after all that, bernie took money from the oil industry ??

[washamericom]

oh i see he just took less.

The total for Clinton’s campaign is about $308,000; for Sanders’s, it’s about $54,000. As Clinton noted in the moment, the Center for Responsive Politics mostly aggregates contributions by employer.

Money from Big Oil isn't always what it appears to be

sometimes i don't know.

and aren't they in bed with the unions.

Fourteen of America's 25 Biggest Campaign Donors Are Unions

Labor | OpenSecrets
https://www.opensecrets.org/.../indus.php?i...
Center for Responsive Politics
In 2012, only 11.3 percent of workers belonged to unions compared to 20.1 ... couple of election cycles have seen increased campaign contributions by the labor ...
Fourteen of America's 25 Biggest Campaign Donors Are ...
www.nationalreview.com/.../fourteen-americas-25-bigge...
National Review
Mar 5, 2014 - Public- and private-sector unions contributed 55.6 percent — $552 million ... Large campaign contributions from any group are fair grounds for ...
Political Spending by Unions Far Exceeds Direct Donations ...
www.wsj.com/.../SB1000142405270230478240...
The Wall Street Journal
Jul 10, 2012 - About 54% of the political spending that unions report to the Labor Department consists of campaign donations to state and local candidates ...
Koch Brothers Are Outspent By A Labor Force Millions Of ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../kochs-brothers-labor_n...
The Huffington Post
Mar 15, 2014 - The labor total comes from disclosure reports unions are required to file with the Department of Labor, along with data on political contributions ...
Union Facts | Use of Dues for Politics
https://www.unionfacts.com/article/political-money/
In 1996, Rutgers economics professor Leo Troy estimated that union political ... Politics, eight of the top ten all-time political contributors are labor unions.

 

[Rustic]

oh i see he just took less.

The total for Clinton’s campaign is about $308,000; for Sanders’s, it’s about $54,000. As Clinton noted in the moment, the Center for Responsive Politics mostly aggregates contributions by employer.

sometimes i don't know.

and aren't they in bed with the unions.

Of course career politicians are going to take any type of money they can… lol

 

[Snouter]

Those welfare douchebags who support Bernie are obviously not donating so someone has to. LOL

 

[washamericom]

Those welfare douchebags who support Bernie are obviously not donating so someone has to. LOL

they are oblivious to union agenda. do unions support republicans ever ?


Political campaigns depend on free speech and association. Sadly, this election cycle is providing further evidence that the First Amendment rights of hundreds of thousands of teachers and other public employees are being trampled upon by powerful, highly partisan and deceptive unions.

(Disclaimer: The Center for Individual Rights is a public interest law firm representing Rebecca Friedrichs and her co-plaintiffs in Friedrichs vs. California Teachers Association.)

Unions have come armed to the financial teeth this election cycle to aid their Democratic friends and causes. In California, the California Teachers Association (CTA) is pulling out all the money stops to try and defeat reformer Marshall Tuck in the race for Superintendent of Public Instruction, which could turn out to be the most expensive race in the Golden State this year. Nationally, the National Education Association (NEA) expects to spend $40 million to influence the outcome of state and local elections.

The unions’ financial support of Democrats is not new or unusual. What is news though is the extent to which unions have gone to hide the aggressively partisan nature of their expenditures.

For example, a good chunk of the $40 million the NEA expects to spend—$12.6 million so far—is reportedly utilized by the union’s “Super PAC” called the NEA Advocacy Fund. As union observer Mike Antonucci points out, because these independent campaign committees do not coordinate with individual candidates, the union takes the position that it can use ordinary dues to fund its Super PACs rather than having to raise funds through voluntary donations, as is the case with the union’s regular PACs. Though agency fee payers can apply for a refund, they have to wait until next year to see the money.


The Super PAC gambit is just one of many ways teachers unions are hiding this year’s political expenditures behind a spider’s web of rules. As Jason Hart notes, the American Federation of Teachers—the NEA’s main competitor—made contributions to dozens of left-leaning organizations this year. They include: $75,000 to the Human Rights Campaign (national group working for “working for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights”); $50,000 to the Center for American Progress (progressive think tank led by former Clinton and Obama aides); and $25,000 each to Jesse Jackson’s “Rainbow Push Coalition” and Al Sharpton’s “National Action Network.”

Hart observes that none of the $2.3 million in contributions to these and other similar groups were listed as political or lobbying expenses and reported to the Department of Labor as such. Instead they were classed as “contributions, gifts, and grants,” apparently to minimize the union’s reported total of political expenses. Teachers have a difficult time knowing what political contributions their dues are supporting since the union is anything but transparent about what they are.

Big Political Spending By Unions--Paid With Dues


bernie is just a flippin hypocrit to suggest that he takes no superpac or special interest money