Patterico's Pontifications


The Favor of Big Money Donors

Filed under: General — Dana @ 8:54 am

[guest post by Dana]

After this week’s Supreme Court campaign finance decision based on the First Amendment right to free political speech, Harry Reid immediately exercised his own right to free political speech,

“The Supreme Court today just accentuated what they did on Citizens United, which is a decision that is one of the worst decisions in the history of that court,” the Nevada Democrat said. “All it does is take away people’s rights because, as you know, the Koch brothers are trying to buy America.”

This was followed by exercising his right to mad tweeting,

“Today’s Supreme Court ruling gives even more power to the wealthiest few who are trying to buy our democracy, like the Koch Brothers.”

So, where do the largest political donations really go? The answer is not surprising: Of the 20 largest current overall political donors, 62 percent of the biggest donors’ money went to support the Democrats.

In descending order:

-a couple of hedge-fund guys who give 100 percent of their donations (more than $11 million) to Democrats

-people associated with the city government of New York (84 percent to Democrats)

-Democratic Governors Association, the National Education Association (89 percent to Democrats)

-the Carpenters and Joiners Union (79 percent to Democrats)

-the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal employees (100 percent to Democrats)

-the AFL-CIO (81 percent to Democrats)

-the National Association of Realtors (53 percent to Republicans)

-the electrical workers unions (97 percent to Democrats)

-AT&T (62 percent to Republicans)

-Lockheed Martin (61 percent to Republicans

-Comcast (58 percent to Democrats)

-the engineers union (79 percent to Democrats)

-Northrop (57 percent to Republicans)

-American Association for Justice (i.e., lawyers, 96 percent to Democrats)

-Honeywell (58 percent to Republicans)

-Boeing (57 percent to Republicans)

-Votesane PAC (70 percent to Republicans)

-Every Republican Is Crucial PAC (100 percent to Republicans)

-Laborers’ union (90 percent to Democrats)

(Two points: The first GOP donation comes in at #8, and note the trend in GOP groups)

No word from Harry Reid about this.


55 Responses to “The Favor of Big Money Donors”

  1. cha-ching!

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  2. The much prettier Dana wrote:

    After this week’s Supreme Court campaign finance decision based on the First Amendment right to free political speech, Harry Reid immediately exercised his own right to free political speech,

    One would think that that would leave a mark, but it doesn’t; the Distinguished Gentleman from Nevada would have to have a sense of shame to be embarrassed by that, but there is no particular evidence that he does.

    But the Democrats’ concern isn’t freedom of speech, and never has been. Rather, they are still bemoaning the rise of the internet, and talk radio, which have allowed conservative messages to reach the public without having to go through the gatekeepers of the professional media. They know that, if campaign expenditures were limited, the professional media, whose message is unrelenting liberalism, would be a far greater part of the discussion.

    The Dana trying to get in the second comment (3e4784)

  3. Thanks for posting this info, Dana. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, although it may be ineffective in the fight against Hairy Reid’s propensity for pedophilia.

    Colonel Haiku (0d1049)

  4. not sure I see the point- except for the hedge fund guys, none of the entities on this list is an “individual” which is what the SC decision is about. So I don’t understand why this list shows that Harry Reid’s statement (though I disagree with it) is hypocritical.

    MS (a640cc)

  5. Comment by MS (a640cc) — 4/4/2014 @ 10:03 am

    IMO, the main issue is who/what are the big donors to who, not so much is the donor an individual, a corporation, a 501(c)4, a 501(c)5, or whatever.
    If the issue is follow the money to see where there is influence, follow all of the money, not cherry picking to make your side look good.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  6. Well, now we know for certain why Democrats have such a hard-on for cutting the defense budget.

    Oh, and Hairy Read is a vile, vile, vile piece of desert trash.

    JVW (9946b6)

  7. If it weren’t for perfidy and hypocrisy, Sen Hairy Reed would not have anything to say. Hell, he basically rented out the Senate floor overnight to Tom Steyer.

    JD (03f68b)

  8. Dem big money donors are good and virtuous.

    JD (03f68b)

  9. Koch Bros. are effective, that’s what rankles the likes of the lying Harry Reid. They serve as the target for the Left’s pathological need for Two Minutes of Hate. Reid is a prime practitioner of that ridiculously moronic exercise.

    Colonel Haiku (aa2ba3)

  10. Here is a list of the top donors since Reagan left office. VERY HEAVILY weighted towards Democrats. No wonder they like the old rules.

    Kevin M (b11279)

  11. Patterico, how can this list be true? The Koch’s are #46, outspent 10-1 by Tom Steyer’s Fahr LLC at #1. How come the Dems don’t object to Steyer?

