What did wealthy Democratic donors feel about Franken?

[lostnfound]

Who has been annoyed at Franken?
Telecoms?

November 8th
Franken Calls for Big Tech Algorithms to Be More Transparent

Franken “delivered a speech to the group in which he compared the power of the big tech platforms to that of internet-service providers, or ISP’s, to "pick and choose which content reaches consumers and which doesn’t." Franken supported a rule change designed to deny the ISP’s such control. "Facebook, Google and Amazon, like ISP’s, should be neutral in their treatment of the flow of lawful information and commerce on their platforms," he said.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-08/franken-calls-for-big-tech-algorithms-to-be-more-transparent

Billionaires?

Al Franken Drops A Truth Bomb And Calls The GOP Health Care Bill A Tax Cut For Billionaires
By Jason Easley on Thu, Jun 22nd, 2017 at 3:51 pm
Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) is calling the Republican health care bill what it really is. Franken described the bill as a thinly disguised tax cut for billionaires.
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/06/22/al-franken-republicans-wont-health-care-bill-thinly-disguised-tax-cut-billionaires.html

Tuesday, January 13, 2015
Franken Renews Push for Wealthiest Americans to Pay their Fair Share in Taxes
Today, U.S. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) joined a group of his colleagues in reintroducing key tax fairness legislation—commonly known as the "Buffett Rule"—to require that America's top earners pay their fair share of taxes just like middle-class Minnesotans.

The Paying a Fair Share Act would ensure that millionaires and billionaires pay at least a 30 percent effective federal tax rate, which means they can't pay a lower rate than what middle-class Minnesotans pay. The legislation, often called the "Buffett Rule," was put forth after billionaire investor Warren Buffett realized that he paid a lower tax rate than his secretary.

Banks?

Franken Fights Back against Big Banks & Corporate Special Interests That Want to Limit Consumer Justice

Says Congressional Attempt to Roll Back CFPB Arbitration Rule is Great News for Wall Street Billionaires, Bad News for Minnesota Families and the American Consumer

Climate deniers?

Al Franken’s devastating strategy for taking on Trump’s team of climate science deniers
Knowledge of climate science plus mastery of storytelling is a rare combination.
https://thinkprogress.org/al-franken-strategy-for-trump-climate-deniers-fd9a6502f9cb/

Al’s “mastery of storytelling” makes him a great communicator on a lot of issues, by the way.

So, who has a lot of influence over leaders of our own party? Even more than voters..
One such person has done great things for Democratic causes, donating $1 M to Hillary’s campaign, and $100,000 to Kamala Harris (who I think is a great addition even though I’m disappointed with her over the Franken issue), clearly wants democrats to win but clearly does not appreciate those who talk about the billionaires. I was watching the interview when he said it, and was intrigued by how much bitterness or anger he displayed toward statements of economic class in the Democratic Party.

On November 7, 2017 Cloobeck appeared on MSNBC and said he told Democratic leaders he would "cut your money off" if they criticize the wealthy, saying: "I’ve talked to Schumer, I’ve talked to [Dem. Senator Ron] Wyden [Oregon], I’ve talked to [House minority leader] Pelosi and I’ve said if you use the term 'billionaire' again, I’m done. We should be a party of business".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Cloobeck

Cloobeck wants to run for governor of Nevada. Great, I hope he succeeds. But if you want to look for why some Dems were willing to throw Al under the bus (while justifying it on the basis of larger strategic objectives or standing up for some ill-considered zero tolerance policy), don’t overlook the influence of a man who can afford to throw $1M at a presidential campaign. I have a feeling there might be a connection. He doesn’t have to whisper in the ears of every one of them, just one or two. Letting Al go might have been a popular move (with Cloobeck or other wealthy donors). How painful it is for congress members to raise campaign funds every day, versus getting the promise of major funds from one very wealthy and very motivated donor.

The guy seems sincere in his centrist patriotic fervor, but the outsized influence of a man like him can make certain words verboten from our elected leaders. (And yes, I know Warren also uses these words all the time. So what?)

[whathehell]

1. So Cloobek has ordered Dems to stop saying the word "Billionaire"?

Last edited Sun Dec 10, 2017, 10:52 AM - Edit history (1)

He can go fuck himself -- He's no democrat.. In fact there ARE no Democrats without support for economic justice, and yes, that means calling out Billionaires for stealing the
nation's wealth through Tax Giveaways and cuts to everything from Public Schools to Medicare

Economic and social justice is what the whole friggin: party is based on...These people want to float on social issues only -- Why?.. because those don't COST them anything.


P.S. We already have a "party of business" -- It''s called the GOP.

[lostnfound]

3. Personally Im a little less quick to judge. Everybody has blind spots...

To his ears, angry words about billionaires might sound like hate speech directed at him personally.

I don’t judge him as a person, he must believe in fairness and equality to some extent or he’d be donating to the GOP instead. But I do find a problem with a political system that gives a disproportionate influence based on money. How do we reconcile the need for donors with the need for an equal voice for all citizens in a democracy? We really can’t.

[whathehell]

4. On this issue, I am not..

and I think anyone who thinks Mr. Cloobeck's demands are about billionaire "hurt feelings" rather than his own economic interests is very naive.

As for the idea that he "must believe in fairness to some extent or he'd be donating to the GOP"...No again, I'm afraid. Do you not know that the wealthy frequently donate to BOTH parties?...It's called "hedging your bets" -- Donald Trump has donated to Democrats so often he's been called a "Democrat"...What do you think of his sense of "fairness"?

