r/conspiracy: Don't think both political parties are the same? In 2014, the largest superpacs pumped hundreds of millions into the campaign coffers of candidates from both parties. Most rank and file politicians in both parties are bought and paid for by the same wealthy people. Our system is rigged.

Don't think both political parties are the same? In 2014, the largest superpacs pumped hundreds of millions into the campaign coffers of candidates from both parties. Most rank and file politicians in both parties are bought and paid for by the same wealthy people. Our system is rigged.

81 2015-11-21 by relevantlife

In 2014, the National Beer Wholesalers association PAC gave 1.2 million to House Democrats and 1.6 million to House Republicans. They also contributed 157k to Senate Democrats and 201k to Senate Republicans.

In 2014, Honeywell International PAC contributed 1.2 million to House Democrats and 1.4 million to House Republicans. They also contributed 122k to Senate Democrats and 195k to Senate Republicans.

In 2014, the National Auto Dealers Association PAC contributed 738k to House Democrats and 1.7 million to House Republicans. They also contributed 70k to Senate Democrats and 215k to Senate Republicans.

In 2014, Lockheed Martin PAC contributed 938k to House Democrats and 1.3 million to House Republicans. They also contributed 173k to Senate Democrats and 168k to Senate Republicans.

In 2014, the American Bankers Association PAC contributed 515k to House Democrats and 1.6 million to House Republicans. They also gave 69k to Senate Democrats and 172k to Senate Republicans.

In 2014, AT&T PAC contributed 897k to House Democrats and 1.2 million to House Republicans. They also gave 108k to Senate Democrats and 220k to Senate Republicans.

In 2014, the Operating Engineers Union PAC contributed 1.5 million to House Democrats and 427k to House Republicans. They also gave 132k to Senate Democrats and 7.5k to Senate Republicans.

In 2014, the Credit Union National Association PAC contributed 1 million to House Democrats and 1 million to House Republicans. They also gave 130k to Senate Democrats and 161k to Senate Republicans.

In 2014, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers contributed 2 million to House Democrats and 58k to House Republicans. They also gave 230k to Senate Democrats and $250 (HAHA) to Senate Republicans.

Do you think these PACs are giving to both parties because they're just so moderate or do you think it's because they are buying representation? I tend to think it's the latter.

10 comments

9 pilgrimboy 2015-11-21

When the media uses the words "moderate" or "centrist" to describe a candidate, it typically means corporate-owned.

1 RealRepub 2015-11-21

Dens have sanders and Warren. OP needs a GED.

5 btcfun 2015-11-21

This comment has been overwritten by an open source script to protect this user's privacy.

2 Warphead 2015-11-21

They are both horribly corrupt and do not represent any of the ideals they are expected to, but they are vile in different ways.

Both are selling off the country to the highest bidders, neither have a shred of actual patriotism, neither represent anything I care about in any meaningful way.

Democrats accomplish little, but modern Republicans actively cause damage, that's the difference to me. Republican policies are so crazy they fight over what kind of crazy to be.

1 DoctorXX 2015-11-21

At the end of the day, they're doing this to influence people to vote for a certain candidate. If we ignore all the BS and choose a candidate that does not do their bidding we can effectively have all this circulating money these PACs invest into candidates become obsolete.

1 newthrowawayhouse 2015-11-21

They could be funding both sides to increase the likelihood of their preferred candidate winning. For example, in the current election I know some people donating to Sander's so he has a better chance at winning the nomination because they think (know) he's much easier for the Republicans to beat than Hillary

1 SleazySnake 2015-11-21

its called cognitive dissonance

1 NotEvenJoking213 2015-11-21

Not really, this actually seems like a well-thought out plan.

If they believe Sander's is going to lose against Hillary, and he's the weakest nomination (in their eyes), then giving him money to become the opposing parties' nomination is pretty smart. They think by doing this Hillary will have an easier time winning, versus another candidate that Hillary would either struggle with, or has more support.

1 luckinator 2015-11-21

Most of the money given to American politicians -- the big money, I'm talking about -- is controlled by Jews. Unless you are willing to say the word "Jews" in this context, you can't talk about the corruption of American politics with any depth or discernment.

0 KendleC 2015-11-21

TAX them until they can't afford to pay bribes and manipulate candidates ever again. The amounts they're paying are literally saying, "Here we can afford this." Better yet triple tax in the amount of the contributions.