    Kevin M (b11279)

  12. #11… exactly. The Koch Bros. are a drop in the bucket… again, they are vilified because they are effective.

    Colonel Haiku (aa2ba3)

  13. Dem big money donors are good and virtuous.

    This is another one of those “tolerance” things then, where the Right must tolerate the things the left likes. Or else.

    Kevin M (b11279)

  14. The playing field must never be level. This case was wrongly decided.


    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  15. Even if they were no effective, someone needs to be vilified least people catch a breath and see who and how much are funding the Dems.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  16. Of the 20 largest current overall political donors

    This is a list, I think, of the employers of donors.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  17. “””The much prettier Dana wrote:””””

    Uh, actually the name Dana is unisex. Not to rain on the parade but is there actual evidence as to Dana’s gender? If Dana has already clarified this point in previous posts then I apologize as I’m not always able to read the blog every day.

    “”””(Two points: The first GOP donation comes in at #8, and note the trend in GOP groups)””””

    Regarding the second point, Dana, could be missing it but what exactly is the trend?

    I understood the first point, that Dems contributors outdonate their GOP counterparts. That’s life. At present nothing much can be done about it.

    Kenneth Simmons (a10c17)

  18. “Uh, actually the name Dana is unisex. Not to rain on the parade but is there actual evidence as to Dana’s gender?”

    Kenneth – The much prettier and female Dana, the author of the comments as just “Dana.” The ugly, misogynistic, etc., etc., male Dana comments with adjectives attached to his name.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  19. the author of this post

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  20. She could change her name to Daynah as a nom de plume. That would prolly help alleviate gender confusion. Hey! I’m just trying to be helpful here.

    elissa (a10250)

  21. FWIW, “Borgo” is flailing away in moderation. Because Sen Hairy Reed is just doing what he is supposed to. Because Koch.

    JD (03f68b)

  22. Thank you J.D. Picturing the gyrations of flailing trolls who are locked away behind the scenes is always fun.

    elissa (a10250)

  23. Harry is going to lose his job next election.

    That’s why he’s a whining little priss now.

    Too bad Harry.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  24. Clearly, the job description of the Senate Majority Leader includes dishonest hackjob smears of civilians that have the temerity to exercise their 1st Amendment Rights. Heaven for is he do something like pass a budget more than once every five years.

    JD (03f68b)

  25. Yeah, that “world’s greatest deliberative body” business is kind of a bad joke, isn’t it.

    elissa (a10250)

  26. Dear America,

    This weekend, I plan to watch March Madness.
    Please don’t bother me with your complaints.



    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  27. 8. Dem big money donors are good and virtuous.

    Comment by JD (03f68b) — 4/4/2014 @ 10:26 am

    True. Democrats will tell you that.

    …The author, Reid Wilson, interviewed “Democratic strategists who deal frequently with high-dollar donors,” and these Democratic strategists told him, strategically, that their high-dollar donors are better than Republican ones. “For the Koch brothers, electing the right candidate can mean a financial windfall,” Wilson wrote. “Democratic donors revolve more around social issues.” On the one hand you have petty, greedy rich men, and on the other you have committed liberals willing to sacrifice for causes they believe in. The morality play writes itself.

    Steve57 (181b49)

  28. Considering how many self-identifying conservatives smugly brag to us here at the blog about how they have already switched their voter registration to “independent” or “unaffilliated,” and how they brag about not showing up to vote in the GOP primaries, we shouldn’t be surprised that the Democrats are actually the party of big donors.

    After all, they actually want to win.
    That’s why they vote.
    You know, like in primaries, and stuff !
    Or whatever !

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  29. Your big tent act never gets tired.

    JD (03f68b)

  30. Shirley, he doesn’t take it seriously,

    narciso (3fec35)

  31. JD,

    It is amusing how you think there’s actually an argument to be made for sitting out the primaries.

    And then you’ll whine when your guy didn’t win the primaries.

    That’s cute.
    Or something.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  32. Every Republican Is Crucial

    omg make up a gayer name i defy you

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  33. It all really depends on what a person believes is at stake.
    I believe our nation’s future is at stake—our country cannot survive with multiple generations of voters who believe that government is the solution to our problems. We need to stop the bleeding right now by electing a conservative who will show everyone that conservative policies are ‘the light.’
    And as a high-income earner, I also believe my personal nest egg is at stake.

