Posted on 08/15/2015 11:30:28 PM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
However, of the nearly $420,000 Trump has donated to committees, the largest recipient has been the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee with $116,000 — or more than one fourth of his total contributions to all party and political action committees.
February 2011:
REPUBLICAN DONALD TRUMP’S PAST AND CURRENT GENEROSITY TO DEMOCRATS: Billionaire real estate tycoon Donald Trump’s recent speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference excited a number of Republicans, many of whom applauded his statement that Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) has “zero chance” of winning.
It also fueled speculation that the mogul would run for president. Cries of “you’re hired!” to a Draft Trump 2012 website added to a growing sense of support among Republicans.
But that GOP support has not always been reciprocated by Trump.
According to a Center for Responsive Politics analysis of Trump’s federal campaign contribution history, The Donald has been a prolific donor to both Democrats and Republicans during the past two decades.
In all, Trump has contributed to 96 candidates running for federal political office since the 1990 election cycle, the Center finds. Only 48 of the recipients — exactly half — were Republicans at the time they received their contribution, including ex-Gov. Charlie Crist (I-Fla.) and ex-Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.), who both of whom received their Trump contributions as Republicans.
Since the 1990 election cycle, the top 10 recipients of Trump’s political contributions number six Democrats and four Republicans. Embattled Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.), who was censured last year by his U.S. House colleagues, has received the most Trump money, totaling $24,750. The most recent contribution from Trump to Rangel was a $10,000 gift during the 2006 election cycle. In the most recent election cycle, Trump doled out $22,500 to political candidates, of which $16,200 benefited Democrats.
The top Republican recipient of Trump’s money is Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) who has collected $13,600 from the billionaire magnate, the second most of any politician. Trump did not contribute to McCain during the 2010 election cycle, during which the former presidential candidate was facing re-election.
Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) is the recipient of $12,000 in Trump contributions, including $10,000 for his 2006 re-election campaign.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has received the fourth-largest amount of Trump’s contributions, including $4,800 in the successful 2010 campaign against Tea Party favorite Sharron Angle. In total Trump has contributed $10,400 to Reid.
In 2010, Trump also contributed $4,000 to Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who easily won re-election. Schumer has received $8,900 from Trump since the 1996 election cycle. Trump has also been generous to New York’s other Democratic U.S. senator, Kirsten Gillibrand, who’s received $5,850 in Trump money.
After McCain, the Republican with the largest amount of Trump’s contributions is former Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.), who left office in disgrace in 2006 when his online solicitation of male House pages became known. Trump contributed $9,500 to Foley between the 1996 and 2006 election cycles.
Trump has also supported other notable politicians, including:
• $7,000 to former Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), the “liberal lion of the Senate”
• $7,500 to former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani (R)
• $5,500 to Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) including $2,000 during his 2004 presidential run
• $5,000 to former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.)
• $4,000 to former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.)
• $2,000 to former President George W. Bush (R)
• $1,000 to then-Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.)
Trump’s donations to various political action committees and 527 groups also demonstrate his bipartisan checkbook.
During the most recent election cycle, Trump contributed $170,000 to the Republican Governor’s Association, $50,000 to the ultra-conservative American Crossroads PAC, $30,400 to the National Republican Senatorial Committee and $10,000 to the Democratic Party of New York.
However, of the nearly $420,000 Trump has donated to committees, the largest recipient has been the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee with $116,000 — or more than one fourth of his total contributions to all party and political action committees.
It may not be a good thing, but it’s the way the game is played. Even Cruz had a $15 million dollar donation from a business - so, what do you think they want in return?
Here’s a comprehensive list going back several national cycles
He buys access
I do it too but smaller scale including local democrats when I’ve had to
Trump has since Obama given mostly to Pubs...not that they count much anymore anyhow
On the Toon Foundation.....the Kochs and Ailes and NewsMax and Dick Scaife gave to them too....as did even Boone Pickens
It’s access
I think the honesty about it is a good thing. They're all on the take, after all. We finally have a presidential candidate who openly admits what everyone already knows. That's a big deal.
Probably every smart business person donates to both parties. They never know when they just might need them in business. I know business people here do. There is a saying around here, “be nice to people on the way up because you just might meet them on the way down.” This just shows his business smarts.
Tks
And I was trying to be civil
I really did like pissant and have no beef with this poster either
Seen her here for years....she’s shared similar South American experience I’ve had
People love to form zot posses in primary season and beg JR to do their bidding
It’s so high school hallway behavior
I think we should just hash it out and tolerate dissent especially with so many candidates
As I’ve said unless someone is calling my southern ancestry nazis I’m reluctant to be ugly to folks I don’t know especially if it’s obvious they are feline
Its a cultural thing
But we Freepers can be daft....myself included....sometimes you have to scratch your head
Of the approximately 150 posts I've done in the last month, here are 20 about Trump [who has been in the news]:
Defending The Donald - Do you have his back, or do you hate America?
