Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

if someone insists they were given $60,000

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ccpup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:18 AM
Original message
if someone insists they were given $60,000
from a major campaign contributor and the number is found to have been substantially higher ($168,000), is that bad and, if so, why?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:18 AM
Response to Original message
1. Not enough info to judge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ccpup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. a long-time political ally -- one of the candidate's
main financial contributers -- is found to have given $168,000 to the candidate's campaigns after the candidate claims the figure was substantially lower, $60,000. Now this contributor may be facing something of a legal issue. With no names attached and with only the info offered, what would one deduce about the candidate?

It's an interesting exercise a friend of mine is urging me to do on DU. Although I don't expect many responses, it would be fascinating to see who says what.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. With that info, I could deduce that
the candidates bookkeeping is messy, or he/she is mistaken,I'd have to get more info before calling them a crook, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:19 AM
Response to Original message
2. Depends on the timeframes being discussed in both cases.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ccpup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #2
9. spanning the length and breadth of one's campaigns
off to take the pups for a walk, but will check in later :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pampango Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:20 AM
Response to Original message
3. Do you support this candidate and look for extenuating circumstances, or
do you oppose him/her and are looking for anything that will make them look bad?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. That is the determining factor? jeezzzzzzzzz
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pampango Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. Sorry, forgot the sarcasm tag. Nonetheless, I think you will see that
most of us are very forgiving of the candidate we support and will look for excuses and rationales for their mistakes, while we seek to nail the other candidates for their mistakes and accept no excuses. (Excuses are treated as "spin" if they come from those supporting other candidates.) ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. .
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ccpup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. nope
it's an exercise in who says what with no candidate information to go on. A friend of mine insists that supporters will spin anything so he wants to see what people say if a candidate's name isn't included.

As I just said in another reply, I don't expect many response, but it will be interesting to see who says what.

I have to head out for awhile (my puppies are jumping up and down with their legs crossed, so it's off to the Park), but will check in later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoveRage Donating Member (322 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:22 AM
Response to Original message
5. If it was the smartest woman in America, then it was just an honest mistake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChiciB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
12. Who Cares Anymore?? It's All About Money Anyway!!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orangepeel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
13. A campaign contributor can't give that much. Was this bundled?
If it was bundled, it isn't inconceivable that the candidate would have the amount wrong, because it would be from dozens of different people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meegbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
14. The correct DU response is ...
If it's my candidate, no. Else, I would scream it's a gross violation of election law, they're sleazy and they should drop out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
15. If a concern troll falls down in the woods and no one is around....?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
16. why don`t you let fitzgerald decide on the case instead of asking
the members of the democratic underground make a decision based on information that neither,they, you or i have access to? posting any thing from the media also has no relevance because they to have no "inside" information or "a source close to the case" because fitzgerald`s office does`t work that way. if any staffer in his office did so they would be fired and/ or be brought up on charges. i doubt that any staffer would want to ruin their life to leak any story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:33 AM
Response to Original message
17. If they knew, then yes, it's bad. Cause it's shady
and will come back to haunt them.

If they didn't know... then no, it's just an honest mistake.

That whole "plausible deniability" thing comes into play, see?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu May 16th 2024, 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC