The terms are used when a politician takes significant funding from specific interest groups and is assumed to support legislation helping those interest groups due to the funds. Basically it means someone who has been successfully bought by the bankers--whose vote on matters critical to those interests is being paid for by said interests.

Why is this any worse than a politician who was "bought" by a gay rights group, Planned Parenthood, Big Pharma, etc.?

Gonna be honest, my opinion of you just went down significantly since you compared the level of donation given by planned parenthood to the donations given by wallstreet. The level of donation given by PP is separated by 4-5 orders of magnitude from the level of donation given by just the Koch brothers.

That's why it's "worse".


Also there are plenty of politicians who are bought by big pharma. You're showing very selective hearing here, being bought by pharmaceutical companies is a major criticism of Clinton. There's plenty of industries that are criticized for their undue influence on capitol hill.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Oct 15 2016 02:12am

I meant of which day. Because technically you said 12 midnight Saturday but you probably meant 12 midnight Sunday (i.e. the first minute of Sunday).

Which would be 1am EST Sunday.

A hhhhh yes indeed just under 6 hours to go list after locked in.

http://www.270towin.com/maps/BWloP

Clinton 346-192 Trump

Thank you for host

I do not believe my post implied as such. If it did, I did not intend for it to do so. Bought politicians are only as good or as bad as those organizations that have them in their pocket.

I didn't intend to compare the level of donation. Rather, I was talking about special interests in general. I don't really see a problem with special interests, especially when they are for the public good. For example, I can understand how someone would be wary of the tobacco industry since they likely do more harm than good. The financial industry, however, is one of the most important industries in the country. So I have to ask, why is the financial industry bad and why is taking money from individuals in the financial industry a bad thing?

What's the finalized list?

/e I vote that tiebreakers be determined as a percentage of individual states correctly called.

This post was edited by Santara on Oct 17 2016 12:55pm