Influence of Adelson (and by proxy Likud Party) in American Politics (1 Viewer)

[Clifford]

Reading an article about Christie's fall from Presidential Contendor, and first page had this paragraph:

The next weekend, Christie flew to Las Vegas and met with Sheldon Adelson, a right-wing billionaire who is looking for a Presidential candidate to fund. Christie managed to offend Adelson, who is a major supporter of the conservative Likud Party, in Israel, by publicly referring to the “occupied territories,” a term to which Adelson objects. (“Occupied territories” is common parlance among both Democrats and Republicans, but Christie, fearful of losing Adelson’s favor, apologized.)

We all know who Adelson is. He basically chooses who will represent the Republican party, one half of our nation's choices for top post in the land. Christie offended him by using the wrong parlance on Israeli matters that outside of political influence have little to no impact on America or the American people.

By offending one person with the wrong term about a situation half a world away, Christie assured that he will not be who we vote for or against in 2016.

What are people's reactions to this? Is there a concern? If so is the concern more in the fact that so much power is concentrated in one man, or that so much power is concentrated in one man who cares this much about what will favor one faction of Israel over another?

ETA: Article

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2014/04/14/140414fa_fact_lizza

 

[timschochet]

Shouldn't the title of this thread be, "The Influence of Sheldon Adelson in American politics?"

ETA, and if old Sheldon is such a kingmaker, why wasn't his candidate last time (Newt Gingrich) the nominee?

 

[Clifford]

If your concern is more about the man than his agenda yes. Just found it a bit concerning for democracy that a slip of the tongue can have that much influence on our nation's choices for President.

 

[timschochet]

If your concern is more about the man than his agenda yes. Just found it a bit concerning for democracy that a slip of the tongue can have that much influence on our nation's choices for President.

First off, it doesn't. All of these guys go to Adelson because they want his money, but as I just pointed out, he's no kingmaker. He's been ineffective in choosing the GOP nominee- basically, he's more conservative than the party is. But they still want his money; wouldn't you?

Beyond that, the title of this thread suggests that there is something much more nefarious going on, that Israel itself, not some Las Vegas billionaire, has a huge impact on who gets elected in this country. That's a notion that is popular in parts of Europe and the Arab world, and it's not too far distanced from the anti-Semitic ideas about Jews who wield secret and powerful influence in control of everything that happens. So I rather take offense to it.

 

[Hooper31]

Beyond that, the title of this thread suggests that there is something much more nefarious going on, that Israel itself, not some Las Vegas billionaire, has a huge impact on who gets elected in this country. That's a notion that is popular in parts of Europe and the Arab world, and it's not too far distanced from the anti-Semitic ideas about Jews who wield secret and powerful influence in control of everything that happens. So I rather take offense to it.

Adelson is a #####, but he's not part of the menacing Jewish influence your thread title implies. He's a rich as all-get-out ##### trying to protect his gambling empire.

 

[T Bell]

If your concern is more about the man than his agenda yes. Just found it a bit concerning for democracy that a slip of the tongue can have that much influence on our nation's choices for President.

First off, it doesn't. All of these guys go to Adelson because they want his money, but as I just pointed out, he's no kingmaker. He's been ineffective in choosing the GOP nominee- basically, he's more conservative than the party is. But they still want his money; wouldn't you?

Beyond that, the title of this thread suggests that there is something much more nefarious going on, that Israel itself, not some Las Vegas billionaire, has a huge impact on who gets elected in this country. That's a notion that is popular in parts of Europe and the Arab world, and it's not too far distanced from the anti-Semitic ideas about Jews who wield secret and powerful influence in control of everything that happens. So I rather take offense to it.

You're going too far in the other direction, though. By plunking down the anti-Semitic card (complete with oblique references to the Holocaust and militant Islam) you're shutting down a legitimate set of questions about one of the most undeniably powerful lobbies in the US.

 

[Clifford]

Yeah, thread title stays.

Likud party priorities > Adelson > GOP priorities (if they want his money, which, yeah, they probably do)

 

[timschochet]

If your concern is more about the man than his agenda yes. Just found it a bit concerning for democracy that a slip of the tongue can have that much influence on our nation's choices for President.

First off, it doesn't. All of these guys go to Adelson because they want his money, but as I just pointed out, he's no kingmaker. He's been ineffective in choosing the GOP nominee- basically, he's more conservative than the party is. But they still want his money; wouldn't you?

