Customer Discussions > Politics forum

75% of US Billionaires are Democrats and Obama supporters. They bought him his presidency and are trying to do it again.


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 53 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Apr 28, 2012 6:37:26 PM PDT
Lettuce Prey says:
Don't be fooled again!

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 28, 2012 6:45:40 PM PDT
VicAriel says:
>75% of US Billionaires are Democrats and Obama supporters.<

Of course you can't provide a link. Grow up.

Posted on Apr 28, 2012 6:47:12 PM PDT
Lettuce Prey says:
It's true. Look it up™. Google "how to Google stuff". :)

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 28, 2012 6:48:06 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 28, 2012 6:49:15 PM PDT
Pull out the Fortune 100 wealthiest and align the names to political contributions. 75% is pretty close.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 28, 2012 6:50:06 PM PDT
VicAriel says:
You made the statement without providing a link. Your inability to offer proof makes you a liar.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 28, 2012 6:50:49 PM PDT
Katrina says:
healthpro, if that's true, I sure feel a lot better now. Thanks for the pump up. I was sure most Billionaires were Republicans.
You know we have the best Politicians money can buy!

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 28, 2012 7:03:15 PM PDT
VicAriel says:
johnston -
I'm surprised that you made a statement like that without doing some research. I looked at it about a year ago. I found that approximately 60 percent of billionaires are Republicans. You haven't been thinking clearly lately as evidenced by your boneheaded decision to go long again on the VIX.

Posted on Apr 28, 2012 10:28:20 PM PDT
M. Emrich says:
The country would be a much better place is 75% of billionaires were dems. We would not have the class warfare brought on by huge the redistribution of wealth to the top 1% since Reaganomics began.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 28, 2012 10:31:55 PM PDT
Lientje says:
Healthpro: You made the statement. You prove it.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 29, 2012 1:47:59 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 29, 2012 1:50:41 AM PDT
Intrepid says:
In the last election, Obama had an unprecedented amount of support from the "99%" of all of us taxpayers. Even donations from the poor. The fact that "75% of US Billionaires are Democrats and [also] Obama supporters" should make you sit back and wonder what do these people that you would otherwise respect ALSO know:

You have a economy in 2012, today, because of what he had to do and what he had to implement.
There is no hyperinflation.
There is no Muslim state and no OBL.
There is no proletariat ownership of companies.
There is no wholesale foreign ownership of our corporations.

Instead inflation is at 3%
Most people dislike Santorum's religious extremism
Large corporations are stabilized
Exports are flowing again

Sure companies do need to step up and there is still much to do. But there were so many mis-perceptions by naysayers. So, respectfully, I suggest reassessing the quality and veracity of your sources if they were so wrong. You would have done horribly if you believed them and invested your savings accordingly.

Posted on Apr 29, 2012 2:22:07 AM PDT
Adam says:
Here's a link to donations made by billionares. I don't know if you can determine their political party by the donations, but it is interesting. Owners of corporations don't seem to care about the party. From what I can see the donate to whomever is going to make their business easier. ie They donate to the party they think will win and pay special interest groups to promote their agendas. There only seem to be a few committed to a party like Jeff Greene who donated 100% to the Democrats. I don't think the 75% of billionares are Democrat stat is correct, but 75% of donations from Billionares might fit.
http://www.newsmeat.com/billionaire_political_donations/

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 29, 2012 2:38:45 AM PDT
You say that after the way Romney bought the GOP nomination? For shame.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 29, 2012 2:53:08 AM PDT
Adam says:
You made the statement. You prove it. How did Romney buy the nomination? link pls.

Posted on Apr 29, 2012 3:01:53 AM PDT
Adam says:
Both sides hurt their credibility when they make factual claims with no proof. If we want to really have a discussion, we need to understand what we are saying before we assert it.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 29, 2012 3:07:43 AM PDT
"Romney spent a total of $76.6 million, far more than any other campaign. That total is, for example, more than the combined spending of Ron Paul, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich"

http://money.cnn.com/2012/04/25/news/economy/Romney-campaign-spending-vote/?source=cnn_bin

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 29, 2012 3:08:45 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 29, 2012 3:23:34 AM PDT
Adios Amigos says:
healthpro says:
It's true. Look it up™. Google "how to Google stuff". :)

========================

you know i fall on your side on financial issues. so, as someone who agrees with you. I still have to point out that it is the responsibility of the person making the first claim to provide a reference that all of us can look at. 5 of us could google it ourselves and we could come up with 5 different answers. to be one one page, the first post would provide a link. Isn't that a logical reason?

