WDYT?

Blueyed228 · February 2012

So Im watching the news, and they are talking about super pacs and the Supreme Courts decision that is coming up.

Now they are making public who has made donations. Except, all im seeing right now is who has donated to the conservative super pacs. So my question, should private donors be able to remain anonymous? And if you say no, then should that apply to all types of donations, or just political ones?

:::off to google who donated to the super pacs that supported Obama:::

chelseamb11 · February 2012

Honestly, I feel like if you make any donation anywhere, unless you specify it as anonymous, you run the risk of your name being released, even if it's as a thank you. Many donors go the anonymous route, so it's very easy to make a donation that you know won't show up publicly somewhere.

Blueyed228 · February 2012

Chels- That is my problem with it though. They were anonymous until it went before the Supreme Court. Then it all went public.

chelseamb11 · February 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_snarky-brides_wdyt-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:17Discussion:c2ba2e18-1680-471c-9a80-3a94d3746fbbPost:2fa4d513-b681-40e8-90ab-6dc05bd907f0">Re: WDYT?</a>:
[QUOTE]Chels- That is my problem with it though. They were anonymous until it went before the Supreme Court. Then it all went public.
Posted by Blueyed228[/QUOTE]

Ooooh got it. I must have read your post wrong.

Then I find that to be bullshit. If someone wants to donate money to a cause, they have a right to put strings on it (including not having your name given). It's just like we tell brides on here. If you can't accept the strings, don't accept the money. People should be able to donate money to causes without worrying about other solicitations.

SarahPLiz · February 2012

Normal non profits have to disclose their donors in Form 990, but can opt to not have that info posted on public sites. We also have to disclose name, address and compensation of all key employees but that can be hidden too I think.

Blueyed228 · February 2012

Sarah- I can understand it being known to the govt agencies that need to know for tax purposes etc, but to be given to the media? I dont like it.

What I have been seeing is the media naming these people, who they donated to, and then pointing out the most controversial things that the candidate stands for, therefore making it seem like the person who donated only believes those few ideals that are the most hot button.

Rummi302 · February 2012

The Times has been tracking this...

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/31/us/politics/super-pac-donors.html?ref=politics

Super PACs made it possible for individuals to donate more $$$ than the limits allowed by regular PACs, so I'm fine if we know where all of this money is coming from. There's lots of precedent for it, too. Donations directly to candidates over a certain dollar amount have to be reported.

Blueyed228 · February 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_snarky-brides_wdyt-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding BoardsForum:17Discussion:c2ba2e18-1680-471c-9a80-3a94d3746fbbPost:183779e3-e375-4af9-b7e0-0b84a79197be">Re: WDYT?</a>:
[QUOTE]The Times has been tracking this... <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/31/us/politics/super-pac-donors.html?ref=politics" rel="nofollow">http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/31/us/politics/super-pac-donors.html?ref=politics</a> Super PACs made it possible for individuals to donate more $$$ than the limits allowed by regular PACs,<strong><u> so I'm fine if we know where all of this money is coming from</u></strong>. There's lots of precedent for it, too. Donations directly to candidates over a certain dollar amount have to be reported.
Posted by Rummi302[/QUOTE]

Why though? Why is it our business if someone wants to donate to a political candidate, but not our business if someone wants to gift millions of dollards to a hospital or to the arts?

Rummi302 · February 2012

All campaign finance rules are an effort to reduce the role of money in elections. The 2010 ruling that allowed for Super PACs made it much more of a free for all money wise. I guess the upshot is that we know who is "buying" the election on both sides. But there hasn't been a change in reporting rules since Super PACs were created, at least to my knowledge.

My view is that there is always limits to free speech. We aren't allowed to slander non-public figures. We can't yell fire in a crowded theater. We are allowed to spend every penny backing a SPac which backs a candidate, with the catch that our name will come out. We could choose to donate to other groups, like ideological think tanks, which will keep our name a secret. It's our choice.

Blueyed228 · February 2012

I guess my point is that you used to be able to donate anonymously, and so they did, but now all of a sudden it can be made public. I dont think thats fair.

Rummi302 · February 2012

Super PACs only came into existance in 2010. They've always been governed by the FEC and disclosure rules. I really don't think anything has changed. Can you link to the news story?

Blueyed228 · February 2012

This is one of the stories I was reading.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/01/31/anonymous-super-pac-campaign-donors-to-be-revealed/

I dont have an issue with making donations to the actual election being public, since it always has been. But there are strict rules that say no interaction between campain funds and the Super Pacs. So since its basically a private organization, I dont think its our business who donates.