Beyond that, the title of this thread suggests that there is something much more nefarious going on, that Israel itself, not some Las Vegas billionaire, has a huge impact on who gets elected in this country. That's a notion that is popular in parts of Europe and the Arab world, and it's not too far distanced from the anti-Semitic ideas about Jews who wield secret and powerful influence in control of everything that happens. So I rather take offense to it.

You're going too far in the other direction, though. By plunking down the anti-Semitic card (complete with oblique references to the Holocaust and militant Islam) you're shutting down a legitimate set of questions about one of the most undeniably powerful lobbies in the US.

What are your legitimate set of questions? And are you suggesting that AIPAC, Sheldon Adelson, and the Israeli government see eye to eye on everything and are one voice in dealing with American politicians?

 

[timschochet]

Yeah, thread title stays.

Likud party priorities > Adelson > GOP priorities (if they want his money, which, yeah, they probably do)

1. What are the Likud party priorities?

2. What are Sheldon Adelson's priorities?

3. How would the GOP priorities be different without the "influence of Israel"? Please be specific.

 

[Clifford]

Look I know what you want this to turn into and it's not going to be that. Substitute Likud party for any other party of any country not in our hemisphere. Instead let's make it the Nationalist Movement Party in Turkey.

My question is should one foreign nation, any foreign nation, have so much influence in our political process that a slip of the tongue about their issues can essentially end a Presidential candidates chances?

The fact that it is Israel is the reality, but the question of whether a foreign country should have this much influence over our own political system?

IOW, if there is a problem with this

Turkist Nationalist Movement priorities > Adelson > GOP priorities

then logically there should also be a problem with this

Likud priorities > Adelson > GOP priorities

I am just asking people if they see problems with the pattern of influence here.

 

[timschochet]

Look I know what you want this to turn into and it's not going to be that. Substitute Likud party for any other party of any country not in our hemisphere. Instead let's make it the Nationalist Movement Party in Turkey.

My question is should one foreign nation, any foreign nation, have so much influence in our political process that a slip of the tongue about their issues can essentially end a Presidential candidates chances?

The fact that it is Israel is the reality, but the question of whether a foreign country should have this much influence over our own political system?

IOW, if there is a problem with this

Turkist Nationalist Movement priorities > Adelson > GOP priorities

then logically there should also be a problem with this

Likud priorities > Adelson > GOP priorities

I am just asking people if they see problems with the pattern of influence here.

What pattern of influence?

And why can't you answer my questions?

1. What are the Likud party priorities?

2. What are Sheldon Adelson's priorities?

3. How would the GOP priorities be different without the "influence of Israel"? Please be specific.

 

[timschochet]

And why do you keep asserting that Sheldon Adelson is able to kill someone's chances of being President? Can you provide an example of somebody that he's "blackballed", who otherwise might be President right now?

 

[Clifford]

I can but won't. It's not the topic. Likud party priorities, good or bad, are determining at least one-half of our choices for President in 2016. The question is how people feel about one political party in another country having that amount of influence.

 

[-fish-]

well, this is a surprising result

 

[Clifford]

And why do you keep asserting that Sheldon Adelson is able to kill someone's chances of being President? Can you provide an example of somebody that he's "blackballed", who otherwise might be President right now?

Tim every single political commentator considers him exactly what you say he's not: a kingmaker for the GOP. So if you think he isn't, make a case.

Since you're the only one here, do you think it's a good thing for America that

A) Sheldon Adelson, a major political force, is a strong supporter of the Likud party

B) Sheldon Adelson though funding is able to play a large, large role in who runs for President on GOP side

C) That a GOP presidential hopeful needs to agree with Adelson's priorities in order to obtain his funding

I have always known that Adelson basically determines the GOP primary winner, but the slip of the tongue thing kind of made it more real to me. I think there are plenty of reasons Christie will never win the primary other than that slip of the tongue, but it crystallized just how much influence one man has over the course of our nation, and the influnce the Likud party has over that particular man. Maybe it's the other way around and he's running the Likud party from behind the scenes as well.

But I think I have convinced myself that you were right at first, and the problem really has to do more with one man than Likud party priorities.

 

[timschochet]

I can but won't. It's not the topic. Likud party priorities, good or bad, are determining at least one-half of our choices for President in 2016. The question is how people feel about one political party in another country having that amount of influence.

