I Don't Get It

I hope y’all can help me with this one. The photo up top is from DailyKos, and it popped up on Facebook last night. It suggests that Ted Cruz’ support from the fossil fuel industry implies that he wouldn’t represent us if elected.

Fair enough.

But a quick check of OpenSecrets.org shows that Hillary has way more outside money than any other candidate. She has raised $57 million in outside money to $46 million for Cruz and a whopping $45,000 for Bernie.


And no matter what industry you look at, she’s in the lead. Money from lobbyists, for example. She has raised more money from lobbyists than Bush, Rubio, Christie, Kasich, and Cruz combined.

Looks the same with donations from people in the hedge fund industry:

We also know that, as of December:

Ninety-eight percent of the money raised by Priorities USA Action came from donors giving $100,000 or more; 90 percent came from donors giving at least $1 million.

And, compared to Ted Cruz, we know that much more than 15% of the Clintons’ personal wealth comes from corporate interests, in the form of speaking fees. $153 million worth.

I’ve posted her list of fundraising events with the financial sector, and people demand proof that she’s traded votes for cash, which is silly. That’s the whole problem: none of this is illegal.

That’s why we know that her “artful smear” comment was pure theater. No one is suggesting that she is being given money to change her positions. It’s quite clear, if you look at her voting record and platform, that she is given money because she already takes positions that these industries like.

So I want to ask a sincere, 100% snark-free question: Who do you think she represents? Do you think she represents you? And why does one standard apply to Ted Cruz and another for Hillary?


Mr. Moulitsas, Tear Down This Wall :)