Quote:
Originally posted by DivaDown
|
This is literally one poll, and I'd like to draw your attention to this:
Quote:
|
According to the latest Rasmussen poll, 15 percent of respondents would prefer some other candidate and 5 percent were undecided.
|
This obviously includes a large number of people who support either Bernie or Cruz who will switch over before the general, largely to Hillary and thus erasing this slim within-the-margin-of-error lead. Of those who choose between Hillary and Trump in the general, who will likely comprise 90% or more of all votes cast, she will have the lead as nearly all polls to date demonstrate. This is not viable support for the Bernie or Bust movement.
Quote:
Originally posted by BlueTimberwolf
Let's Correct the Record:
1. Only about $5 million of the $60 million raised went to the DNC. Don't know where you're getting your numbers from.
2. Hilary is only supposed to be getting $2700 per contributor. She is abusing the fund to double dip and collect more money from individual donors. A lot is not supposed be "obviously" going to her, there are limits in place. 2/3 is not supposed to be going to her, under the law it is a separate fund.
|
Quote:
Originally posted by BlueTimberwolf
Also it being "early" means nothing when the DNC is forcing them to give the money back that has already been distributed.
|
Sorry, it was about a sixth that has gone to the DNC (don't forget the $3.3m that was transferred from the state parties to them, NOT back to the HVF). The other sixth is still with the HVF waiting for distribution to the state parties (original
Politico article: "there is an additional $9 million on hand that will be distributed over the coming months as state parties ramp up for the general election").
Additionally, your #2? That's kind of
literally the point of the fund. This fund is specifically built to allow large contributions to Hillary and to the state parties. And yes, quite a lot is specifically supposed to be benefiting her; additionally, I'd like you to cite some sort of limit regarding what is supposed to benefit her campaign in particular from this fund, because that limit does not actually seem to exist within the extent of the applicable laws. Additionally, I'm sure that you can't be talking much about individual donations, because the original article can again be cited talking about this and explaining why you're simply wrong regarding the $2,700 limit:
Quote:
Until 2014, the most an individual could have given to such a committee was $123,200. But in April of that year, the Supreme Court, in a case called McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, struck down aggregate limits on total giving to federal campaigns, allowing maximum donations to as many different committees as a donor wanted.
That paved the way for massive joint fundraising committees that could accept ever-larger checks based on the number and type of committees that agreed to participate. In the case of the Hillary Victory Fund, the maximum donation in 2016 is $356,100, based on maximum donations of $2,700 to Hillary for America for the primary election, $33,400 to the DNC and $10,000 to the federal accounts of each of the 32 state parties.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...#ixzz47Xm4RYwc
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook
|
And let's continue to remember that this is primarily for the
Hillary Victory Fund, which - as we have established - has or will distribute approximately a third of its funds to the state parties and the DNC, and which had distributed just a quarter of its funds to Hillary's campaign directly.
Hillary will probably have a landslide win with the popular vote, but not as big.
Lots of registered Democrats don't vote 
