Did the maga's cough it up to beat Bernie's 6M in 24 hrs? - Donald Trump Discussion

[–] Thrillhouse (1509) 6 years ago

Hillary obliterated the record for campaign fundraising in 2016. I don't think that's what you want. Or maybe it is.

reply

[–] MinorityRules15 (963) 6 years ago

Trump's a billionaire. Why would he even need campaign donations?

reply

[–] Thrillhouse (1509) 6 years ago

Hillary spent over 2 billion plus she had the entire media, government, and corporate infrastructure on her side.

reply

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 6 years ago

But she didn't spend a dime in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania which is where the election was won. Hillary has a history of being a terrible campaigner which is how Obama took the lead in 2008.

reply

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

Why did he need inaugural donations?

reply

[–] Cuthbert (732) 6 years ago

Bernie got 6M in small donations that averaged $27 each from around 223,000 individuals. Hillary got money from big money donors.

reply

[–] ItsTheAngelMan (135) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Destinata (3564) 6 years ago

That's really not the yardstick, although it does show that he has a lot of root-hog- an'-die kind of fans. Eventually, I have no doubt, y'all will turn America socialist. Then we can look forward to that bright future that folks in Venezuela and Greece have. And when our economy goes down, it will make the Great Depression -- which you've no doubt NOT been properly taught about in schools -- look like Sunday in the park. 🤷🏼‍♀️

reply

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 6 years ago

The Venezuela boogieman doesn't work any more. It never worked to begin with except for donors to get republican voters to vote against their own interest. There's no argument you can make that public college and healthcare will turn our economy into Venezuela's. In fact I would even argue its un-American to suggest our economy is so fragile.

But it doesn't really matter what I say because the $6m in one day speaks for itself.

reply

[–] Destinata (3564) 6 years ago

The $6mill in one day means nothing because you people still haven't figured out the Electoral College. Obviously.

reply

[–] ItsTheAngelMan (135) 6 years ago

Oh... kay then? So you think most money = most votes? How did that work out in 2016?

reply

[–] Cuthbert (732) 6 years ago

No one is saying more money more votes.

You’ve missed the point entirely.

reply

[–] ItsTheAngelMan (135) 6 years ago

That might be because you didnt have one?

reply

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 6 years ago

Nope. There was a point but you missed it. $6 million with a $27 average means more individuals supporting him than any other candidate. More supporters means more votes.

reply

[–] Destinata (3564) 6 years ago

So you ARE saying more money, more votes. Now prove it all came in $27 per person, and you will have more individuals supporting him than any other candidate...so far. And you STILL understand nothing about the Electoral College.

Are you American, or did you just flunk anything having to do with civics? 😂

reply

[–] Cuthbert (732) 6 years ago

Reality is out if your grasp Destinata.

reply

[–] Destinata (3564) 6 years ago

And yet another person who doesn't understand the Electoral College! 😃

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (15104) 6 years ago

He has one, it's just on his head.

reply

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

Bump

reply