Wall Street to Dems: you can't have it both ways

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 19, 2011 3:46 AM GMT
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66259.html

    After the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee sent a recent email urging supporters to sign a petition backing the wave of Occupy Wall Street protests, phones at the party committee started ringing.

    Banking executives personally called the offices of DCCC Chairman Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) and DCCC Finance Chairman Joe Crowley (D-N.Y.) last week demanding answers, three financial services lobbyists told POLITICO.

    “They were livid,” said one Democratic lobbyist with banking clients.

    The execs asked the lawmakers: “What are you doing? Do you even understand some of the things that they’ve called for?” said another lobbyist with financial services clients who is a former Democratic Senate aide.

    Democrats’ friends on Wall Street have a message for them: you can’t have it both ways.

    President Barack Obama and other top Democrats are parroting the anti-corporate rhetoric running through the Occupy Wall Street protests, trying to tap into the movement’s energy but keep the protesters at arms’ length.

    But many bankers aren’t buying the distinction. And some financial services lobbyists and industry insiders say the liberal line will make swing givers think twice before opening their checkbooks this year.

    “Most Wall Street guys, they feel like they’re going to be burned in effigy,” said Anthony Scaramucci, managing partner of SkyBridge Capital, who gave to Obama in 2008 but is now fundraising for Mitt Romney. Some moderate donors, who have given to both parties, “fled from Obama in his support of the Wall Street protests,” he said.

    In 2008 Obama edged out John McCain in Wall Street fundraising and Democrats overall raised about as much as Republicans. Giving patterns went back to normal in 2010 when the GOP came out back on top.

    This cycle Democrats have a particularly tough sell, since they pushed through a financial regulatory reform law last year and Mitt Romney has emerged as a Republican presidential front-runner, whose deep Wall Street ties clash with Obama’s recent populist overtures. The lip service to occupiers is only hurting an already rocky relationship.

    “You can’t have it both ways,” said one in-house financial services lobbyist. “It just makes it harder for people who are Democrats in New York, Boston, Chicago to on the one hand be demogagued and then be asked ‘Hey, you can get your picture with the president for $30,000.’ It doesn’t square.”
  • KissTheSky

    Posts: 1980

    Oct 19, 2011 4:00 AM GMT
    Another good example of money and big business running politics.
    Both parties do what corporate donors tell them to do -- not what's in the best interest of the country.
    As a result, our country is f*cked until major campaign finance reform happens -- although I won't hold my breath for that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 19, 2011 4:04 AM GMT
    KissTheSky saidAnother good example of money and big business running politics.
    Both parties do what corporate donors tell them to do -- not what's in the best interest of the country.
    As a result, our country is f*cked until major campaign finance reform happens -- although I won't hold my breath for that.


    I don't think the issue is one of campaign finance reform, the issue is that of solutions that require for ever greater regulations that entrench incumbents and ever greater power to government/politicians. What we need are politicians who reduce the size, scope and reach of government which is why I think the tea party movement has the better solution here than the OWS folks who seem more interested in implementing ever greater regulations which will result in ever greater "unanticipated" consequences.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 19, 2011 4:39 AM GMT
    riddler78 said
    KissTheSky saidAnother good example of money and big business running politics.
    Both parties do what corporate donors tell them to do -- not what's in the best interest of the country.
    As a result, our country is f*cked until major campaign finance reform happens -- although I won't hold my breath for that.


    I don't think the issue is one of campaign finance reform, the issue is that of solutions that require for ever greater regulations that entrench incumbents and ever greater power to government/politicians. What we need are politicians who reduce the size, scope and reach of government which is why I think the tea party movement has the better solution here than the OWS folks who seem more interested in implementing ever greater regulations which will result in ever greater "unanticipated" consequences.


    What we need is money out of politics since many of the regulations and programs you dislike are written by lobbyists and passed by politicians of both parties at the behest of their well-heeled donors.

