This is a reversal of her previous decision.
Edit: chirt points out that she still hasn't reversed course on taking big donations during the GE altogether. So this is progress but still not all the way there.
Last edited:
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Elizabeth Warren Will Forego Big Money Events If Nominated, She Announces
- Thread starter Deleted member 4346
- Start date
This is a reversal of her previous decision.
Edit: chirt points out that she still hasn't reversed course on taking big donations during the GE altogether. So this is progress but still not all the way there.
It's the right call, imo.
Her and Bernie's totals in the primary so far have showcased that small donations can sustain a campaign. Now, I hope there is still a larger-dollar effort for down-ballot races because I don't think there is enough money to go around for helping the smaller, local elections. Maybe I'm wrong though.
Her and Bernie's totals in the primary so far have showcased that small donations can sustain a campaign. Now, I hope there is still a larger-dollar effort for down-ballot races because I don't think there is enough money to go around for helping the smaller, local elections. Maybe I'm wrong though.
glad she was open to reversing this decision
it'll make it even easier than it already was to vote for her in the primary
it'll make it even easier than it already was to vote for her in the primary
This is a great decision. This shows that she actually cares about the people of the country as a whole, not just to the people with deep pockets. Love it!
OP
OP
Presumably yes, but maybe we can continue to pressure her from the left on this. She's signaling some progress here.
Mistake I think
Small money can't beat big money
Only way this works is if Bernie's donor hop ship now instead of waiting for the inevitable.
Small money can't beat big money
Only way this works is if Bernie's donor hop ship now instead of waiting for the inevitable.
holy shit it was a genuine bit of criticism and she took it on board
It's a good step to be sure. She's firmly my #2 so I'm happy to see this sort of progress.
She says this now but I am not sure this is a pledge that will or even can hold up in the general.
I mean... Do you think that money has power to influence?
Before she was saying she was open to being influenced in the general election.
This is a fantastic move.
Ah yes, Elizabeth Warren, well known for selling out the first moment she can to large financial interests.
Someone did point out that Trump beat Hillary even though spending was 2 to 1 sooo
who knows how the cards will fall. Do we rely on precedent and conventional wisdom going forward?
I am almost more concerned about the propaganda machines being implemented by foreign powers, troll farms, information warfare firms, facebook etc...
If she gets the nomination, I hope she can win doing that. Those small donations need to pick up the slack then too. She's going up against a propaganda machine with near unlimited money and resources. Not sure if a principle like this is critical before you've actually won.
We'll see.... I'd be like "I'll take whatever money you send, big or small, but know I'll only fight for what's best for all Americans. Not what your company wants." Then at least every big donor can donate or not knowing that.
We'll see.... I'd be like "I'll take whatever money you send, big or small, but know I'll only fight for what's best for all Americans. Not what your company wants." Then at least every big donor can donate or not knowing that.
Which is exactly why her previous position of leaving it open didn't make sense.
Thank you.
Sarcasm's hard for you, huh. No, what doesn't make sense is the "of course anyone soliciting large campaign donations will be corrupted by money" stuff. It's like complaining you can't have alcohol present because no one can avoid getting drunk.
Hey Kirblar. There's no need to be rude. I absolutely understood you were being glib. :)
I think a more apt analogy is that someone trying to stay sober shouldn't be accepting alcohol as gifts. I think it would be fair for people invested in that person's sobriety to be concerned.
I was saying that money has the power to influence which is not a foreign concept. I'm not saying she necessarily was being influenced but Warren's previous policy of being willing to accept those money in the general election was a concern in many people's minds. Her new policy removes a lot of doubt which is fantastic.
Trump is a unique case. He had constant media attention so his lack of dollars didn't matter as much. On the flip side, all the bad shit he has done might mean Warren doesn't need to spend as much to beat him if it were a generic Republican.
I love the distinction you are making between "corrupt money" lol
As if candidates aren't influenced by big money donors.
There is no shady guy handing a duffle bag of money out for one vote.
This mentality is why corruption is so easy in Washington. You make it easy.
Warren will be the nominee and she will win. The only concern hanging around her is her proximity to Pelosi and the Democratic establishment, and how easily they could rope her in like they did Obama.
It's not just ad spending. They build up staff in various locations in every state. Lotta people to pay.
Why on earth would Elizabeth Warren be a "person struggling to stay sober" here? It makes absolutely no sense- there's nothing in her history suggesting this would be an issue. You then go on to argue the problem was "perception", which again, is not on her, its on you and others projecting behavior onto her.
The "not avoiding them for downballot donations" part is good, crowdfunding campaigns is absolutely not a viable solution for most downballot candidates and especially not for party organizations. OFA was a goddamn disaster post-'08 because without an election + charismatic candidate, that type of fundraising falls off a cliff.