Wall Street's political cash favors Democrats

[Patters]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/financial..._wallstreet_dc

Wall Street has shifted its allegiance in the 2006 election cycle by donating more to Democrats than Republicans who have been the investment banks' usual benefactors, U.S.

Five leading firms Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Bear Stearns Companies Inc.,Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch & Co. and Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. have contributed $6.2 million so far to candidates before the November elections, with about 52 percent going to Democrats.

...

Despite being awash in record profits, Wall Street executives, investment bankers, brokers and traders may be getting weary of Republican control, Carroll said. President George W. Bush's polling numbers are low and growing violence in Iraq also weighs heavy on Republican leadership, he said.

Meredith McGehee, policy director at The Campaign Legal Center, said Wall Street also may be concerned about the U.S. deficit, which has ballooned during the Bush administration.

"The last time the deficit was under control was under the Democrats," McGehee said.

***

Democrats have been trying to claim the mantel of fiscal responsibility since Clinton came to office. It's interesting that Wall Street is starting to respond. Nancy Pelosi the other day pledged that a Democratic Congress would adapt a pay as you go approach to fiscal discipline.

[Real World]

Originally Posted by Patters

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/financial..._wallstreet_dc

Five leading firms Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Bear Stearns Companies Inc.,Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch & Co. and Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. have contributed $6.2 million so far to candidates before the November elections, with about 52 percent going to Democrats.

Despite being awash in record profits, Wall Street executives, investment bankers, brokers and traders may be getting weary of Republican control, Carroll said. President George W. Bush's polling numbers are low and growing violence in Iraq also weighs heavy on Republican leadership, he said.

So now can we say that the Dems are corporate sell-outs since they're taking in the same cash the GOP has been historically ridiculed for accepting? My point is that these sleazeballs on the left and right don't care about who gives them the cash, all they care about is getting elected. Furthermore, those donating the cash are just trying to buy influence. My dad donates to candidates opposing each other in the same elections sometimes. He does it to buy some influence and good standing. Thats business I guess.

Originally Posted by Patters

"The last time the deficit was under control was under the Democrats," McGehee said.

George Bush has done more to make government bankruptcy a possibility in my lifetime than I ever could have dreamed. What will half the country do when it can't function because the fed closed? HA! I can't wait. I'm going to sit on my front stairs with a 6 pack of beer and a bag full of popcorn.

Woohoo!

[Patters]

Originally Posted by Real World

So now can we say that the Dems are corporate sell-outs since they're taking in the same cash the GOP has been historically ridiculed for accepting? My point is that these sleazeballs on the left and right don't care about who gives them the cash, all they care about is getting elected. Furthermore, those donating the cash are just trying to buy influence. My dad donates to candidates opposing each other in the same elections sometimes. He does it to buy some influence and good standing. Thats business I guess.

The Democrats have been corporate sellouts for a long time. I'm not saying it's good that the Democrats are in bed with Wall Street, but it's certainly good politics.

Originally Posted by Real World

George Bush has done more to make government bankruptcy a possibility in my lifetime than I ever could have dreamed. What will half the country do when it can't function because the fed closed? HA! I can't wait. I'm going to sit on my front stairs with a 6 pack of beer and a bag full of popcorn.

I think fiscal responsibility is an issue the Democrats want to own, and the Republicans have made a very big mistake on that front.

[Real World]

Originally Posted by Patters

The Democrats have been corporate sellouts for a long time. I'm not saying it's good that the Democrats are in bed with Wall Street, but it's certainly good politics.

Almost as good as exploiting the molestation of children.

We know how much the party sheeple on both sides sell there principles and common sense for politcal benefit. The funny part is how the two parties conspire to ensure that a thrid party never rises to significance. I've always wondered why they don't include them in national debates. To the credit of Taxachusetts, at least they allow the lesser parties a chance to express their views in an even setting. To bad the Big 2 wouldn't ever permit the same.

Originally Posted by Patters

I think fiscal responsibility is an issue the Democrats want to own, and the Republicans have made a very big mistake on that front.

I agree 1,000%. What's sad though is that the Dems, with as aweful a job as the GOP is doing, STILL have no message. It's comical. You'd think that they would have secured 95 seats in the Senate by now, instead, they are hoping to "gain ground". What a Banana Republic we live in.

Quick, someone tell me what the Democratic party stands for, or what they propose to do......


EXACTLY! Now tell me what the GOP wants to do?

Terrorism...security....terrorism.....security.... terrorism...

Terrorism and security are the Duct tape holding the GOP together. If whacky, out to left field loons like Pelosi, Dean, Kennedy, Kerry, etc...were booted from the Democratic party and replaced by sensible people, the Dems would landslide to victory. The problem is that they all have to swear alligence to the party and support each other. Sad. Had the GOP not been similarly dumb and insane, they'd have disintegrated the Dems forever. Please let us see some pissed off pols with brains break off and form a thrid party, please!

[BelichickFan]

I guarantee you Wall Street doesn't like a liberal government. This is a combination of :

- Anti spending of the Bush administration
- Wanting the gridlock that a split government causes.
- Wanting to get on the good side of the presumed new congressmen.

[Pujo]

Originally Posted by BelichickFan

I guarantee you Wall Street doesn't like a liberal government.