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 29, 2012 3:12:28 AM PDT
Adios Amigos says:
Intrepid says:There is no hyperinflation.
=================
that is because we had deflation. The inflation is not noticeable yet. give it a couple years.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 29, 2012 3:14:58 AM PDT
Adam says:
Yup thats what I was asking for. Thank you. But, be careful how you describe Romney 'buying the nomination' because you have also verifed the original post's claim that Obama bought the 2008 election.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 29, 2012 3:17:35 AM PDT
Just pointing out hypacracy as I see it.,

Posted on Apr 29, 2012 3:30:30 AM PDT
Adios Amigos says:
Intrepid

if you are checking back. I think you might find this interesting. I don't have any specific reason why i think you would, but I was watching it while I was answering your posts.

It is a national geographic story on Russian prisons. It makes american prisons look like country clubs. The only thing we have close to it is solitary confinement at Pelican Bay State Prison.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbfjuYtkJRE&feature=related

BTW- i was curious if during your time at the hospitals (or any places) if you have seen or heard story about children getting hurt by scissors. I am think about donating some money to a guy who invented a new safer design. I was wondering what your experience might have been.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 29, 2012 3:50:13 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 29, 2012 4:08:57 AM PDT
M. Gaudet says:
Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me.

Or how about the W Bush version, "fooled me once ain't never gonna git fooled agin."

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 29, 2012 4:18:22 AM PDT
Intrepid says:
> "that is because we had deflation. The inflation is not noticeable yet. give it a couple years."

You don't base your investments on what may occur in a couple of years. That's why our CPA CFO missed the run up in 2009. Even Wall Street bases it on a 6 month timeline. But the predictions were for disaster and instead we have had a reasonable recovery relative to the depth of the Recession.

The fact remains that those who predicted hyperinflation did not factor in the effect of the recession on the psyche's of the boomers. That was obvious to some of us.
Did not look at Japan's similar experience - whose recovery phase we have beaten in 1/3 the time and 1/2 the debt to GDP exposure.
Did not look at Federal efforts to keep inflation in check.
And did not look at the fact that much of the problems in 2008 were because commercial credit was strangled.

In short, they were wrong and more than a bit blind to the evidence. It's not something I am happy about. Just a little bitter that too many people who called themselves "financial planners" and experts prejudged out of bias without looking at the facts that I and many others were able to see and predict as early as 2009. BigDog (remember him?) was far and away more wealthy than most people and noted these things as well. Perhaps one of those aforementioned billionaires in the OP. He had interesting info to contribute - just much too hot a temper.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 29, 2012 4:25:53 AM PDT
Adios Amigos says:
I agree with you post

also [BigDog (remember him?) was far and away more wealthy than most people and noted these things as well. Perhaps one of those aforementioned billionaires in the OP. He had interesting info to contribute - just much too hot a temper.]

True too

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 29, 2012 4:36:58 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 29, 2012 4:40:30 AM PDT
Intrepid says:
I am glad you want to donate to someone interested in Child safety. But safety scissors seem to be plentiful. The one I like is made by Fiskars. Fiskars 94167097 Kids Classic 5-Inch Blunt Tip Scissors. IMHO, it's not worth investing in refining that excellent yet economical model. Even that one gets copied and sold in the dollar stores.

If you want to donate to a cause, consider helping to figure out the environmental triggers (plural) for autism. 1 out of 88 kids in the USA (use to be 1:110) is worthy of our having a small amount of panic. Just avoid the emotional hype about vaccines that gets in the way just like ACT UP got in the way of AIDS research. If you want to volunteer, help stem the (as high as) 40% drop out rate in urban high schools that threatens the sustainability of all of us as a nation when we will be retired and vulnerable.

4% is of concern. 40% should cause uproar in the streets by Al Sharpton etc, yet amazingly has not. No Child Left Behind really should be changed to No Child Allowed to drop out AND be a ward of the state. The German system of education is much more rational. Not every child should be forced into a pre-college track, especially those programmed to fail on that misguided approach.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 29, 2012 4:59:50 AM PDT
You made the statement without providing a link. Your inability to offer proof makes you a liar.
=========================================================
Since when has not including a cite equated to an inability to provide one? And, since when is an inability to provide a cite proof that one is lying? Did you own a dog when you were growing up? SHOW ME THE CITE!
‹ Previous 1 2 3 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Politics forum
Participants:  23
Total posts:  53
Initial post:  Apr 28, 2012
Latest post:  Apr 29, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

Search Customer Discussions