Ladies and gentlemen, the difference between the Hillary Clinton Campaign and the Bernie Sanders Campaign, in a nutshell:
Let’s take a step back.
ICYMI: George Clooney held an extravagant dinner-event to raise money for The Hilldabeast’s campaign in California this weekend. Tickets for the sham-of-a-fundraiser ranged from a mere $33,400(!) to a high of $353,400 (are you fucking kidding me!?).
Clooney marketed the event as a must-attend event for celebrities and socialites alike. As a result, the “fundraiser” was able to charge moronic sheeple over THIRTY THOUSAND DOLLARS to attend a dinner-event. That’s how thirsty some people are to yack it up with celebrities. I mean, people were willing to to spend 3-upper-middle-class-household-incomes-worth of money for a piece of filet mignon at the same table as George Clooney! “DAMN, 3 TIMES”.
This is the perfection exemplification of the main difference between the type of politician Hillary Clinton is, and the type of politician Bernie Sanders is. Hillary has demonstrated over the past decade that she’s more interested in securing votes as Boss Tweed would, rather than through her message. The Hilldabeast gets her fat-cat on with Super PACs, Wall Street, and Hollywood alike in an astonishingly shameless manner.
In contrast, the average donation to the Bernie Sanders Campaign is under $30.00. For a while, the average donation size was $27.00, which has become a rallying-cry of sorts for Americans who are Feeling The Bern. By the end of February 2016, the Sanders Campaign had received contributions from over 4 MILLION INDIVIDUAL DONORS.
According to The Atlantic, a majority of The Brooklyn Brawler’s campaign contributions come online.
Does this not sound like the pure antithesis to the Clinton Campaign? How can supporters of ANY candidate stomach the fact that “their candidate” is relatively controlled by mega-donors and Super PACs when Bernie is running an honest campaign based on grass-root support and small donations? This question should rock the very core of all American voters as we progress into an era of a shrinking middle-class, extreme levels of, and a society obsessed with materialism.
I’m sure many people would try to make the counterpoint that, “well, Sanders cannot raise enough money to win the nomination by not tapping into mega-donors”. Which isn’t stupid, by the way. There’s a reason Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton were the perennial favorites to win presidential nominations over a year ago: money. We’ve “learned” first hand that it requires significant capital to run a successful campaign. We’ve “learned” that it’s normal for politicians to bend to the will of some mega-donors in order to secure financing. But here’s the thing, the Sanders Campaign is defying everything we “learned”.
Here’s another fun stat courtesy of Vox (as of March 23rd):
Sanders has now received $77 million from those giving less than $200, while Clinton has received $32 million from the same category, data from the Campaign Finance Institute shows.
It’s clear that that the “rules” of the political game are only what the American voters let it be. The way Hillary has conducted her campaign has been straight up dog-and-pony show. Don’t expect the continued bullshit pandering to the influential elite by Hillary to stop if Bernie’s passionate peeps continue to send their support.
At least some Sanders supporters made it clear to attendees of the Clooney-Clinton event just exactly what they embody: