Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Bread and Circus

(9,454 posts)
Sat Apr 2, 2016, 03:15 PM Apr 2016

How Hillary Clinton Bought the Loyalty of 33 State Democratic Parties

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/04/01/how-hillary-clinton-bought-the-loyalty-of-33-state-democratic-parties/

April 1, 2016

How Hillary Clinton Bought the Loyalty of 33 State Democratic Parties

Collusion between the Clinton campaign and the DNC allowed Hillary Clinton to buy the loyalty of 33 state Democratic parties last summer. Montana was one of those states. It sold itself for $64,100.

The Super Delegates now defying democracy with their insistent refusal to change their votes to Sanders in spite of a handful of overwhelming Clinton primary losses in their own states, were arguably part of that deal.

In August 2015, at the Democratic Party convention in Minneapolis, 33 democratic state parties made deals with the Hillary Clinton campaign and a joint fundraising entity called The Hillary Victory Fund. The deal allowed many of her core billionaire and inner circle individual donors to run the maximum amounts of money allowed through those state parties to the Hillary Victory Fund in New York and the DNC in Washington.
18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
How Hillary Clinton Bought the Loyalty of 33 State Democratic Parties (Original Post) Bread and Circus Apr 2016 OP
And, they wonder why Bernie doesn't give money to "downticket Dems"...who will work for Hillary. Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2016 #1
Awkwardly for your point, Sanders does have these agreements mythology Apr 2016 #12
Kick Backs noretreatnosurrender Apr 2016 #2
It does sort of a resemble a ponzi scheme, no? Bread and Circus Apr 2016 #4
This message was self-deleted by its author highprincipleswork Apr 2016 #3
Kick azmom Apr 2016 #5
When you read the article... it is literally buying an election. Bread and Circus Apr 2016 #6
I never had a doubt she was buying them. azmom Apr 2016 #8
Wow, the near unanymous endorsements now makes sense. Bread and Circus Apr 2016 #9
Yes. jwirr Apr 2016 #18
EXACTLY! BOUGHT AND PAID FOE EVERY STEP OF THE WAY! EVERYTHING Bernie's Against! CorporatistNation Apr 2016 #10
So you would say that a candidate who signs such an agreement is buying an election mythology Apr 2016 #14
I first read this April 2 and had to go to the MN convention jwirr Apr 2016 #17
+1 quantumjunkie Apr 2016 #7
+2 Bread and Circus Apr 2016 #11
My thoughts on the Clintonites... GeorgiaPeanuts Apr 2016 #13
what are the HIllarian defenses of this -- still waiting for them? stupidicus Apr 2016 #15
Me too. Bread and Circus Apr 2016 #16
 

mythology

(9,527 posts)
12. Awkwardly for your point, Sanders does have these agreements
Sun Apr 3, 2016, 07:35 PM
Apr 2016
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/bernie-sanders-2016-fundraising-dnc-215559

Being an independent and not party of the party for many years means Sanders doesn't have deep ties with the Democratic party donors, but he did voluntarily sign the same agreements that his supporters here are slamming Clinton for doing.

noretreatnosurrender

(1,890 posts)
2. Kick Backs
Sat Apr 2, 2016, 03:30 PM
Apr 2016
By November 2015, 22 of the state parties linked to the Hillary Victory Fund have received $938,500 from the fund and sent the same amount back to the DNC. There is no limit to amounts of money transferred between state and national parties and PACS or Funds.

(Obama had a similar fund in 2008, but not until he had already won enough delegates to be sure he would be the nominee.)

The Democratic spokespeople for the17 states that refused to go along with the Clinton campaign’s plan, even though many of them were as broke as the Montana State Democratic Party was (Nebraska springs to mind), were clear that it seemed less than democratic to be choosing sides in a primary that hadn’t happened yet. That the very purpose of a primary was to let the people choose which candidate they wanted to represent them and to not let the party establishment load the dice in their own favour. They made it obvious that they were choosing democracy over kick-backs.

Response to Bread and Circus (Original post)

Bread and Circus

(9,454 posts)
6. When you read the article... it is literally buying an election.
Sat Apr 2, 2016, 05:28 PM
Apr 2016

And I am supposed to vote for this in November?

azmom

(5,208 posts)
8. I never had a doubt she was buying them.
Sat Apr 2, 2016, 05:35 PM
Apr 2016

It's what the Clinton's have always done.

As I recall one of the comments that Rep. Tulsi Gabbard made when she announced she was backing Sanders was that her vote was not for sale.

CorporatistNation

(2,546 posts)
10. EXACTLY! BOUGHT AND PAID FOE EVERY STEP OF THE WAY! EVERYTHING Bernie's Against!
Sat Apr 2, 2016, 05:41 PM
Apr 2016
THIS is why the opponent needs to be portrayed as the biggest ogre in world history!

Here We Go...
&list=RDUcGrzbxRaxs&index=1





 

mythology

(9,527 posts)
14. So you would say that a candidate who signs such an agreement is buying an election
Sun Apr 3, 2016, 07:37 PM
Apr 2016

I guess you can't vote for Sanders either then as he's signed the same agreements. Really, please do some actual research before you post horribly unsourced biased articles. This has been posted and had holes poked through it repeatedly.

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
17. I first read this April 2 and had to go to the MN convention
Mon Apr 4, 2016, 06:38 PM
Apr 2016

on April 3. I was hoping some of the younger voters would be there so I could take the story to them. The one I waited for did not show up so I sat there watching the party leaders (county level) run the party.

And as I sat there I kept wondering if they knew what the top party leaders had done. And thinking about my 5 super-delegates who were sold out by those same leaders. I watched how smoothly the county convention ran and wondered if it was all for nothing.

 

GeorgiaPeanuts

(2,353 posts)
13. My thoughts on the Clintonites...
Sun Apr 3, 2016, 07:35 PM
Apr 2016

The Clintons aren't just normal politicians anymore. They are often the kind of politicians that are called "super predators". No conscience, no empathy, we can talk about how they ended up that way, but first we have to bring them to heel. Time to make them feel the Bern in their third way behinds!

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»How Hillary Clinton Bough...