which subjects them to the various restrictions on speech that go along with that program. This goes too far; Arizona’s matching funds provision substantially burdens the speech of privately financed candidates and independent expenditure groups without serving a compelling state interest.

    Josh Silver is also the executive director of the speech-censoring advocate Free Press, and frequently blogs at the left-leaning Huffington Post. Free Press was co-founded by socialist Robert McChesney, and is one of the main organizations that mounted opposition to the recent FCC repeal of the 2015 Open Internet Order, and has been accused by FCC Chairman Ajit Pai of supporting a “socialist” agenda. McChesney expressed his views on the evils of capitalism in a 2008 interview with the far-left publication Monthly Review:

    The media system reflect[s] the nature of the U.S. political economy, and any serious effort to reform the media system would have to necessarily be part of a revolutionary program to overthrow the capitalist political economy.

    Veil of Nonpartisanship
    Represent.Us claims to be bipartisan and says that they bring together “conservatives, progressives, and everyone in between” to push for their organization’s cause, but during a summit put on by Represent.Us’ from February 2-4, 2018 called Unrig the System that bipartisanship was somewhat questionable.

    The summit featured Republicans Richard Painter, Buddy Roemer, and Mike Gallagher in addition to Jennifer Lawrence, Democratic Representative Tulsi Gabbard, former FEC Commissioner Ellen Weintraub, and a list of other politically involved speakers.

    Of the Republicans advertised at the summit, Richard Painter and Buddy Roemer are arguably less than bastions of conservatism. Richard Painter is currently attempting to sue President Trump for a second time after his first lawsuit, CREW v. Trump, was thrown out by a New York federal judge. Buddy Roemer is a former Louisiana Governor that served his term as both a Democrat and a Republican, and in 2012 ran as a presidential candidate for the Reform Party.

    Considering the group’s funding from wealthy left-wing foundations, Represent.Us’ claims of bipartisanship are at best a stretch."



    Of course, Capital Research Center could be a right-wing think tank that will just criticize left wing agendas no matter how altruistic, but since non-profits, like politicians, are beholden to their donors, they also make a point.

    Now if a billionaire like Bloomberg or Steyer were sincere about political reform and put as much money into political reform as they did into their campaign, then maybe something like the stated goals of Represent US could succeed at some point.

    But I imagine that sincerely altruistic billionaires are in rather short supply.

    I don't know enough about the workings of the political system to have an opinion about any of this one way or the other, but that provided a glimpse, at least.
    Last edited by onawah; 14th January 2020 at 06:32.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  4. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    anandacate (3rd February 2020), Ba-ba-Ra (14th January 2020), Bill Ryan (14th January 2020), DaveToo (4th February 2020), mountain_jim (14th January 2020), peterpam (14th January 2020), rgray222 (14th January 2020), Sadieblue (15th January 2020), Sunny-side-up (4th February 2020), Tintin (14th January 2020)

  5. Link to Post #3
    Canada Avalon Member TomKat's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd September 2017
    Posts
    847
    Thanks
    133
    Thanked 3,110 times in 728 posts

    Default Re: Two Presidential Candidates That Stand No Chance of Winning Have Spent $250 Million

    Quote Posted by rgray222 (here)
    It really is not important that these guys are Republican, Democrat or Independent. What is important that nobody seems to be talking about is the insanity of throwing these vast sums of money at lost causes. There are so many wonderful things that could be done with this money other than handing it over to corporate advertising executives on wall street.
    Any thoughts
    They probably don't think they're throwing away their money. It's a backdoor way of donating to the Democrats.
    Last edited by TomKat; 14th January 2020 at 11:00.

  6. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to TomKat For This Post:

    Ba-ba-Ra (14th January 2020), Bill Ryan (14th January 2020), Ivy23 (14th January 2020), peterpam (3rd February 2020), rgray222 (14th January 2020), Sadieblue (15th January 2020), Sunny-side-up (4th February 2020), Tintin (14th January 2020)

  7. Link to Post #4
    Australia Avalon Member
    Join Date
    23rd June 2011
    Age
    40
    Posts
    1,011
    Thanks
    241
    Thanked 3,498 times in 788 posts

    Default Re: Two Presidential Candidates That Stand No Chance of Winning Have Spent $250 Million

    Quote Posted by rgray222 (here)
    It really is not important that these guys are Republican, Democrat or Independent. What is important that nobody seems to be talking about is the insanity of throwing these vast sums of money at lost causes. There are so many wonderful things that could be done with this money other than handing it over to corporate advertising executives on wall street.
    so True and that's what on my thought when i read yesterday that Bloomberg could spent $1bn to defeat trump....i don't know what to say but amaze. for one of reason i think Trump going to win because Zionist and MIC where Defense stock so high right now....He do what have asked to do.