    Some people are happy to sit back and allow other people to determine the course of the country.
    Not me.
    I’m voting in the primaries for the most conservative candidate whom I believe can win.
    As of now, I believe that person may be Jindal, Rubio, Walker, Cruz, et al.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  34. Voting In Primaries !
    LOL !
    That’s like, so Ronald Reagan.
    Or something.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  35. a lot was at stake in 2012 I think

    2016 is just for those playing the home game

    this cowardly debtwhore slut of a country is going down

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  36. Who is the big social conservative money bags, the left made it look like it was Scaife, but really he was focused on defense and economics, RMS was the Kochgoat of his day, it was in imitation of that phantom that Soros created his network,

    narciso (3fec35)

  37. someone should make french toast

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  38. John Forbes Kerry is french toast.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  39. And his wife Teresa the Ketchup Heiress is a belgian waffle.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  40. Maybe you could point out where I have made that argument, ES? Kthx

    JD (5c1832)

  41. here’s my favoritest french toast recipe

    it uses some cointreau which makes it even more frenchtastic

    you can skip the grated zest of 1 orange and also you can just use regular old nutmeg (not freshly grated – good lord get a life)

    this is a way better recipe than Giada’s btw

    she’s such a cow

    a very fancy stupid cow what has to throw mascarpone and heavy cream into everything she serves to other people but won’t actually eat herself

    anyway this is a great recipe but you should wait til you see panettone on sale – for the love of god don’t pay more than $4 for one… last one I got was 2.25 at Vallarta, which is value

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  42. Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 4/4/2014 @ 3:20 pm

    Umm, not sure who made such comments, but in some states there are open primaries and the registration doesn’t matter. In other states, such as PA, the presidential primaries are so late it hasn’t made a difference in my lifetime. I’m actually registered Dem, because the only elections that mean much in Philly are the Dem primaries.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  43. gayer… made my year happyfeet.

    If I work really hard and pay my dues one day I will be gayer.

    highpockets (16e2ee)

  44. e.s.- i can see your point about primary voting in red states, but in the most bluest states, indy’s like myself sometimes vote for the least screwed up dem, because the republicans can’t field a candidate.

    mg (31009b)

  45. Somebody give that Republican candidate a sandwich.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  46. like the Koch Brothers.”

    I was listening to some people chatting away today at lunch — all of them of the left — and it was blah, blah, blah, evil Koch, blah, blah, blah, Koch is power hungry, blah, blah, blah, the Supreme Court’s decision is horrible and wealthy dirtbags like David Koch should be tarred and feathered. Blah, blah, blah.

    It was amusing (and disgusting) having to hear such rhetoric. I was tempted to barge in and say something like, Who the hell are you people to be making such statements when a fanatic leftist billionaire like George Soros is pulling the strings far more than anything being done by the Koch’s!

    In the thread on Michael Hiltzik I posted a synopsis on why a reputable psychiatrist back in 2008 diagnosed the liberalism of various people as being similar to mental illness. I think it is.

    Mark (0b101b)

  47. Liberalism is nothing more than guys with small units trying to nail lesbians.

    And lesbians with size issues disappointed about biology.

    highpockets (16e2ee)

  48. you know what would be cool?

    to be a big money donor


    That would really be something.

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  49. Well no, you could ask the founder of Melaleuca about that, or the car dealers that were closed because they donated to the Huntress, yes the codger was on that campaign, but he had ‘thrown the match;

    narciso (3fec35)

  50. I’m sure this was an oversight, because they were in the top 10;

    narciso (3fec35)

  51. Ol Harry never let the facts, the truth, nor common decency get in the way of delivering one of his sleazy rants.

    Skeptical Voter (12e67d)

  52. Comcast. Now there’s a Big Money Donor.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  53. Comment by MD in Philly (f9371b) — 4/4/2014 @ 10:23 am

    IMO, the main issue is who/what are the big donors to who, not so much is the donor an individual, a corporation, a 501(c)4, a 501(c)5, or whatever.

    Corporations are not allowed to contribute to candidate’s campaign funds for federal elections, and it has been that way since 1907. in some states they can give limited aounts. Otherwise all contributions have to be from individuals, and maybe from some collections of funds.

    What that list is is of who was listed as the employer by the individuals contributing.

    I think the worst kinds of contributions are thoise from groups, and the next worest is when somebody “bundles” money (brings a whole bunch of contributions he solicited to a candidate all at one time and gets credit fro the whole thing more or less)

    The best kind of of an individual, who can have 1,000 reasons for giving and who is replaceable.

    Sammy Finkelman (ebf45c)

  54. “What that list is is of who was listed as the employer by the individuals contributing.”

    Sammy – Click on the list and remove the mystery.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  55. Not that my interests and those of big donors are likely to coincide, I think allowing gifts to a larger, targeted group of individuals rather than dumping whole sums into super-PAC black holes is probably a good thing.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2549 secs.