Rummi302 · February 2012

Yesterday was a routine filing deadline with the FEC, not a *new* mandate to disclose. Nothing has really changed since the Citizens United decision in 2010.

I think it's a fundamental difference in opinion about the role of money in politics. I want to have someone overseeing campaign spending, lobbying efforts, etc. to ensure that things are as above board as possible. If someone wants to donate to a group who wants to influence politics directly, then I think the pubilc has a right to know. Just like there's a registry of lobbyists when they have official meetings with our elected officials. And this isn't just a Dem/Rep issue - John McCain would rather Super PACs not exist at all...

Blueyed228 · February 2012

But if I want to take my own money and make a commercial that says "I hate Obama!", then I can. And if I have my own organization and someone decides to give me the money privately to make that commercial, then it should remain private.

I think it is an Dem/Rep issue because of the numbers. The GOP supporting super pacs raise FAR more money than the ones for the Dems.

I think they attract more money by it being a private donation because, lets face it, its not a popular thing in this country to be a conservative. And companies are more at risk to lose lots of business if their owners admit to being a conservative, but its not true for the reverse.

Rummi302 · February 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_snarky-brides_wdyt-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:17Discussion:c2ba2e18-1680-471c-9a80-3a94d3746fbbPost:dff7cad3-77d6-457b-9d1b-459bf9efeabf">Re: WDYT?</a>:
[QUOTE]But if I want to take my own money and make a commercial that says "I hate Obama!", then I can. And if I have my own organization and someone decides to give me the money privately to make that commercial, then it should remain private. I think it is an Dem/Rep issue because of the numbers. The GOP supporting super pacs raise FAR more money than the ones for the Dems. I think they attract more money by it being a private donation because, lets face it, its not a popular thing in this country to be a conservative. <strong>And companies are more at risk to lose lots of business if their owners admit to being a conservative, but its not true for the reverse.</strong>
Posted by Blueyed228[/QUOTE]

<div>Data or it didn't happen. America is actually a pretty conservative nation: <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2011/09/12/more-now-see-gop-as-very-conservative/" rel="nofollow">http://www.people-press.org/2011/09/12/more-now-see-gop-as-very-conservative/</a> </div><div>
</div><div>I know conservatives have gotten pretty far on the media bias whine train, but research suggests no bias exists outside of the editorial page. </div><div>
</div><div>Most Super PACs have affiliated 501c4s that are still anonymous. And there's always think tanks like Heritage or Cato. There's no lack of places for conservatives to donate their money anonymously. </div>

Blueyed228 · February 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_snarky-brides_wdyt-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding BoardsForum:17Discussion:c2ba2e18-1680-471c-9a80-3a94d3746fbbPost:51a40bca-757f-4bfa-98a8-b1cd4e2e05ac">Re: WDYT?</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: WDYT? <strong><u>: Data or it didn't happen.</u></strong> America is actually a pretty conservative nation: <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2011/09/12/more-now-see-gop-as-very-conservative/" rel="nofollow">http://www.people-press.org/2011/09/12/more-now-see-gop-as-very-conservative/</a> I know conservatives have gotten pretty far on the media bias whine train, but research suggests no bias exists outside of the editorial page. Most Super PACs have affiliated 501c4s that are still anonymous. And there's always think tanks like Heritage or Cato. There's no lack of places for conservatives to donate their money anonymously.
Posted by Rummi302[/QUOTE]

Seriously?

Companies get boycotted all the time for this stuff.

SarahPLiz · February 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_snarky-brides_wdyt-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:17Discussion:c2ba2e18-1680-471c-9a80-3a94d3746fbbPost:0942abf0-8a2c-4a2f-bb64-f88dccaa0a7d">Re: WDYT?</a>:
[QUOTE]Sarah- I can understand it being known to the govt agencies that need to know for tax purposes etc, but to be given to the media? I dont like it. What I have been seeing is the media naming these people, who they donated to, and then pointing out the most controversial things that the candidate stands for, therefore making it seem like the person who donated only believes those few ideals that are the most hot button.
Posted by Blueyed228[/QUOTE]
Oh, I get it. I don't think it is right either, but in the cases of non-profits (not SuperPacs, as they are not tax deductible contributions as far as I know), the government has to know in order to determine if the charity has enough "public support" to maintain its exemption status. Basically you have to disclose it so the govt can see if there is any private inurement going on (tax shelters). <div>
</div><div>The rule, at least for form 990, is that they HAVE to list a name if the harity knows who gave the donation, even if the donor wishes to remain anonymous. Most charities will put the charity address instead of the donor's home address so they can avoid some solicitation as well, if the info gets out.</div><div>
</div><div>I think all the detail is just in the interest of transparency. I like transparency. I love seeing that several branches of the armed forces are the highest donors to Ron Paul. </div>

Rummi302 · February 2012

And JC Penney got boycotted for having a (gasp) gay spokeswoman. Idiotic boycotts happen all of the time. I don't see Koch Industries going out of business because of a bunch of liberal hippies are pissed at their contributions.