Overwhelming majority of Trump's online following is ineligible to vote
How Long Will Trump’s Cathartic Candidacy for Fed-Up Conservatives Last?
Haven't We Seen the Trump Saga Before?
Women tweet updates about their periods to Donald Trump
Morning Jolt: Do Republicans Even Care What Conservatism Is Anymore?
Poll: Trump Leads Iowa GOP Field but Shows Less Strength among Debate Viewers
Hillary Clinton Attended Donald Trump’s Wedding After He Published ‘Disgusting’ Comments About Women
Trump campaign loses top adviser
I Have Disinvited Donald Trump to the RedState Gathering
Style, Substance, and The Donald
Trump: What You Don't See Is What You Will Get
The Donald Could Prove Hillary’s Trump Card
Trump: GOP challengers 'viciously' attacked me
Donald Trump's Attorney Defends Him Against Ex-Wife's Rape Allegation “You can’t rape your spouse"
Trump pro-amnesty? Walker stands firm against pro-amnesty ambush. Lots of changed ratings.
Exclusive: Trump threatens third-party run
Mr. Trump, America’s Challenges Deserve More than Lip Service
Tea Party sours on Donald Trump
On Trump, Know What You’re Doing and Why
FLASHBACK: Trump: Geller 'taunting' Muslims with Muhammad event ["obnoxious blowhard"]
Of course Trump has contributed to many Dems. He has switched parties at least 5 five times in 30 years and has only been a Republican since 2009 (and possibly only until 2011). He is a new and singularly unique kind of politician.
So what?
Donald Trump has already said that he contributed to politicians of both parties. He said he had to do it for business reasons. I totally understand that because politicians in either party can cause his businesses all sorts of problems. Donald Trump contributed to BOTH John Kerrey and Bush in 2004. Is that the sign of a diehard Democratic partisan?
In addition, the GOPe has no problems torpedoing Tea Party, Evangelical, and Constitutional Conservative Senate candidates. Why should everyone get in a tizzy because Donald Trump made some poitical contributions?
And GOPe RINOs are not better than Democrats. For instance, in Illinois, Tammy Duckworth will be a much better senator (especially with veterans’ issues) than RINO and Lindsey Graham pal Mark Kirk.
Political party(s)
Republican (Before 1999)
Reform Party (1999–2001)
Democratic (2001–09)
Republican (2009–11)
Independent (2011–12)
Republican (2012–present)
This isn’t necessarily true. Those who have been vetted have a political history which we can draw upon. Look, I understand your passion for your candidate, but to keep posting anti-Trump articles isn’t going to change minds for people to stop supporting him and get on the Walker wagon. This is a high school type of activity. I don’t think you have said anything to get zotted for, but, your constant anti-Trump articles are annoying. If Walker should somehow get the nomination, I’d have no problem voting for him - we need to defeat the Democrats, Right now, this isn’t feasible.
Why didn’t Trump run for political office in NY?
He could have challenged Chuck Schumer or Hillary Clinton (instead of giving them money).
He could have used his money and run for the Senate, could have been a vote against the Left.
But he didn’t.
Now he wants to be president.
No. Come back to her thinking? Are you nuts?
She is a big supporter of the cronyism, and the SuperPACs behind all of it, that is destroying the Conservatives.
The following is from Sundance at the Conservative Treehouse:
If you look back closely at the history of the last few election cycles you will see what Trump is fully aware of, and what few have EVER paid attention to.
The Citizens United Supreme Court decision was reached in ’09. Obama famously railed against it in his 2010 State of the Union speech.
Most, conservatives and Republicans saw the CU decision as a win for our team; a win for free speech; a win to push back against the scope of the Labor Union money that supports the leftist political apparatus...
...what was not thought through was how the Citizens United decision would evolve, and be used by the establishment Republican class, against us.
In 2010 we defeated dozens of incumbent Republicans in both the House and Senate, replacing them with more conservative representatives. Jim DeMint’s Senate Conservative Fund, a traditional political action committee (PAC), was a key element in supporting Marco Rubio, Mike Lee, Ron Johnson, Rand Paul, etc.
Mitch McConnell and the establishment republicans were furious.
If the 2010 election process was allowed to repeat again in 2012, the power of dozens of professional republicans was at risk. The very influence of Tom Donohue and the CoC was at stake. Billions of dollars hang in the balance. Something needed to be done to stop the vulgarians.
In late 2011 and early 2012 the Wall Street and K-Street lobby groups formulated a plan to stop conservatives from steamrolling their preferred candidates, Super-PAC’s.
Super Political Action Committees were formed, using the Citizens United decision, to pour BILLIONS into very specific election processes and subvert the traditional dependency on campaign financial support from the electorate.
In essence the construct of the Citizens United decision was used to pump political gladiators with Wall Street steroids. This approach would be how the professional class would defend their seats, their place at the trough.
This would be how Mitt Romney would be nominated despite the will of the electorate.
We were too slow to respond, because we did not understand the scheme.