What priorities are determining this?

How are they determining this?

What proof do you have that either Likud, or Sheldon Adelson, is able to determine at least one-half of our choices for President? Again, do you have an example of a candidate that they chose to blackball in the past who otherwise would have gotten the nomination? Are you honestly suggesting that, if not for Sheldon Adelson, Chris Christie would have the nomination?

 

[timschochet]

And why do you keep asserting that Sheldon Adelson is able to kill someone's chances of being President? Can you provide an example of somebody that he's "blackballed", who otherwise might be President right now?

Tim every single political commentator considers him exactly what you say he's not: a kingmaker for the GOP. So if you think he isn't, make a case.

Since you're the only one here, do you think it's a good thing for America that

A) Sheldon Adelson, a major political force, is a strong supporter of the Likud party

B) Sheldon Adelson though funding is able to play a large, large role in who runs for President on GOP side

C) That a GOP presidential hopeful needs to agree with Adelson's priorities in order to obtain his funding

I have always known that Adelson basically determines the GOP primary winner, but the slip of the tongue thing kind of made it more real to me. I think there are plenty of reasons Christie will never win the primary other than that slip of the tongue, but it crystallized just how much influence one man has over the course of our nation, and the influnce the Likud party has over that particular man. Maybe it's the other way around and he's running the Likud party from behind the scenes as well.

But I think I have convinced myself that you were right at first, and the problem really has to do more with one man than Likud party priorities.

First off, you keep saying he's a kingmaker. You state that you've always known Adelson determines the GOP primary winner. If so, why wasn't Newt Gingrich the nominee? In 2008, Adelson supported the candidacies of Fred Thompson, then Mitt Romney. Why did neither of these guys win the nomination in 2008? What sort of kingmaker is this, exactly, and how does he determine the GOP primary winner? Are you SURE about what you've "always known"?

To answer your questions:

1. Neither good nor bad for America. Personally, I'm a huge supporter of Israel, but not necessarily of Likud. So I don't hold much with what Adelson's trying to accomplish. Still, it's his money.

2. Take it up with the Supreme Court. As far as I'm concerned, it's his money if he wants to spend it. But as has been shown time and again, money cannot buy elections. Adelson is proof of this.

3. Does it bother me that in order to get Adelson's money, you need to agree with Adelson? Uh, no. That's as it should be.

 

[fantasycurse42]

You two want to take this to PM?

 

[timschochet]

Just so you know, there are several billionaires involved in Republican politics besides Adelson. The Koch brothers. Howard Ahmanson. Scaife. All of these men have had an influence in GOP politics, much more than Adelson, who is still a relative newcomer (he used to be a Democrat.)

On the Democrat side you've got Soros obviously, but there is also Bill Gates, Phil Knight, Warren Buffett, and others.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Refresh my memory. Which party does the Jewish community overwhelmingly support again?

Let's start with presidential elections.

 

[Clifford]

And why do you keep asserting that Sheldon Adelson is able to kill someone's chances of being President? Can you provide an example of somebody that he's "blackballed", who otherwise might be President right now?

Tim every single political commentator considers him exactly what you say he's not: a kingmaker for the GOP. So if you think he isn't, make a case.

Since you're the only one here, do you think it's a good thing for America that

A) Sheldon Adelson, a major political force, is a strong supporter of the Likud party

B) Sheldon Adelson though funding is able to play a large, large role in who runs for President on GOP side

C) That a GOP presidential hopeful needs to agree with Adelson's priorities in order to obtain his funding

I have always known that Adelson basically determines the GOP primary winner, but the slip of the tongue thing kind of made it more real to me. I think there are plenty of reasons Christie will never win the primary other than that slip of the tongue, but it crystallized just how much influence one man has over the course of our nation, and the influnce the Likud party has over that particular man. Maybe it's the other way around and he's running the Likud party from behind the scenes as well.

But I think I have convinced myself that you were right at first, and the problem really has to do more with one man than Likud party priorities.

First off, you keep saying he's a kingmaker. You state that you've always known Adelson determines the GOP primary winner. If so, why wasn't Newt Gingrich the nominee? In 2008, Adelson supported the candidacies of Fred Thompson, then Mitt Romney. Why did neither of these guys win the nomination in 2008? What sort of kingmaker is this, exactly, and how does he determine the GOP primary winner? Are you SURE about what you've "always known"?