  8. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to apokalypse For This Post:

    Ba-ba-Ra (14th January 2020), peterpam (3rd February 2020), rgray222 (14th January 2020), Sadieblue (15th January 2020), Sunny-side-up (4th February 2020), Tintin (14th January 2020)

  9. Link to Post #5
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    21st July 2010
    Age
    33
    Posts
    652
    Thanks
    305
    Thanked 2,986 times in 558 posts

    Default Re: Two Presidential Candidates That Stand No Chance of Winning Have Spent $250 Million

    Umm when I opened this page I had a popup come up that an XSS hijacking event happened from that google document.

    My no script did not like it and it is the only time that this has happened on this site.

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Praxis For This Post:

    Ba-ba-Ra (14th January 2020), Sadieblue (15th January 2020)

  11. Link to Post #6
    Avalon Member Satori's Avatar
    Join Date
    26th May 2010
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM, USA
    Age
    69
    Posts
    1,185
    Thanks
    4,819
    Thanked 7,673 times in 1,152 posts

    Default Re: Two Presidential Candidates That Stand No Chance of Winning Have Spent $250 Million

    Quote Posted by rgray222 (here)


    Former New York City Mayor and 2020 contender Mike Bloomberg has already spent $200 million on his campaign in advertisements alone. Bloomberg has been in the 2020 race for only about seven weeks, but his ad buys have almost surpassed the rest of the 2020 field combined. He will be spending an additional $10 million on a 60-second spot during the Superbowl and an additional $10-15 million in the run-up to the Superbowl.



    Tom Steyer, the former hedge fund investor turned impeachment activist, announced that he has spent $141 million. Mr. Steyer positioned himself as a populist outsider, railing against corporate interests that he described as holding too much sway over the political system.



    Neither one of these two billionaires were able to spend their way into the presidential debates and it appears that all their money will not allow them to buy a seat in the Oval Office.  Here are two smart guys with egos that apparently match the size of their bank accounts. Their efforts seem to be nothing more than Don Quixote jousting with windmills. In my mind, there is not a chance on Planet Earth that they will ever win the presidential race in Nov 2020.

    This post is NOT about being on the left or the right, nor is it just about the USA. I am hoping that people focus on the vast sums of money being spent by candidates in a cause that has been lost before it ever got started. The sheer absurdity of spending this kind of money borders on lunacy.

    I was reading a story about a $100 million donation that will pay for all medical students tuition at NYU. This is what started me thinking about wasting this kind of money on a lost effort. After compounding interest this will allow the school to pay for all med students in the future.  

    Quote In a surprise announcement today, the New York University School of Medicine said that it will pay the tuition of all its students regardless of merit or financial need, becoming the first major American medical school to do so. NYU made the announcement at its annual White Coat Ceremony, where new students are presented with white lab coats to mark the start of their medical education.

    “Thanks to the extraordinary generosity of our trustees, alumni, and friends, our hope—and expectation—is that by making medical school accessible to a broader range of applicants, we will be a catalyst for transforming medical education nationwide,” said Kenneth G. Langone, chair of NYU Langone Health’s board of trustees.

    Together with his wife Elaine, Langone, who made his $3.5 billion fortune as a co-founder of Home Depot, has given $100 million to fund the tuition package.
    It really is not important that these guys are Republican, Democrat or Independent. What is important that nobody seems to be talking about is the insanity of throwing these vast sums of money at lost causes. There are so many wonderful things that could be done with this money other than handing it over to corporate advertising executives on wall street.

    Any thoughts
    I do not disagree, but let us not forget that the money does not just evaporate. It trickles it’s way through the economy as it flows into and out of the bank accounts of others. Some recipients may be more deserving than others; but that is a judgment.

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Satori For This Post:

    Ba-ba-Ra (14th January 2020), rgray222 (14th January 2020), Sadieblue (15th January 2020)

  13. Link to Post #7
    United States Moderator James's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th November 2018
    Posts
    180
    Thanks
    361
    Thanked 1,407 times in 170 posts

    Default Re: Two Presidential Candidates That Stand No Chance of Winning Have Spent $250 Million

    When you can buy anything, it's pretty easy to think you can buy an election.