Individuals are much less likely to say they're liberal in this country. "Liberal" is the dirty word, not conservative. Refer to that Pew link if you think that's untrue.

cheeseandrice · February 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_snarky-brides_wdyt-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:17Discussion:c2ba2e18-1680-471c-9a80-3a94d3746fbbPost:4eff16da-6343-45f7-baf6-90e36c161398">Re: WDYT?</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: WDYT? : Seriously? Companies get boycotted all the time for this stuff.
Posted by Blueyed228[/QUOTE]

<div>I can think of a huge one here. Target got massively boycotted when they donated money to the MN Republican Gov candidate (because of his economic stances.) Boycotted because he was Republican and admittedly against gay marraige. EVEN THOUGH Target donates more money and does more community-related GLBTA stuff than any other company i know. </div>

cheeseandrice · February 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_snarky-brides_wdyt-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:17Discussion:c2ba2e18-1680-471c-9a80-3a94d3746fbbPost:94ab72d6-e7dc-4988-9450-24de4571a96c">Re: WDYT?</a>:
[QUOTE]And JC Penney got boycotted for having a (gasp) gay spokeswoman. Idiotic boycotts happen all of the time. I don't see Koch Industries going out of business because of a bunch of liberal hippies are pissed at their contributions. <strong>Individuals are much less likely to say they're liberal in this country. "Liberal" is the dirty word, not conservative.</strong> Refer to that Pew link if you think that's untrue.
Posted by Rummi302[/QUOTE]

<div>Oh, please. Seriously!?</div>

SarahPLiz · February 2012

On the other hand, if you care enough about ruining Obama to pay for a TV ad, then why wouldn't you stand up and say it was you. Why hide? Donate to organizations that represent your beliefs, with tactics you approve of, and there is no issue.

Rummi302 · February 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_snarky-brides_wdyt-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:17Discussion:c2ba2e18-1680-471c-9a80-3a94d3746fbbPost:421dc945-bc05-4914-8c2e-584129e88cd9">Re: WDYT?</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: WDYT? : Oh, please. Seriously!?
Posted by Steph+J[/QUOTE]

<div>Actually, yes. 19% of all Americans identify as liberal, 38% as moderate and 41% as conservative. <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2011/09/12/more-now-see-gop-as-very-conservative/" rel="nofollow">http://www.people-press.org/2011/09/12/more-now-see-gop-as-very-conservative/</a></div><div>
</div><div>There's no voodoo in these numbers. It's been this way for years.</div>

Blueyed228 · February 2012

Rummi- your link doesnt make sense to me. The one from Pew.

Its a fact that there are way more registered Democrats in this country than there are Republicans. And the large number of Independants tend to VOTE Democrat. So it doesnt matter if some of them lean a little conservative on certain things, the fact is that they vote liberal.

cheeseandrice · February 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_snarky-brides_wdyt-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:17Discussion:c2ba2e18-1680-471c-9a80-3a94d3746fbbPost:94ab72d6-e7dc-4988-9450-24de4571a96c">Re: WDYT?</a>:
[QUOTE]And JC Penney got boycotted for having a (gasp) gay spokeswoman. Idiotic boycotts happen all of the time.
Posted by Rummi302[/QUOTE]

<div>It was a fake boycott of like less than 1000 people. (Even the "Million Moms Strong" group admitted they had less than that who actually signed their petition or whatever.) Meanwhile, the counter argument, in support of JCPenney's got well over 100,000 people on fb in the first like week.</div><div>
</div><div>Nice try, though. Can you find any real examples of companies being boycotted for being liberal?</div>

Blueyed228 · February 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_snarky-brides_wdyt-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding BoardsForum:17Discussion:c2ba2e18-1680-471c-9a80-3a94d3746fbbPost:38d52642-40c9-487b-9a70-d5d3af84c84d">Re: WDYT?</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: WDYT? : Actually, yes. 19% of all Americans identify as liberal, 38% as moderate and 41% as conservative. <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2011/09/12/more-now-see-gop-as-very-conservative/" rel="nofollow">http://www.people-press.org/2011/09/12/more-now-see-gop-as-very-conservative/</a> There's no voodoo in these numbers. It's been this way for years.
Posted by Rummi302[/QUOTE]

Thats just false.