To answer your questions:

1. Neither good nor bad for America. Personally, I'm a huge supporter of Israel, but not necessarily of Likud. So I don't hold much with what Adelson's trying to accomplish. Still, it's his money.

2. Take it up with the Supreme Court. As far as I'm concerned, it's his money if he wants to spend it. But as has been shown time and again, money cannot buy elections. Adelson is proof of this.

3. Does it bother me that in order to get Adelson's money, you need to agree with Adelson? Uh, no. That's as it should be.

Gingrich, then Romney in 2012, Bush in 2004, 2008 couldn't find.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Reading an article about Christie's fall from Presidential Contendor, and first page had this paragraph:

The next weekend, Christie flew to Las Vegas and met with Sheldon Adelson, a right-wing billionaire who is looking for a Presidential candidate to fund. Christie managed to offend Adelson, who is a major supporter of the conservative Likud Party, in Israel, by publicly referring to the “occupied territories,” a term to which Adelson objects. (“Occupied territories” is common parlance among both Democrats and Republicans, but Christie, fearful of losing Adelson’s favor, apologized.)

We all know who Adelson is. He basically chooses who will represent the Republican party, one half of our nation's choices for top post in the land. Christie offended him by using the wrong parlance on Israeli matters that outside of political influence have little to no impact on America or the American people.

By offending one person with the wrong term about a situation half a world away, Christie assured that he will not be who we vote for or against in 2016.

What are people's reactions to this? Is there a concern? If so is the concern more in the fact that so much power is concentrated in one man, or that so much power is concentrated in one man who cares this much about what will favor one faction of Israel over another?

ETA: Article

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2014/04/14/140414fa_fact_lizza

I think a bigger mystery is why the Democratic Party under Pres. Obama while very much reliant upon Jewish voters in several key states is so relatively antagonistic towards Israel given the importance of Israel's safety to those same Jewish voters.

What's more I will take someone seeking Adelson's stamp of approval over someone who actually has associated with outright anti-Semites like Farrakhan, Wright and Khalidi.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/10/nation/na-obamamideast10

 

[timschochet]

And why do you keep asserting that Sheldon Adelson is able to kill someone's chances of being President? Can you provide an example of somebody that he's "blackballed", who otherwise might be President right now?

Tim every single political commentator considers him exactly what you say he's not: a kingmaker for the GOP. So if you think he isn't, make a case.

Since you're the only one here, do you think it's a good thing for America that

A) Sheldon Adelson, a major political force, is a strong supporter of the Likud party

B) Sheldon Adelson though funding is able to play a large, large role in who runs for President on GOP side

C) That a GOP presidential hopeful needs to agree with Adelson's priorities in order to obtain his funding

I have always known that Adelson basically determines the GOP primary winner, but the slip of the tongue thing kind of made it more real to me. I think there are plenty of reasons Christie will never win the primary other than that slip of the tongue, but it crystallized just how much influence one man has over the course of our nation, and the influnce the Likud party has over that particular man. Maybe it's the other way around and he's running the Likud party from behind the scenes as well.

But I think I have convinced myself that you were right at first, and the problem really has to do more with one man than Likud party priorities.

First off, you keep saying he's a kingmaker. You state that you've always known Adelson determines the GOP primary winner. If so, why wasn't Newt Gingrich the nominee? In 2008, Adelson supported the candidacies of Fred Thompson, then Mitt Romney. Why did neither of these guys win the nomination in 2008? What sort of kingmaker is this, exactly, and how does he determine the GOP primary winner? Are you SURE about what you've "always known"?

To answer your questions:

1. Neither good nor bad for America. Personally, I'm a huge supporter of Israel, but not necessarily of Likud. So I don't hold much with what Adelson's trying to accomplish. Still, it's his money.

2. Take it up with the Supreme Court. As far as I'm concerned, it's his money if he wants to spend it. But as has been shown time and again, money cannot buy elections. Adelson is proof of this.

3. Does it bother me that in order to get Adelson's money, you need to agree with Adelson? Uh, no. That's as it should be.

Gingrich, then Romney in 2012, Bush in 2004, 2008 couldn't find.

He supported Romney after Romney won the nomination. And he supported Bush when there was no other candidate.