In 2014, the process took on new levels of political maneuvering. We caught on to the constructs, as well as the overall goals, of Donohue to 1.) keep Obamacare, 2.) get immigration reform to include amnesty, and 3.) establish Common Core federal education standards.
Late in 2013 we began ringing the alarm bells. Few could believe what we were saying.
It came to pass in 2013, 2014 when establishment Super-Pac’s funded by Wall Street and Tom Donohue, and directed by the power brokers alongside Mitch McConnell, destroyed conservative challengers like Ken Cucinelli in Virginia, Matt Bevin in Kentucky, and most obviously Chris McDaniel in Mississippi.
*****************************************************
Wardaddy — do you understand what is going on now?
She is working for the establishment, and against freedom.
Political speech and advocacy through contribution and publicized comments, IS “political history which we can draw on.”
Trump’s history is there but too many want to push it aside and deflect.
Of course I support another candidate (Gov. Scott Walker)!
I think Trump is for Trump and will say and do anything voters want to hear in order to be in the news and promote himself and his brand.
Any business man with a quarter of a brain pays the mafia protection money to be left alone, including the democrats of the U.S. government, the most ruthless of all.
Given his current standings, I'd say he's taken a more efficient route than you suggest ;)
Sweetie, they all promote themselves and their “brand.” It’s the nature of the political beast. Each of them has said, “I’m the first to do this or that.” That’s promoting oneself and brand. Trump has nothing to lose - he’s well past the time in life where he needs to build another hotel, or building. It just doesn’t seem to sink in your thick skull that he was a businessman and this is how the game is played. You seem to overlook the fact that while he did doante to Democrats (while living in one of the most blue states in the U.S.) he also contributed to Republicans - including your candidate. I guess that didn’t make the list either??? All the candidates say what they think the voters want to hear. Once again - you sound sincere in who you support, but, ignorant about how politics really work. It’s a rough and tumble game and not one for the faint hearted. Just what would attribute to Trump taking a $400,000 year job - other than wanting to straighten out this country. That’s one-tenth of his annual salary. So, how does this benefit him financially? It doesn’t. So, there must be another motive, don’t you think? It isn’t to be a stalking horse for anyone else either - Trump is too egotistical to do that. I have to conclude that he truly wants to make America Great Again!
No, they simply reject your thesis that "...Trump is for Trump and will say and do anything voters want to hear in order to be in the news and promote himself and his brand."
And frankly, it's because your answer does not fit the characteristics of the question. He doesn't *need* to do any of this to accomplish exactly what you see as his goal.
Citizens United v. FEC In the case the conservative lobbying group Citizens United wanted to air a film critical of Hillary Clinton and to advertise the film during television broadcasts in apparent violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (commonly known as the McCain–Feingold Act or "BCRA"). Section 203 of BCRA defined an "electioneering communication" as a broadcast, cable, or satellite communication that mentioned a candidate within 60 days of a general election or 30 days of a primary, and prohibited such expenditures by corporations and unions. The United States District Court for the District of Columbia held that §203 of BCRA applied and prohibited Citizens United from advertising the film Hillary: The Movie in broadcasts or paying to have it shown on television within 30 days of the 2008 Democratic primaries The Supreme Court reversed this decision, striking down those provisions of BCRA that prohibited corporations (including nonprofit corporations) and unions from making independent expenditures and "electioneering communications". The majority decision overruled Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce (1990) and partially overruled McConnell v. Federal Election Commission (2003). The Court, however, upheld requirements for public disclosure by sponsors of advertisements (BCRA §201 and §311). The case did not involve the federal ban on direct contributions from corporations or unions to candidate campaigns or political parties, which remain illegal in races for federal office."
I think it’s quite possible that a lifelong Republican who has deep feelings for the Party, and doesn’t understand how bad it’s gotten, to want the GOP to reform itself from within.
Reagan did it, and he had a much longer record as a conservative, even though he once was a Democrat.
I think since then the game has been rigged against another Reagan from within. I think that’s what Ted Cruz wants to be, but his detente with Trump may indicate he’s thinking that might not be possible.
The election is a long way off. If Trump is the real deal, he’ll win the majority of the dyed-in-the-wool Republicans over. Probably a bunch of folks who only pull the lever for Democrats, too.
To be honest, I’d much rather be voting for a Republican, but if it’s GOPe or Trump, Trump has my vote. If it’s Cruz as the Republican, it gets a lot harder to choose. Maybe Trump throws his support to Cruz or vice versa and I don’t have to choose.
My parents were proud Republicans, and my mother was very active in local races. I’ve manned phone banks for Republican candidates.
I kind of sensed they’d crossed the line from happy losers to collaborators when they turned on Palin, but it’s still hard for me to say I’m not a Republican. But, as somebody I admire once said, the party left me.
Not everybody who hasn’t gotten to that point is an enemy.
The states have been doing yeoman’s work turning blue states red and legislatures to Republican majorities. This is where the political bench is strong. The states have been fighting Washington and holding the line. You can’t toss everyone into the same GOP-e basket.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.