SarahPLiz · February 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_snarky-brides_wdyt-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:17Discussion:c2ba2e18-1680-471c-9a80-3a94d3746fbbPost:421dc945-bc05-4914-8c2e-584129e88cd9">Re: WDYT?</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: WDYT? : Oh, please. Seriously!?
Posted by Steph+J[/QUOTE]
It is amongst my crowd. Where I'm from, liberal is a dirty word. You might as well be screwing your sister. <div>
</div><div>Austin is different. It is in the only liberal county in the state. And Texas is big. Liberal is a horrible thing to be outside of Travis county. </div>

cheeseandrice · February 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_snarky-brides_wdyt-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:17Discussion:c2ba2e18-1680-471c-9a80-3a94d3746fbbPost:38d52642-40c9-487b-9a70-d5d3af84c84d">Re: WDYT?</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: WDYT? : Actually, yes. 19% of all Americans identify as liberal, 38% as moderate and 41% as conservative. <a href="http://www.people-press.org/2011/09/12/more-now-see-gop-as-very-conservative/" rel="nofollow">http://www.people-press.org/2011/09/12/more-now-see-gop-as-very-conservative/</a> There's no voodoo in these numbers. It's been this way for years.
Posted by Rummi302[/QUOTE]

<div>I'd be willing to bet that most of that 38% VOTE liberal though. Especially if people see the GOP as "very conservative" then even some of those who identify as conservative could still swing Democrat.</div><div>
</div><div>Even so, that doesnt' meant that 'liberal' is a dirty word. I mean, unless you're going to be on of the OWS idiots who are tarnishing the word 'liberal'. </div>

Blueyed228 · February 2012

If liberal was the dirty word, then why would so many celebrities risk their careers coming out to help raise 1 BILLION dollars for Obama? Why would they do walks and protests like OWS, and the Prop 8 protests?

Rummi302 · February 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_snarky-brides_wdyt-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:17Discussion:c2ba2e18-1680-471c-9a80-3a94d3746fbbPost:22944eb3-74b9-43af-b9bd-f7dc3046fa08">Re: WDYT?</a>:
[QUOTE]Rummi- <strong>your link doesnt make sense to me</strong>. The one from Pew. Its a fact that there are way more registered Democrats in this country than there are Republicans. And the large number of Independants tend to VOTE Democrat. So it doesnt matter if some of them lean a little conservative on certain things, the fact is that they vote liberal.
Posted by Blueyed228[/QUOTE]

<div>The best place to look is the "How Partisans See Themselves" table. You then want to look at the column labelled "Total". The figure above is cool, but it is a bit more confusing. This data says that people see themselves as moderate or conservative.</div><div>
</div><div>As for the actual voting - we've only had 2 Democratic presidents in the last 3 decades. Democrats are barely holding the Senate. Republicans are hardly in bad shape here.</div><div>
</div><div>As for the boycotts - I want to see the businesses that have gone out of business. Wasn't the claim that Republican businesses are going out of business completely?</div>

cheeseandrice · February 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_snarky-brides_wdyt-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:17Discussion:c2ba2e18-1680-471c-9a80-3a94d3746fbbPost:73c4258e-1fd2-4423-84e6-996bfc149f4c">Re: WDYT?</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: WDYT? : It is amongst my crowd. Where I'm from, liberal is a dirty word. You might as well be screwing your sister. Austin is different. It is in the only liberal county in the state. And Texas is big. Liberal is a horrible thing to be outside of Travis county.
Posted by SarahPLiz[/QUOTE]

<div>Well, you ARE from the state that voted in Rick Perry, so you know. ;)</div><div>
</div><div>Up here, I would probably get scorned at work if people knew I was Republican. It's totally ok to hear all sorts of bullshit lies about how awful Republicans are and how they're going to RUIN EVERYTHING. (yes, even by supervisors, having these conversations with employees right before elections.)</div><div>
</div><div>It's obviously a regional thing, though, but here in MN? it's far 'dirtier' to be a conservative. (I mean, not like Bachmann helps that cause or anything.)</div>

Rummi302 · February 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_snarky-brides_wdyt-5?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:17Discussion:c2ba2e18-1680-471c-9a80-3a94d3746fbbPost:15049483-7adc-469f-9d2a-0f80db096de8">Re: WDYT?</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: WDYT? : Thats just false.
Posted by Blueyed228[/QUOTE]

<div>On what basis is it false. Statistical sampling is pretty accurate these days. Pew has a decent reputation. The question asked is the same one that's been used for decades. I don't understand why you think this data is wrong.</div>

WDYT?

Re: WDYT?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards