But explain this in more detail to me. What exactly are they questioning? That specific individuals have donated to his campaign too often?
Yes. And really I used to work in FEC compliance it isn't hard. Their is software that tags similar names and addresses. This is really just lazy compliance.
FYI, the article you're scorning is quoting directly from the primary source, which it also links. Is use of a primary source alarmist, in your sage opinion?
Yes it does, my point was that the story chosen was an alarmist article from a lesser known site instead of the more "reasonable" article from the well known and well respected NYT
I'm certainly not saying it's not true that he is being investigated.
FYI, the article you're scorning is quoting directly from the primary source, which it also links. Is use of a primary source alarmist, in your sage opinion?
But explain this in more detail to me. What exactly are they questioning? That specific individuals have donated to his campaign too often?
Yes. And really I used to work in FEC compliance it isn't hard. Their is software that tags similar names and addresses. This is really just lazy compliance.
What is the penalty if the Sanders campaign does not respond to this by the deadline?
It also seems like it is not just a matter of some giving too large of contributions but there are also issues regarding staff reimbursement for travel (that it was not properly documented) as well as illegal contributions from foreign nationals.
FYI, the article you're scorning is quoting directly from the primary source, which it also links. Is use of a primary source alarmist, in your sage opinion?
Not at all.
Then please explain what made it alarmist such that you came out swinging at the OP?
My h and I theorize he's secretly getting Koch money.
I think that makes a lot of sense. Apparently, cross-referencing contributions for candidates, many of the contributors in excess of individual limits for the Sanders campaign previously gave to Rand Paul.
Yes. And really I used to work in FEC compliance it isn't hard. Their is software that tags similar names and addresses. This is really just lazy compliance.
What is the penalty if the Sanders campaign does not respond to this by the deadline?
It also seems like it is not just a matter of some giving too large of contributions but there are also issues regarding staff reimbursement for travel (that it was not properly documented) as well as illegal contributions from foreign nationals.
The problem with the New York Times article posted is that it does not provide a link to the actual letter from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to the Sanders campaign, and it also gives a simplistic account of the possible violations that the FEC is investigating. It is not simply those contributions over the individual limit of $2700 but also poor documentation of travel reimbursements and foreign nationals illegally giving money. Moreover, it does not really explain the process: for instance, when must the Sanders campaign respond, and if they fail to respond, what are the consequences? A good article would have covered each of these points.
So a lot of middle class people have $2,700+ to give a political candidate?
Yup. Right after they pay their $500 car payment.
The idea of a $500 car payment makes me want to die. Maybe if it was for two cars.
This is how I know I am cheaper than MH thinks I am, lol. He thinks I am like "'money, la di da!"
I never dispute we are solidly upper middle class, but both of these things - $500 car payment and $2700 to a political candidate seem like crazy talk.
Then please explain what made it alarmist such that you came out swinging at the OP?
coming out swinging? Really? But, yeah I shouldn't have said anything. I should know better by now.
No, just be prepared to offer something substantive and know what you are talking about. This board is pretty anti-Bernie, and I don't think anyone disputes that. I'm not trying to be mean, but you are someone who pops in occasionally to defend him or offer your support and rarely is it persuasive or substantive, which doesn't help perception on this board of Bernie fans.
iamlaila did a good job pointing out the value the OP's article has.
Then please explain what made it alarmist such that you came out swinging at the OP?
coming out swinging? Really? But, yeah I shouldn't have said anything. I should know better by now.
Don't act brand new. You challenged her, and it was all over your tone. And that's fine. I appreciate you wanting to contribute a source. But your analysis of the sources side-by-side actually missed why the first article was actually the more appropriate one. And when I pointed out the primary source, you are now passive-aggressively donning Bernie martyr robes ("I should know better"). I'm not having it. I think it's great you want to contribute and make us look at other sides. But the side you asked us to look at was inferior, and I'm not having it.
The idea of a $500 car payment makes me want to die. Maybe if it was for two cars.
This is how I know I am cheaper than MH thinks I am, lol. He thinks I am like "'money, la di da!"
I never dispute we are solidly upper middle class, but both of these things - $500 car payment and $2700 to a political candidate seem like crazy talk.
I am with you on this. I don't feel like I am politically apathetic, at all, but I really, really have trouble imagining giving this much money to a political campaign. We are well above middle class HHI and, to me, this is like a crazy amount of money to donate to politicians. I can't believe there are this many people that do this.
And LOL forever at a $500 car payment. I'd buy myself a good pair of $500 boots and walk everywhere while I saved for a car before I did that.
But these things are making me realize why my DH likes to tell me I am totally out of touch with reality.