    The initial tea parties (before Koch et al co-opted the movement), have more in common with OWS than they realize or you care to admit.
  • dancedancekj

    Posts: 1761

    Oct 19, 2011 4:44 AM GMT
    The Tea Party is dying. It's already been assimilated by the government, and are being gerrymandered into obsoletion or have been removed from power. Their first mistake was to elect representatives into the system ironically.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 19, 2011 4:54 AM GMT
    dancedancekj saidThe Tea Party is dying. It's already been assimilated by the government, and are being gerrymandered into obsoletion or have been removed from power. Their first mistake was to elect representatives into the system ironically.


    It's more than alive and well. The tea party movement continues to weed out Republicans and I suspect you will find they will have even greater success in 2012. Unless you try not to see it, the tea partiers continue to gain influence within the Republican party - which to some like Christian mean that Republicans are doomed or to others like me, it suggests that they are at least seeking redemption.

    As reason.com's polling shows, there remains a divide on a range of issues between tea partiers and the Republican party.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Oct 19, 2011 5:19 AM GMT
    “You can’t have it both ways,” said one in-house financial services lobbyist. “It just makes it harder for people who are Democrats in New York, Boston, Chicago to on the one hand be demogagued and then be asked ‘Hey, you can get your picture with the president for $30,000.’ It doesn’t square.”

    Do you think that Wall Street has been backing democrats? Is that what you're thinking?
    Sorry that train has already left the station
    The Financial Reform
    Elizabeth Warren
    issues have soured that relationship
    But LET Romney have their money .... that's an issue that can be used in a potential campaign
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 19, 2011 5:28 AM GMT
    GQjock said“You can’t have it both ways,” said one in-house financial services lobbyist. “It just makes it harder for people who are Democrats in New York, Boston, Chicago to on the one hand be demogagued and then be asked ‘Hey, you can get your picture with the president for $30,000.’ It doesn’t square.”

    Do you think that Wall Street has been backing democrats? Is that what you're thinking?
    Sorry that train has already left the station
    The Financial Reform
    Elizabeth Warren
    issues have soured that relationship
    But LET Romney have their money .... that's an issue that can be used in a potential campaign


    Wall Street has been backing Democrats. There's no dispute on that issue. The Democrats continue to ask for their support. That's the irony.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Oct 19, 2011 10:47 AM GMT
    Wall Street has been backing Democrats. There's no dispute on that issue. The Democrats continue to ask for their support. That's the irony.

    Ahh ..... but this go 'round that money is tainted
    and has become an issue in itself
    What candidate Now will publicly come out and say they are backed by Wall St ?
    Any takers?
    Nary a One ... lol

    And what do you think will happen if a candidate is linked to Wall St Money ... Scott Brown

    Do you think that will be a positive or a negative? .... Scott Brown icon_biggrin.gif



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 19, 2011 3:07 PM GMT
    GQjock saidWall Street has been backing Democrats. There's no dispute on that issue. The Democrats continue to ask for their support. That's the irony.

    Ahh ..... but this go 'round that money is tainted
    and has become an issue in itself
    What candidate Now will publicly come out and say they are backed by Wall St ?
    Any takers?
    Nary a One ... lol

    And what do you think will happen if a candidate is linked to Wall St Money ... Scott Brown

    Do you think that will be a positive or a negative? .... Scott Brown icon_biggrin.gif


    "This go around the money is tainted"? Good luck with that argument ;)
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Oct 19, 2011 5:01 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    GQjock saidWall Street has been backing Democrats. There's no dispute on that issue. The Democrats continue to ask for their support. That's the irony.

    Ahh ..... but this go 'round that money is tainted
    and has become an issue in itself
    What candidate Now will publicly come out and say they are backed by Wall St ?
    Any takers?
    Nary a One ... lol

    And what do you think will happen if a candidate is linked to Wall St Money ... Scott Brown

    Do you think that will be a positive or a negative? .... Scott Brown icon_biggrin.gif


    "This go around the money is tainted"? Good luck with that argument ;)


    Ummm ...... Dude
    There are thousands of people in the streets who would disagree with you
    icon_wink.gif