« Explaining Civics 101 To The Smartest Man In The World | Main | Some are waking up to the charade that is Barack Hussein Obama »

Following the Money

Once upon a time a pair of Senators concluded that Money was the root of all political evil.  They then proceeded to convince a majority of their fellow Senators and Representatives that this was indeed a problem and one which needed to be dealt with.

What say we look at twenty years worth of actual data?

Top 20 US political donors over the last 20 years via OpenSecrets.org:

Note that of the top 20 donors over a 20 year span, a mere 2 slightly favor Republicans, while only 4 are relatively neutral (though two lean slightly Democrat and two lean Republican).  The remaining 14 of the top 20 political donors are solidly in the Democrat camp.

The full list of the 140 top donors can be found at the link.

Color me unsurprised, and let this be the stake through the heart of the "Republicans are the party of Fat Cats" meme.

Hat Tip: Jacob Lyles of distributedrepublic.net via The Blogfather.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/41384.

Comments (30)

Most of these interests are... (Below threshold)
Paul Hooson:

Most of these interests are not really interested in electing members of one party over the other, but in having an effect on legislation related to their industry or steering contracts in their direction by having favorable legislators in office.

So you're point, Paul, is t... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

So you're point, Paul, is that it is more cost effective to buy Democratic Party members?

Paul, doublespeak is out of... (Below threshold)
epador:

Paul, doublespeak is out of style.

Sorry, I meant doublethink.... (Below threshold)
epador:

Sorry, I meant doublethink.

The problem with buying Dem... (Below threshold)
Rodney Graves Author Profile Page:

The problem with buying Democratic Politicians is that they seldom stay bought, absent regular maintenance payments.

Well there are 'fat cats' a... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

Well there are 'fat cats' and 'Democratic fat cats'. Nuance is everything.

The swamp is draining the t... (Below threshold)
914:

The swamp is draining the taxpayers. You can add "Muslim Brotherhoods" and Barry's favorite "Acorn for affirmation" , both who are 100% indebted to the greedmonger in cheif.

(head scratching commences)... (Below threshold)

(head scratching commences)

Not sure where you came up with that summary of the numbers. I see 3 solid R leaners (60+%), 1 split, and 2 slight R leans.

You using that new math stuff?

Using "liberal math," howev... (Below threshold)
Caesar Augustus:

Using "liberal math," however, when massive labor unions contribute 98% to Democrats and 2% to Republicans that means they're actually non-partisan and evidence no conceivable indication of political cryonism, whereas a company like AT&T (56-44 towards the GOP) is an evil corporate shill for fat cat Republicans and accordingly should be shouted down, censored and barred from public discourse.

Most of these interests ... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Most of these interests are not really interested in electing members of one party over the other

Right. That's why 12 of the 20 give over 92% to the dems, because they know that there is no difference between the two parties. Note that not a single one of the top 20 favors the GOP like the others favor the dems. So much for the dems assertion that the GOP is the captive of corporate interests (and really what is a union these days but a business that exists to sell labor to other businesses?).

Note also that 11 of the 20 are unions, none of which give less than 89% to the dems and who give a median of 98% to the dems.

So Paul go ahead and keep your head firmly stuffed up your ass. Ignore the facts plainly laid out before you that the dems are the party of fat cats, bought and paid for by the unions. Which is why they are giving exemptions to obamacare to unions and why they sought to exempt unions from their campaign laws restricting political donations and speech. One rule for the dems and their union friends and another for the rest of us.

Falze, follow the link. Ope... (Below threshold)
Upset Old Guy:

Falze, follow the link. OpenSecrets lists their criteria for the catagories of "on the fence", "leans", "strongly" and "solidly." It's the same regardless of party.

Oh, I see it, I just don't ... (Below threshold)

Oh, I see it, I just don't believe it. You give money 3:2 R:D and that's not considered pro-R? Like I said, looks like that new math to me. And 67% to R is only slightly to the R? That's a pretty solid tilt in my world.

And, if I'm not mistaken, Rodney has edited his post without saying so to make it more correct about the leaners, which naturally makes my previous comment look more stupid since it refers to something he said before he fixed it ;)

Falze,Gee, sorry a... (Below threshold)
Rodney Graves Author Profile Page:

Falze,

Gee, sorry about that...

Falze,Yes there ar... (Below threshold)
jim m:

Falze,

Yes there are GOP leaning donors, but none of them show the bias of the dem donors and they are significantly outnumbered. Only 4 of the 20 tilt toward the GOP and a 2 more are evenly divided. The remaining 14 give over 60% to the dems and of those 13 give over 89%.

The median split for dem leaning donors is 97% to the dems wile the median for the GOP donors is 60% with the max being 68%.

The fact is that the big donors tilt heavily toward the dems and they reap substantial benefits from their payments.

Most of these interests ... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Most of these interests are not really interested in electing members of one party over the other, but in ...

... advancing the interests of the Party. And you know which Party that is.

Paul Hooson @ 1 wrote (in p... (Below threshold)

Paul Hooson @ 1 wrote (in part):

Most of these interests are not really interested in electing members of one party over the other, but in ...

