If Howard Dean carried a sign reading, "Stop Bush in 2004," and marched toward Bush, refusing to be quarantined in a "free speech zone," would the police arrest him? I hope Dean exercises his right to free speech the next time he crosses the trail of Action Figure George Junior. Pick up a protest sign and show that we are still a free people, Dr. Dean. America is counting on you.
It seems to me that you just restated what I have been saying. Unless you are assuming that you know how many rich people are Dems vs. Repubs and you are so into their heads that you know that they are giving or not. Your stats were exactly what I said, more and smaller donations were given to the Republicans while larger amounts and fewer were given to the Democrats. Just this morning, on the news, they flashed these numbers on the board for contributions to the Bush campaign so far...494,000 donors with an average of $211 per donation. Sounds like a lot of average Joe's to me. But you know, I am not going to convince you and I am tired of discussing it with you. It didn't even involve you from the beginning. I am moving on and letting you continue to wallow in your disillusionment and off-the-wall thinking.
Here is the source where you can examine the statistics from this study:
You are playing the same kind of statistical game that Bush used to sell his tax cuts, selective use of distorting numbers. Here is the more relevant information:
Breaking down the money raised at various giving levels, the Center found that individuals giving less than $200 to federal candidates, parties or leadership PACs gave 64 percent of their money to Republicans during the last election cycle. Democrats raised just 35 percent of the money from those donors. Among very wealthy donors, Democrats reigned supreme. Contributors of $1 million or more gave 92 percent of their money to Democrats, and 8 percent to the GOP. (See the total amounts raised and the party breakdown of fundraising at various giving levels.)
The findings illustrate the Republicans' strong advantage over Democrats in the current system, which caps total contributions to candidates, PACs and parties at $95,000 per individual per election cycle. In fact, the figures show that Republicans out-raised Democrats at every giving level below $100,000 in 2001-2002.
As you can see, there are more wealthy liberals prepared to make contributions greater than $100,000 than there are wealthy conservatives in the same category. The total amount of these large contributions was $132 million in the study year. The total amount in the $1,000 to $99,999 category was $591 million, of which the majority was raised by Republicans. This isn't quite the story you are trying to put across, is it?
One more link. This is a WOW. It is:
A table of contributions by the computer industry by year. Surprise, surprise...they gave more to Dems for the 2000 election. Just goes to show who is for the redistribution of wealth. This opensecrets.org is fascinating. Really comprehensive breakdowns and eye openers.
If you want to read the whole article, you have to register and pay $2.95. It is in the Washington Times dated Dec. 18, 2002.
The following is a result of my search of the archives:
Article 51 of 56, Article ID: 200212180851500006
Published on December 18, 2002, The Washington Times
The Richest 1 Percent
So much for Republicans being the party of the wealthy. According to a new study by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, that moniker more appropriately belongs to the Democrats."Republicans raised more than Democrats from individuals who contributed small and medium amounts of money during the 2002 election cycle," the report notes, "but Democrats far outpaced Republicans among deep-pocketed givers." Among donors who gave more than $200 but less than
Complete Article, 445 words ( )
The Center of Responsive Politics is
a non-partisan, non-profit research group based in Washington, D.C. that tracks money in politics and its effect on elections and public policy. The Center conducts computer-based research on campaign finance issues for the news media, academics, activists, and the public at large. The Center�s work is aimed at creating a more educated voter, an involved citizenry, and a more responsive government. You can access this statement and info at: http://www.bapd.org/gceocs-1.html
You know, I would expect that answer from you. I really don't care if you believe it or not. I was just asked for the numbers upon which I was basing my statement and I gave them. You can take them or leave them. Makes no diff to me. You really are obnoxious. DD, hippo, and Nav will debate and though we disagree, are at least polite, but you are just plain obnoxious.