The Democratic Party and business interests.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I'm discussing party politics in the United States with someone on another board, and they brought up the tired old line of, "the Republican Party represents business interests while the Democrats don't."

Does anyone know any good resources I could post in rebuttal to this? I have some ideas, but I thought I'd ask.

[apathy maybe]

The film industry consists of businesses doesn't it?

I believe that they contribute far more to Democrats then to Republicans. Not to mention, Clinton was president when many of the more outrages laws regarding copyright were passed in congress (I can't remember which party had control in either house).

I'm sure you could find many more examples of the film industry getting kickbacks from the Democrats. And that example alone destroys the other person's argument. (And there are many more.)

[timbaly]

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A00E7DB1031F93BA25753C1A9609582 60&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

That's an old New York Times article. I'm guessing that you're debating this on a site with right-wingers so I think they'll likely accept the New York Times easily. It's about the time of the Dole - Clinton election. It does mention that Republicans get more business donations, but it also tells you that Democrats get a lot too and mentions some companies that give more to Democrats.

[RGacky3]

EVERY political party in a Capitalist society, that accepts Capitalist power represents business interest, it must represent business interest, because business controls the cash and industry in their country.

[jake williams]

This is troubled by the fact that the Democratic party is less activist and extreme in its support of business, especially in its rhetoric but even in its policies. So you have to be able to say, well, the Democratic party isn't as extreme as the Republican party on this set of issues, but the spectrum is extremely tiny and both take these positions basically even if there are minor variations.

[Bud Struggle]

This is troubled by the fact that the Democratic party is less activist and extreme in its support of business, especially in its rhetoric but even in its policies. So you have to be able to say, well, the Democratic party isn't as extreme as the Republican party on this set of issues, but the spectrum is extremely tiny and both take these positions basically even if there are minor variations.

That would be dead on. there's a bit if a rhetoric issue, nice and all of that--but there's lots of big buck Democratic suporters and there's lots of big buck republican supporters.

I think the real difference is that the Republicans are a bit more honest about their intentions. Nope, that's not true either--the Republicans got into office saying they would limit government--and in 8 years they doubled it's size.

You are getting what they decide to give you--either way. Bend over.

[RGacky3]

I would say the difference is Democrats are a little more sensible, and look a little more long term than republicans, they are also a lot worse at politics. The american republican party is probably the best political entity in the world, they can take a turd and dress it up to look like a pie and have people eat it. Democrats are a little more sensible and conservative (in that they don't make such rash desicions) But are still just as business interested.

[JimmyJazz]

I know this isn't very helpful, but if you can get a dvd of The Myth of the Liberal Media, which is basically a short documentary interviewing Chomsky and Herman as they explain the propaganda model of the MSM, there is a nice graph that shows Republican and Democratic funding side by side, each broken down by donations from business, labor, and individual donors. The individual donors are insignificant for both, business accounts for like 95% of the Republican, and like 80% of the Democratic. I've searched the internet in vain for a screenshot of that graph because it is pretty impressive stuff.

[Lenin's Law]

I'm discussing party politics in the United States with someone on another board, and they brought up the tired old line of, "the Republican Party represents business interests while the Democrats don't."

Does anyone know any good resources I could post in rebuttal to this? I have some ideas, but I thought I'd ask.

:rolleyes: Such a silly argument this person made to you.

Wall Street has donated more money to the Barack Obama campaign than they have for McCain. Obama's supporters include the likes of Warren Buffet and Bill Gates... This should pretty much end the argument.

If they go further you can point how many companies donate the same or almost the same amount of money to both parties, why? They want to hedge their bets so no matter who gets elected, the corporation wins. There are exceptions to this to be sure - for instance the movie companies generally support the Dems while big tobacco generally supports the Reps but even then this doesn't negate the argument that Dems are completely beholden to corporate interests.

Don't get into the rhetoric game; propaganda = BS. The point isn't to focus on token phrases and soundbytes issued around election time but to focus on policy and financial support. This is far more indicative of where the party stands and to whose interests they follow.