You're absolutely right that they don't want a fiscally liberal government (I don't think they really care either way about gay marriage). The disconnect seems to be that Wall Street no longer equates Republicans with the conservative fiscal policies they want.

[Patters]

Originally Posted by Real World

Almost as good as exploiting the molestation of children.

I would put it differently, but yes, you're right.

Originally Posted by Real World

We know how much the party sheeple on both sides sell there principles and common sense for politcal benefit. The funny part is how the two parties conspire to ensure that a thrid party never rises to significance. I've always wondered why they don't include them in national debates. To the credit of Taxachusetts, at least they allow the lesser parties a chance to express their views in an even setting. To bad the Big 2 wouldn't ever permit the same.

Yes, I was impressed with the Massachusetts debate. I can see why Healey might have liked the idea, but it's not working out that way for her. I wonder why Deval allowed a debate like that.

Originally Posted by Real World

I agree 1,000%. What's sad though is that the Dems, with as aweful a job as the GOP is doing, STILL have no message. It's comical. You'd think that they would have secured 95 seats in the Senate by now, instead, they are hoping to "gain ground". What a Banana Republic we live in.

I think it's strategic. Tip O'Neill said that all politics is local politics, and that's mostly how the Dems are running their various campaigns. While Iraq and other issues might be mentioned, the ads and speeches are mostly about local issues. I think in the next elections, the Dems will have a very clear and specific message.

Hillary has done some really interesting things. She has been very pro-veteran and in that regard even supported flag-burning legislation. She lost my vote in the primary by doing that, but she's really defining herself. Whether you like her or not, she's the one to watch to see which way the Democratic Party is going and if it has a message that can bring about the end of the Reagan era in 2008.

Originally Posted by Real World

Terrorism and security are the Duct tape holding the GOP together. If whacky, out to left field loons like Pelosi, Dean, Kennedy, Kerry, etc...were booted from the Democratic party and replaced by sensible people, the Dems would landslide to victory. The problem is that they all have to swear alligence to the party and support each other. Sad. Had the GOP not been similarly dumb and insane, they'd have disintegrated the Dems forever. Please let us see some pissed off pols with brains break off and form a thrid party, please!

The liberals have done a dreadful job spelling out their beliefs on terrorism and security. Neither you nor I know know what they believe; we just have impressions. I think there's a more constructive approach to terrorism than the one Bush is using, and the liberals need to present that as a policy paper. They need to present a comprehensive plan to fight terrorism and increase security. I don't think that will happen until the presidential election, when one of the new wave of liberals (like Feingold) runs for office.

[Real World]

Originally Posted by Pujo

You're absolutely right that they don't want a fiscally liberal government (I don't think they really care either way about gay marriage). The disconnect seems to be that Wall Street no longer equates Republicans with the conservative fiscal policies they want.

WANTED



For crimes against fiscal sanity.

[Real World]

Originally Posted by Patters

Hillary has done some really interesting things. She has been very pro-veteran and in that regard even supported flag-burning legislation. She lost my vote in the primary by doing that, but she's really defining herself. Whether you like her or not, she's the one to watch to see which way the Democratic Party is going and if it has a message that can bring about the end of the Reagan era in 2008.

Interesting, or fony? She's the biggest fraud in the market. I pray that the Dems are stupid enough to give her the nomination. She will be torn to shredds just as she deserves to be. She's a criminal & fraud. Talk about a fony, she's just moving her image away from the bleeding heart loon liberal she really is, so that stupid people accross the country, who's vote unfortunately counts the same as mine, will look at her and think she's really "swell". HA! The GOP will tear her to shreds. When she was first lady, she was off limits, but as a national candidate, the gloves are certainly coming off. If the First Lesbian (my barber's name for her, not my view, but I think it's funny) is the best the Dems can do they are in worse trouble than I thought.

Originally Posted by Patters

The liberals have done a dreadful job spelling out their beliefs on terrorism and security. Neither you nor I know know what they believe...and the liberals need to present that as a policy paper. They need to present a comprehensive plan to fight terrorism and increase security.

They do have a comprehensive plan on paper. It's right here...

[Patters]

Originally Posted by Real World

Interesting, or fony? She's the biggest fraud in the market. I pray that the Dems are stupid enough to give her the nomination. She will be torn to shredds just as she deserves to be. She's a criminal & fraud. Talk about a fony, she's just moving her image away from the bleeding heart loon liberal she really is, so that stupid people accross the country, who's vote unfortunately counts the same as mine, will look at her and think she's really "swell". HA! The GOP will tear her to shreds. When she was first lady, she was off limits, but as a national candidate, the gloves are certainly coming off. If the First Lesbian (my barber's name for her, not my view, but I think it's funny) is the best the Dems can do they are in worse trouble than I thought.

Hillary's biggest problem is that the right-wing has defined her. I don't know to what extent she can overcome that, but she's very smart. A lot of people think she's a phony, and she'll also have to overcome that. But, that's less of a problem because the basis for thinking her a phony doesn't really exist.

Originally Posted by Real World

They do have a comprehensive plan on paper. It's right here.

Now, now, your leaping to assumptions about both liberals and Muslims. You might start by looking at F.B.N.'s thread:

How do the terrorists justify terror by citing Islam?