g********2
发帖数: 6571 | 1 If billionaires are indeed controlling elections, they're not exactly doing
a bang up job. Let's take a look at the "super PACs" Sanders so mistrusts,
and what they did in the 2016 election so far.
The damage from 2016
The biggest super PAC of the 2016 cycle was Right to Rise USA, according to
the campaign finance site Open Secrets. This super PAC raised $121 million,
and spend $86 million in the 2016 cycle. So it must have supported Donald
Trump or Hillary Clinton, right? No. It supported former Florida Governor
Jeb Bush.
Yes, the same Jeb Bush who failed to win a single state. The Bush who won 4
pledged delegates, and a whopping 0.92 percent of the vote overall. The same
Bush who received 286,634 votes -- not exactly anywhere close to Trump's 14
million (45 percent of the vote), or even in the ball park of Ted Cruz's 7.
8 million (25 percent of the vote).
Ok, so the first one was a huge bust. How about the second? That would be
Conservative Solutions PAC, which raised $60 million and spent $55 million.
Surely that was a Trump PAC, right?
Nope again. That PAC backed Florida Senator Marco Rubio, who did quite a bit
better than Bush (despite Bush spending heavily on attack ads against him!)
. Rubio won three states, got 11 percent of the vote, and 173 delegates.
That's still small potatoes compared to Cruz and Trump, however. Cruz won
more than double Rubio's votes, states, and delegates.
In third place in terms of candidate PACs is Clinton's Priorities USA Action
, which raised $76 million and spent $36 million. Even that couldn't give
the former secretary of State a free pass to the Democratic nomination. The
huge populist wave also known as "Bernie Sanders" came far closer to
stopping her than ever anticipated, despite his relative lack of campaign
finance.
To be fair, if all the pro-Cruz PACs are counted as one, they would hit
fourth place behind Bush, Rubio, and Clinton. The Texas senator's "dark
money" groups raised a combined $55 million and spent a total of $26 million
. If billionaires controlled politics, you would expect Cruz to have
finished a distant third place, rather than a close second.
https://pjmedia.com/election/2016/07/16/no-hillary-bernie-millionaires-arent
-buying-elections-2016-proves-it/ | V*****i
发帖数: 9883 | 2 无论床铺和希拉里上台都是金钱的胜利
[在 gemini2012 (双子AB) 的大作中提到：]
:If billionaires are indeed controlling elections, they're not exactly
doing a bang up job. Let's take a look at the "super PACs"
Sanders so mistrusts,
:and what they did in the 2016 election so far.
:The damage from 2016
:The biggest super PAC of the 2016 cycle was Right to Rise USA, according to
the campaign finance site Open Secrets. This super PAC raised $121 million,
and spend $86 million in the 2016 cycle. So it must have supported Donald
:Trump or Hillary Clinton, right? No. It supported former Florida Governor
:Jeb Bush.
:Yes, the same Jeb Bush who failed to win a single state. The Bush who won 4
pledged delegates, and a whopping 0.92 percent of the vote overall. The
same Bush who received 286,634 votes -- not exactly anywhere close to Trump&
#39;s 14 million (45 percent of the vote), or even in the ball park of Ted
Cruz's 7.8 million (25 percent of the vote).
:Ok, so the first one was a huge bust. How about the second? That would be
:Conservative Solutions PAC, which raised $60 million and spent $55 million.
Surely that was a Trump PAC, right?
:Nope again. That PAC backed Florida Senator Marco Rubio, who did quite a
bit better than Bush (despite Bush spending heavily on attack ads against
him!). Rubio won three states, got 11 percent of the vote, and 173 delegates
.
:.......... | g********2
发帖数: 6571 | 3 展开说说。
to
million,
【在 V*****i 的大作中提到】
: 无论床铺和希拉里上台都是金钱的胜利
: [在 gemini2012 (双子AB) 的大作中提到：]
: :If billionaires are indeed controlling elections, they're not exactly
: doing a bang up job. Let's take a look at the "super PACs"
: Sanders so mistrusts,
: :and what they did in the 2016 election so far.
: :The damage from 2016
: :The biggest super PAC of the 2016 cycle was Right to Rise USA, according to
: the campaign finance site Open Secrets. This super PAC raised $121 million,
: and spend $86 million in the 2016 cycle. So it must have supported Donald
|
|