    But even $200,000,000 isn't enough to buy one.


  14. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to James For This Post:

    Ba-ba-Ra (14th January 2020), enigma3 (14th January 2020), rgray222 (14th January 2020), Sadieblue (15th January 2020)

  15. Link to Post #8
    UK Moderator/Librarian/Administrator Tintin's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd June 2017
    Location
    Trowbridge/Bath - UK
    Age
    50
    Posts
    1,584
    Thanks
    16,588
    Thanked 10,069 times in 1,564 posts

    Default Re: Two Presidential Candidates That Stand No Chance of Winning Have Spent $250 Million

    USEFUL HISTORICAL REFERENCE for background

    Sources that I would strongly urge anyone interested in the history of backdoor funding by private corporate interests, and its influence in politics - and more widely within a social and global context - would do extremely well to invest some time in absorbing the following resources in the Avalon Library - this is anything but new or surprising in the least:

    Freemen Digest issue from June 1978:
    Link: http://avalonlibrary.net/Norman_Dodd..._June_1978.pdf



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

    Dodd Report to the Reece Committee on Foundations 1954:
    Link: http://avalonlibrary.net/Norman_Dodd...tions-1954.pdf



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

    [INTERVIEW .mp4 from 1982]
    Collectivist Treason: The Hidden Agenda for World Government - G. Edward Griffin interview with Norman Dodd along with the transcript.

    Last edited by Tintin; 26th January 2020 at 23:38.
    “If a man does not keep pace with [fall into line with] his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” - Thoreau

  16. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

    Ba-ba-Ra (14th January 2020), enigma3 (14th January 2020), justntime2learn (3rd February 2020), onevoice (15th January 2020), rgray222 (14th January 2020), Satori (14th January 2020)

  17. Link to Post #9
    Bhutan Avalon Member enigma3's Avatar
    Join Date
    1st July 2016
    Posts
    382
    Thanks
    3,471
    Thanked 2,450 times in 369 posts

    Default Re: Two Presidential Candidates That Stand No Chance of Winning Have Spent $250 Million

    Bloomberg has no prayer. Steyer has bought his way into the next debate, as I understand. Seems the Dems make their own rules up as they go along.

    Tune in to Neon Revolt today and listen to a Project Veritas secret video where one of Bernie's field staff spews that Trump supporters should be sent to a gulag! Talk about going off the deep end.

    Enigmadamus predicts there will be a brokered Democratic convention. Now what happens when either Warren (probable) or Sanders drops out and all their delegates go to the other?

    Lastly, did anyone catch the college football championship game last night? Raucus and loud cheering when the Trumpster and Melania entered the Superdome to stand for the national anthem. I heard no boos, but perhaps they were drowned out.
    Last edited by enigma3; 14th January 2020 at 19:43.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to enigma3 For This Post:

    justntime2learn (3rd February 2020)

  19. Link to Post #10
    Avalon Member justntime2learn's Avatar
    Join Date
    22nd April 2014
    Posts
    1,377
    Thanks
    44,774
    Thanked 8,645 times in 1,333 posts

    Default Re: Two Presidential Candidates That Stand No Chance of Winning Have Spent $250 Million

    For anyone interested, I just watched Bloomberg's super bowl commercial.

    If he can't win and is spending so much money, I found myself curious.

    The commercial was anti-second amendment which is disturbing to me.

    I searched for the commercial to add on this post, but was unsuccessful. I'm sure it will be available on YouTube soon though.

    Just food for thought...
    “To develop a complete mind: Study the art of science; study the science of art. Learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else” – Leonardo Da Vinci

  20. Link to Post #11
    Canada Avalon Member TomKat's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd September 2017
    Posts
    847
    Thanks
    133
    Thanked 3,110 times in 728 posts

    Default Re: Two Presidential Candidates That Stand No Chance of Winning Have Spent $250 Million

    His commercials are everywhere and they're more anti-Trump than they are pro-Bloomberg. I don't think he cares whether he wins, just wants to get rid of Trump. The late Tracy Twyman believed Bloomberg was the reason she was pulled off the air mid-interview when she was on Coast radio, when she was talking about Bloomberg's involvment in an ancient Baphomet religion.

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to TomKat For This Post:

    justntime2learn (3rd February 2020)

+ Reply to Thread

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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