To which Jay Guevara replied:

... advancing the interests of the Party. And you know which Party that is.

The CPUSA Democratic Party?

To Jim M's point, I did the... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

To Jim M's point, I did the math for the comrades:

Leftists received $504,333,129.71.

Americans received $133,867,933.37.

Fat cats indeed.

Rodney, the Democrat Party ... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Rodney, the Democrat Party is merely the aboveground wing of the CPUSA, much like Sinn Fein was the aboveground wing of the Provisional IRA.

Both represent a feeble effort to offer an acceptable face to the cognitively challenged who cannot divine the truth.

And speaking fat cats and R... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

And speaking fat cats and Reds, note that the #1 contributor above is ActBlue, which is a front group for Soros, Lewis, and assorted unions and other front groups (e.g., American Association for Justice, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO Committee on Political Education).

"As unnerving and dishonest as it may be, ActBlue seems an effective way for rich donors -- private parties and unions -- to funnel donations to liberal candidates and get around the limitations on donations in McCain-Feingold."

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32591


As the labor unions fade aw... (Below threshold)
moseby:

As the labor unions fade away, so will the power of the liberal scum in this country....

sorry for the confusion, I ... (Below threshold)

sorry for the confusion, I wasn't criticizing the obvious conclusions reached from the data, merely Rodney's mathematizing where groups giving more money to Republicans was stated as favoring Democrats ;)

I see you updated your count again. Boy, I sure look dumb, now, eh?

There's an interesting post... (Below threshold)

There's an interesting post here waiting to be posted I think, but I'm afraid I have to keep playing devil's advocate here.

This data says nothing to the 'fat cats' "meme", in fact, it could be argued that it argues exactly the opposite, that groups of 'ordinary' Americans have bundled more together to give to Democrats while the GOP has pulled more large donations from fewer people. If there is a fat cats "meme" it is that rich people give disproportionately to the GOP, I don't think it has anything to do with groups that have a lot of dough to throw around.

Given that there is no "dis... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

Given that there is no "discussion" of individuals, it says nothing of the sort falze :)
but seeing how many public employee unions and unions that get much of their work from govt contracts or work in highly regulated sectors... that is instructive.

Falze @ 22 opines:<bl... (Below threshold)
Rodney Graves Author Profile Page:

Falze @ 22 opines:

There's an interesting post here waiting to be posted I think...

Knock yourself out.

Given that there is no "... (Below threshold)

Given that there is no "discussion" of individuals

Of course, my bad. When people say that the GOP is the party of 'fat cats' the allusion is bundled donations from organizations, right?

Again, showing that Democrats receive WAY more $ from groups that appear to be 'working people' is a strange way to refute the GOP/party of fat cats argument. But that's just me.

Personally, I can't believe no one else is shocked that AT&T is #2 on the list. Doesn't that seem like a LOT of money from AT&T?

Looking at this again, this... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

Looking at this again, this is the list of largest contributors, period. Individuals have some limits on what they give, so that precludes them. Hence the bundlers like ActBlue... you'd need to see their books to know how much money came from say... Soros.

If you look at the entire list, out of $2,180,149,543 , just over 59% went to the dems ($1,293,080,241). Looking at the unions that are either govt workers OR get their bread and butter jobs from the government OR work in a field that can't sneeze without federal go-aheads (communications workers, for example) you see that $391,821,539 went to the dems, or nearly 18% of the total.
That puts the Fleabaggers of Wisconsin and Indiana in perspective, IMO.

Also interesting, the Eeeevil Fox (NewsCorp) is tagged as a fence sitter for giving 58% ($6,537,001.36) to the dems.
Disney (ABC) gave 68% to dems ($7,992,605.08)
Time Warner (TBS etc) 72% ($14,635,829.52)
Newsweek 98% (0% to Reps) $9,758,693.00. I bet their creditors love that number in light of their financial "success"

So Fox, that gives more money to the Left is hopelessly biased in favor of the Right... but the other media companies are fair and unbiased.
Or so the trolls tells us ;) LOL


Falze, which of the groups ... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

Falze, which of the groups in that list of 140 are the Republican Fat Cat front groups?

Another shocker... ActBlue ... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

Another shocker... ActBlue was formed in 2004. In that time is has donated more money than any other group in a 20 year period. Nearly all of it to the dems.
In 6 years they've given the dems more than the top 3 Republican leaning donors have given the Reps in 20 years! (Altira, Nat Auto Dealers and UPS). And more than 5 times what the EEEEvilll Koch Industries gave to the Republicans.

SCSIwuzzy @ 26,To ... (Below threshold)

SCSIwuzzy @ 26,

To paraphrase a great man:

It's not what our leftards don't know, it's what they know that just ain't so.

groups of 'ordinar... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:
groups of 'ordinary' Americans have bundled more together to give to Democrats

Yep, Soros, Lewis, the Pritzkers are all just lunch pail blue collar workers.

If there is a fat cats "meme" it is that rich people give disproportionately to the GOP

WTF are you talking about? How many effing leftist billionaires does it take for you to realize that the fat cats are Reds? Or are Soros and Lewis skinny cats on your planet?




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

tips@wizbangblog.com

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy