Discussion
  • Read More
    ReburnsABurningReturnsHamilton Nolan
    7/29/16 10:57am

    So you’re just going to drop these two numbers without supplying any sort of thought as to why hedge funders are not donating to Donald Trump, who is running with a party that has both no interest in raising taxes and no interest in beefing up financial regulation, both things that Hillary has consistently stood in support of during and preceding the election cycle?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      RobertMadooReburnsABurningReturns
      7/29/16 10:58am

      Because they think they’ll get a better return with Clinton?

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      pre-emptive sighReburnsABurningReturns
      7/29/16 10:59am

      Because uncertainty is bad for investors and if nothing else Trump represents uncertainty. Also Trump has been very explicitly anti-free trade, something global investors aren’t gonna be too psyched about.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    butcherbakertoiletrymakerHamilton Nolan
    7/29/16 10:59am

    The DNC in general, and Hillary supporters in particular, are like an abusive SO who screams at their partner between beatings: “you can’t have anyone better because you don’t deserve anyone better!”

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      SubwayJusticebutcherbakertoiletrymaker
      7/29/16 11:02am

      Well I mean that would seem to be true for the nation as a whole. Although I would argue that Hillary is good, but whatever.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      The Alvin Greene Dreambutcherbakertoiletrymaker
      7/29/16 11:05am

      The dissolution of the Republican right into batshit-mania gives the Democrats (who are happy to continue drinking the GOP’s milkshake) all the room they need to hold progressives hostage. And the right isn’t going to get (materially) any better after Trump. It will be Tom Cotton, or whatever other wackadoo after that. And the left will continue to be told that you either support more neoliberal bullshit, or you wreak that upon the world.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    ZukkaHamilton Nolan
    7/29/16 10:57am

    How can we, as a nation, extricate ourselves from the corporate-backed two party system?

    P.s. not being sarcastic

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      ReallyBoredAtWorkZukka
      7/29/16 10:58am

      We could start by not nominating a Clinton.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      reboundstudentZukka
      7/29/16 10:58am

      By voting local and in midterm elections! Tada!

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    KumichoHamilton Nolan
    7/29/16 10:57am

    If my house is on fire, I’m not going to question the motive of the firemen putting it out...

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      ReallyBoredAtWorkKumicho
      7/29/16 10:57am

      If my house is on fire, I wouldn’t call the arsonist for help.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      The Alvin Greene DreamKumicho
      7/29/16 10:59am

      Exactly the position the current Democratic establishment wants you to be in.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    KyuzoHamilton Nolan
    7/29/16 11:07am

    Hillary is a competent government leader and Trump is a goofy reality show celebrity.

    That explains the disparity in donations...they think she’s the better candidate. Not everything is a conspiracy.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Hillary_was_behind_9/11Kyuzo
      7/29/16 11:16am

      You’re a fucking moron.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Gawquera de Tokers TownHillary_was_behind_9/11
      7/29/16 11:20am

      Pantsuits can’t melt steel beams.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    stuckinthegreyswithyouHamilton Nolan
    7/29/16 11:03am
    .
    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Gamblor JDstuckinthegreyswithyou
      7/29/16 1:23pm

      She also said she will work to overturn Citizens United and we all know she has no interest in doing that. Talk is cheap as fuck; Hillary the candidate is not.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      HighLikeAnEagleGamblor JD
      7/29/16 1:32pm

      How do we know that she has no interest in doing that? What do you know that I do not?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    BleedingFromHerWhereverHamilton Nolan
    7/29/16 11:07am

    “It will be interesting to see how high the taxes on the rich get raised in the next four years.”

    Many wealthy people, when faced with a choice of marginally higher taxes or batshit crazy man who wants to bankrupt America’s economy through trade wars and immigration crackdowns, will choose marginally higher taxes. You mean like all the money she got in 2000 and 2006 in her Senate run despite voting repeatedly against the Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthy? Her husband also raised a lot of money in ‘92 from the financial industry (not as much as his wife) and promptly raised taxes on the wealthy in his FIRST budget. Obama raised tons of money from the financial industry and the rich in 2008 and 2012 and increased financial regulation and allowed the tax cuts for the wealthy to expire.

    I swear, I can’t wait for the Gawker staff to endure the next 8 years of her presidency only to realize she isn’t the Machiavellian Wall Street harpie they thought she’d be.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Promnight Dumpster Baby FireBleedingFromHerWherever
      7/29/16 11:09am

      But she is exactly that. Wait till she endorses, pushes for, and forces through the TPP, which she pretends now to oppose. That will probably be the first big betrayal, but there will be many.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      EvanrudeJohnsonBleedingFromHerWherever
      7/29/16 11:12am

      One thing to remember about both Clinton and Obama’s tax increases, they did not hit capital gains. At the beginning of the Clinton’s term, capital gains were taxed at 28%, by the end, it was 20%. So these big shooters got something out of the deal. With Obama, the investor class still pays 20% on capital gains and dividends.

      So these ultra wealthy who earn most of their money through investments didn’t really take a huge hit with those increases.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    The Alvin Greene DreamHamilton Nolan
    7/29/16 10:58am

    But Democrats are just “playing the game” as it exists. They’ve got all the correct values under the hood.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      FreshlyShavenThe Alvin Greene Dream
      7/29/16 11:07am

      Yeah, those hedge fund managers and other lobbyists are just giving millions of dollars out of the goodness of their heart, expecting nothing in return.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      The Alvin Greene DreamFreshlyShaven
      7/29/16 11:14am

      That was kind of my point, though I’ll admit that detecting the sarcasm probably depends a little too heavily on having been exposed to my ideological views beforehand.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Armageddon T. ThunderbirdHamilton Nolan
    7/29/16 10:58am

    The Trust Fund Candidate

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      SpringSprungArmageddon T. Thunderbird
      7/29/16 11:01am

      I’m sure he’d handle the economy as well as he did that trust fund.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!Armageddon T. Thunderbird
      7/29/16 11:05am

      The Four-Time Bankrupt Candidate.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    MaurySlineHamilton Nolan
    7/29/16 11:04am

    This analysis is stupid and misleading... One candidate will run the country and the other will ruin the country and the economy. Of course hedge fund managers will donate to Hillary - and if Warren or Sanders were the candidates, Wall Street would donate to them over Trump - because they’d prefer to live with increased regulations and new ways of doing business, than with an economic collapse that would make the Bush recession and even the Great Depression look like rosy times!

    ETA - It really chaps my ass that Chelsea married a hedge fund manager though!

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      EvanrudeJohnsonMaurySline
      7/29/16 11:16am

      Chelsea worked for a damn hedge fund, did you really thing marrying a manager is something she wouldn’t do?

      Reply
      <