Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Politics In General National Commission to Investigate the January 6

I've always said that both major parties owe their hearts and souls to corporations, wall street firms, lobbyist, special interests, mega money donors etc. That we, the voter are nothing more than a necessary evil. Pawns moved around by the moneyed elite who with the two party system along with voting make it look like we, the people have a say, determine who's in charge.

Who received most of the money from these moneyed folks over the last 12 years, the Democratic Party. Lawyers and Lobbyist 62 million to Biden 8 million to Trump, Finance, insurance and real estate, 252 million to Biden 103 million to Trump. You can scroll through the money and from whom here.

https://www.opensecrets.org/2020-presidential-race/sector-totals?sector=F

Election spending
2020 Democrats 6.9 billion, Republicans 3.8 billion
2016 Democrats 2.3 billion, Republicans 2.5 billion
2012 Democrats 2.2 billion, Republicans 2.5 billion
2008 Democrats 2.2 billion, Republicans 1.5 billion

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2020/10/cost-of-2020-election-14billion-update/

The thing here is these moneyed elites are smart businessmen, if they didn't get a better return for their investment, er donations into our political system and parties, they wouldn't invest, er, donate.

Here's the history of political party spending from 1960-2016. Take a look

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/56-y...ding-how-2016_b_5820bf9ce4b0334571e09fc1

The candidate with the most money won with the exceptions of 1964 and 2016. The graph basically shows not that much disparity until 2008,2012 and 2016 when one party had a huge money advantage.

One last thing, you'll find a lot of these moneyed elites be they corporations, wall street firms etc. donating to both parties and their candidates. Always much more to the candidate and party they think will win. But they also give to the other candidates and party. This way even if their number one candidate loses, the loser still owes them.

Now am I being cynical or not?

The writer was a bit more than disingenuous in their analysis.

One can not simply write about slavery or economic systems independently. In this case the Southern Economic System was predicated solely on the institution of slavery. In other words one can not talk about one without the other. Like taking one leg of a triangle away .... it is no longer a triangle.

However in an analysis of actual real reasons for session, Southern legislatures provided an insight to the reasons. First and foremost was the Southern Economic System, and second was States Rights, and third was the election of an abolitionist, Pres A Lincoln.

Of course on the converse side for cause of hostilities, first and foremost was the Constitutional issue of dissolution of the Union. One can not simply write that we are shooting at you because we want you to end slavery, but we can if there is an overriding legal principle, fundamental to the Union. (Note the similarity to the talk of Trump supporters, who believe they can at will overthrow the government simply because they don't like America ... sounds dangerously close to what Southerners were saying in 1860). Once the principle was invoked, secondary issues could and did come into play, even if political in nature.

so you have actually provided the very reason these folks are ready for the "storm". They have in their mind been fighting for an America which they can no longer recognize. The only alternative the the Trump Solution.

Yes so for these nuts we have Mr Trump proclaiming he will be "reinstated" in August, and we have all manner of clowns from the Kraken Lady, Powell, to Gen "The Coup is what is needed" Flynn, to more than a little crazy Rep Gohmert, saying the election was stolen.

Ready for a run? Damn right they are!!!!

Now for the bonus. These same crazies are implementing the machinery for a general takeover of the entire system through "legal" means. Please note Pres Biden was elected on slim margins in 6 battleground states. If those same legislatures disenfranchise just a few voters .... you should be able to figure out the rest. Imagine a coup right before your eyes and you wont know it until the elected inmates of the Congressional asylum start talking crazy.

Indeed. But economic systems generally are designed to benefit the wealthy. And the wealthy have this funny way of convincing the poors that we can't live without them....that our success depends on their success.

Trickle down economics was alive even then.

There's no denying the major role that slavery had in the war, no denying that it needed to be abolished.

But I can't think of a single worse way to fix the problem than to have a war over it and if the slavery issue had been erased from the picture I'm pretty sure the war would have happened anyway.

If the war had been erased from the picture I'm pretty sure that slavery would have been abolished anyway.

Northern industrialists had already mechanized. Southern agriculturalists still depended solely on manpower. Industry was pulling ahead economically and thus pulling ahead in controlling congress.

Back in those days there was a clear geographic divide, a clear cultural divide, and a clear political divide. Two separate economies.

All that clearly exists today are two right wing parties that keep us fighting among ourselves while they loot the nations wealth.

I totally agree Greger. I view it all the same way. Voters have become the pawns of the moneyed elites who make us think we're deciding things when we're not.

I think you mean; "Takes two to tango"?

what I find really interesting here, is how much Greger, a self avowed socialist and myself, a right leaning swing voter tend to agree. That is except when it comes to slogans meaning what the slogan says. That plus the fact I would bend to win elections whereas I don't think Greger would. Perhaps that would make me the ultimate politician or strategist depending on how one looks at these things.

Perhaps it may be that we both dislike both major parties along with disliking Trump.

Defund the Police means exactly what it says. Defund them. Spend that money to prevent crime. I dunno why you keep choking on this slogan.

They have become a racist lynch mob and need to be rebuilt from the bottom up.

Y'hear about them white kids shooting at officers for over two hours with a shotgun and an AK47?

One was wounded, the other was taken peacefully.

Real guns, not toys. Two hours. Not ten seconds. Kids taken alive.

White kids.

No rain of bullets. No SWAT team, no armored vehicles. Just some brave officers showing restraint. The kid was walking toward them firing a shotgun and saying she was going to kill them. Sounded like the officer felt really bad about having to return fire.

It should always be this way, not just for white kids. Defund them.

Hmm, no more police. Defund them all, then some of those funds can go to my vigilante group I'd have to raise.

Defund -prevent from continuing to receive funds.

Yep, with no police, we retired military might be quite good doing vigilante work. Now we'd want to get our fair share of the defunding funds from defunding the police.If not, I'm sure we'd find a way to get them, especially with no police around.

Sure glad you didn't mean Reform the police. That's not what defund means.

I guess the words got in the way of understanding.

a common problem.