Corruption on a scale we haven't seen in WH for Centuries

[jj22]

It's not the DNC"s role to help a non Democrat win. Just like the RNC never helped Ron/Rand Paul win. They just used those party's so they can have a platform to debate on. Expecting the DNC and RNC to help elect non party members is setting yourself up for disappointment.

[hollodero]

(06-08-2018, 12:57 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: He refused to play with the party for years and then wanted to use their resources to help him become President. 

...while still remaining an Independent. As I said. I understand why the DNC would prefer a Democrat over Sanders.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(06-08-2018, 08:57 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Wait, you mean politicians people are paid to write books and go on speaking tours after leaving office? How corrupt! Definitely the same as enacting policies while in office to benefit financially.

Yes, because those corporations, who are profit-driven operations, are paying $250-500k out of the goodness of their heart. $500k for 1-2 hours of someone speaking? That sure seems like something above board. $3m/yr just to be listed as an honorary vice-principal of a for-profit college? That sure seems legit.

NOT because they had huge political favor and power and were able to do all kinds of people favors. No sir. Just because people are desperate to throw tens of millions of dollars at people to hear a couple words of wisdom.



Naive.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(06-08-2018, 12:57 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: He refused to play with the party for years and then wanted to use their resources to help him become President. 

Still doesn't excuse the conspiracy.  Besides, had they backed him, he probably wins.  That election was all about going against the status quo and anti-establishment......as much as everyone wants to make it about something else.  The fact is, the DNC had their own anti-establishment candidate, and they blew it.  No one's fault but their own.

[BmorePat87]

(06-08-2018, 02:33 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Yes, because those corporations, who are profit-driven operations, are paying $250-500k out of the goodness of their heart. $500k for 1-2 hours of someone speaking? That sure seems like something above board. $3m/yr just to be listed as an honorary vice-principal of a for-profit college? That sure seems legit.

NOT because they had huge political favor and power and were able to do all kinds of people favors. No sir. Just because people are desperate to throw tens of millions of dollars at people to hear a couple words of wisdom.



Naive.

You're suggesting that someone out of office indirectly welding power and influence is worse than someone in office directly wielding power and influence.

It's silly.

[jj22]

(06-11-2018, 01:20 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: You're suggesting that someone out of office indirectly welding power and influence is worse than someone in office directly wielding power and influence.

It's silly.

This is true. Trump and his family is set to make billions personally because of his presidency. For every deal he makes on behalf of America, he personally gets a cut. This hasn't been seen in century's. Book and speaking deals after you are no longer in office doesn't compare.

[*wildcats forever*]

(06-08-2018, 12:57 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: He refused to play with the party for years and then wanted to use their resources to help him become President. 

I questioned why the DNC allowed Sanders to run as a democrat without Sanders joining the party, and committing to play by their rules. What resulted was plain ugly to witness. Giving Independents a platform of equal footing to present their policies that would generate the populist support they need to proceed is lacking. Reform of the Electoral College and Campaign Finance seems mandatory before any third party can organize itself well enough to compete with the RNC and DNC. With DC being one giant fund raiser, I can't imagine many there wishing to address such changes. And that just causes cynicism to deepen.

[Belsnickel]

(06-11-2018, 01:49 PM)wildcats forever Wrote: I questioned why the DNC allowed Sanders to run as a democrat without Sanders joining the party, and committing to play by their rules. What resulted was plain ugly to witness. Giving Independents a platform of equal footing to present their policies that would generate the populist support they need to proceed is lacking. Reform of the Electoral College and Campaign Finance seems mandatory before any third party can organize itself well enough to compete with the RNC and DNC. With DC being one giant fund raiser, I can't imagine many there wishing to address such changes. And that just causes cynicism to deepen.

Pretty much my thoughts in bfine's thread talking about the recent DNC decision.