There's a name for people like Cloobeck's and it's not "Democrat",
it's Libertarian...Libertarians describe themselves as liberal on social issues and conservative on economic ones -- Most Dems call them "Republicans who want to smoke pot and get laid".

As for some "resolution" with doners, I'm afraid I disagree again
. Bernie Sanders showed us a Democrat with a winning message AND good campaign skills doesn't need to placate the wealthy or use corporate cash for campaign financing. His campaign was entirely funded by private doners, and it can be done again.

[pangaia]

10. Your last paragraph

[whathehell]

15. Yes..

It seemed apt.

[lostnfound]

20. This one appears to have donated only to Democrats. If you watch the interview...

That he did, you’ll see that a sharp change in his mood with the mention of the word.

I donated a whole lot to Bernie, and some to certain other as well, and can’t afford it again, because the GOP is going to make me poor very quickly.

There was over $1.4 B spent on the election. Without campaign contribution limits, end of dark money, and an effective reinstitution of a fairness doctrine, it’s like David and Goliath.

[whathehell]

22. "If you watch the same interview that he did"?

What interview is that?

[lostnfound]

23. Heres a link

Sam Seder has posted it and commented on it but the interview was with Stephanie Ruhle

&sns=em

Actually that’s just a snippet of it., the whole thing with Stephanie Ruhle probably gives better insight.

I also found this:

But despite his fears over the future direction of the Democratic Party, Cloobeck said he would not defect to the Republicans, even if his donations to Democrats ceased. Discussing President Donald Trump’s party, the Democrat said: “They are very, unfortunately, bigoted, anti-Semitic and caustic, and creating civil war.”

Asked why Democrats were struggling to gain ground against such a party, Cloobeck responded: “Good question. A sad state for us.”

The donor clas for Dems are generally centrist and corporate, while the donor class for republicans are insane sociopathic ideologues. It would be great if we could fund our campaigns the way Bernie did, but I suspect that when the gop tax plan gets done with is, the middle and professional classes will have nothing left.

[lostnfound]

2. Our donors

How should the Democratic base think about our own wealthy donors, in a post-Citizens United world?
Grateful, for starters. We NEED them to counterbalance the massive money pouring in on the right. So, thank you...
But maybe a little wary, also. It’s a foot on the scale, that people who are so successful at making money have extra influence. The GOP Tax Bill is a handout to billionaires — but can we say that without offending some of our donors? Obviously some do.
Looking at Open Secrets, I review a list of bundlers for Hillary’s campaign. it is interesting to me to see J.B. Pritzker high on the list (running for governor of Illinois): Tom Steyer at ther very top of the list as biggest bundler, who is now running ads to try to impeach Trump, and Stephen Cloobeck is a little further down on the list, intending to run for governor. How many other big donors will decide to appeal directly to the public or to run for office? They must be frustrated, as we all are.

We have a vote and a voice, they have a vote and a giant voice and big checkbooks.

[spicysista]

7. Yes!

This!

[Honeycombe8]

5. These are the Dem Party's positions on these issues. Franken wasn't taking different stances.

It's no different than any stance that Schumer or Pelosi or any other regular Dem politician would take.

[LakeArenal]

6. Franken fought way more on these issues than ANYONE...

Quit making excuses for the ousting of Franken....(not you Honeycombe8)

He was railroaded by spurious accusations, some he declared false, for the express purpose of clearing the road for all of that "list's" future candidates. Period.

If it 's considered the "high road" or whatever, it's not the high road I would take.. It actually feels a awfully low in here.

[Heartstrings]

17. Awfully....low.....

[Honeycombe8]

18. +1. nt

[whathehell]

8. Thank you..

although I think Franken was a bit less corporate and Blue Dog-ish than some, and for that I give him credit.

[dlk]

9. Sometimes it Takes a Few Days for the Facts to Emerge

Money in the political process has poisoned our democracy.

[brooklynite]

11. Fun fact; I first met Franken at the home of Billionaire George Soros.

The insinuation is the Democratic donors pressured Senators to kick him out. Any actual evidence?

[flamingdem]

16. I bet Soros doesn't agree with Schumer and Gillibrand about firing Franken

He's too smart for that

[lostnfound]

21. Im asking the question of my comrades.. thats all. That interview was a bit of a shock.

And the fact that so many senators lined up to push him out was also a shock. It’s a huge loss from my point of view, and it was pretty baseless. I’m heartsick about Conyers as well, but at least in that case there was more justification, and it happened while he was in office.

[ananda]

12. Oh dear ..

.. I'm starting to tear up again.

Franken was a fighter .. for us!

What the Dems did will actually hurt people because
it shows they don't stand up for their own or for
what's right!

[zentrum]

13. In the middle

…of the huge bomb of the tax bill being passed by the Senate—the Dems fire Franken.

Dangerous and harmful madness.

An ethics investigation would have made the Dems look just as "high road".

Maybe Minnesotans will write his name in, in the next election and return him to office.

[flamingdem]

14. Aha! Finally some concrete answers. Plus the "in group" was wondering what Franken had done

for them lately. He wasn't in the NY circle Schumer/Bernie/Gillibrand and perhaps was excluded from other power circles because he was authentically fighting for us. Effectively. Perhaps he showed them up. Perhaps there was jealousy involved or jockeying for position for 2020

[Honeycombe8]

19. Yes...jealousy & 2020. nt

[McCamy Taylor]

24. I agree. Some would like our party to be all about the "House Democrats"

as opposed to those unsightly "Field Democrats."