12-02-2016, 04:17 PM
(12-02-2016, 03:49 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Fair enough. I'm just pointing out how certain posters had no problem with the Clinton's money machine, but are deeply concerned about a multi-billionaire who had easier and more effective options to further enrichment than running for POTUS.
As for the Clintons, watch those speaking fees and charitable donations drop off a cliff (because, as you point out, it's effectively lobbying dollars...the difference being it goes to directly to their pockets rather than campaign funds).
The influence a POTUS wields over policy within this country and policy regarding how we deal with other countries is an extremely effective option for further enrichment, especially as there is no rule against presidential conflicts of interest since it is a constitutional office.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