So, putting aside everything but 2012, he supported Newt against Romney, and then Romney against Obama. Exactly how influential do you think he is, again?

 

[timschochet]

Reading an article about Christie's fall from Presidential Contendor, and first page had this paragraph:

The next weekend, Christie flew to Las Vegas and met with Sheldon Adelson, a right-wing billionaire who is looking for a Presidential candidate to fund. Christie managed to offend Adelson, who is a major supporter of the conservative Likud Party, in Israel, by publicly referring to the “occupied territories,” a term to which Adelson objects. (“Occupied territories” is common parlance among both Democrats and Republicans, but Christie, fearful of losing Adelson’s favor, apologized.)

We all know who Adelson is. He basically chooses who will represent the Republican party, one half of our nation's choices for top post in the land. Christie offended him by using the wrong parlance on Israeli matters that outside of political influence have little to no impact on America or the American people.

By offending one person with the wrong term about a situation half a world away, Christie assured that he will not be who we vote for or against in 2016.

What are people's reactions to this? Is there a concern? If so is the concern more in the fact that so much power is concentrated in one man, or that so much power is concentrated in one man who cares this much about what will favor one faction of Israel over another?

ETA: Article

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2014/04/14/140414fa_fact_lizza

I think a bigger mystery is why the Democratic Party under Pres. Obama while very much reliant upon Jewish voters in several key states is so relatively antagonistic towards Israel given the importance of Israel's safety to those same Jewish voters.

What's more I will take someone seeking Adelson's stamp of approval over someone who actually has associated with outright anti-Semites like Farrakhan, Wright and Khalidi.

1. How is Obama antagonistic toward Israel?

2. When did Obama associate with Louis Farrakhan? (And I don't know who Khalidi is.)

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Reading an article about Christie's fall from Presidential Contendor, and first page had this paragraph:

The next weekend, Christie flew to Las Vegas and met with Sheldon Adelson, a right-wing billionaire who is looking for a Presidential candidate to fund. Christie managed to offend Adelson, who is a major supporter of the conservative Likud Party, in Israel, by publicly referring to the “occupied territories,” a term to which Adelson objects. (“Occupied territories” is common parlance among both Democrats and Republicans, but Christie, fearful of losing Adelson’s favor, apologized.)

We all know who Adelson is. He basically chooses who will represent the Republican party, one half of our nation's choices for top post in the land. Christie offended him by using the wrong parlance on Israeli matters that outside of political influence have little to no impact on America or the American people.

By offending one person with the wrong term about a situation half a world away, Christie assured that he will not be who we vote for or against in 2016.

What are people's reactions to this? Is there a concern? If so is the concern more in the fact that so much power is concentrated in one man, or that so much power is concentrated in one man who cares this much about what will favor one faction of Israel over another?

ETA: Article

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2014/04/14/140414fa_fact_lizza

I think a bigger mystery is why the Democratic Party under Pres. Obama while very much reliant upon Jewish voters in several key states is so relatively antagonistic towards Israel given the importance of Israel's safety to those same Jewish voters.

What's more I will take someone seeking Adelson's stamp of approval over someone who actually has associated with outright anti-Semites like Farrakhan, Wright and Khalidi.

1. How is Obama antagonistic toward Israel?

2. When did Obama associate with Louis Farrakhan? (And I don't know who Khalidi is.)

1. I said "relatively."

2. Obama and Farrakhan and the two wives as well knew each other and supported each other in Chicago. This was arguably "just politics" but nonetheless that kind of politics is not ok.

3. I posted the Khalidi fundraiser report from the L.A. Times from 2008 in an ETA, above, here it is again.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/10/nation/na-obamamideast10

 

[RCon]

And why do you keep asserting that Sheldon Adelson is able to kill someone's chances of being President? Can you provide an example of somebody that he's "blackballed", who otherwise might be President right now?

Tim every single political commentator considers him exactly what you say he's not: a kingmaker for the GOP. So if you think he isn't, make a case.

Since you're the only one here, do you think it's a good thing for America that

A) Sheldon Adelson, a major political force, is a strong supporter of the Likud party

B) Sheldon Adelson though funding is able to play a large, large role in who runs for President on GOP side

C) That a GOP presidential hopeful needs to agree with Adelson's priorities in order to obtain his funding

I have always known that Adelson basically determines the GOP primary winner, but the slip of the tongue thing kind of made it more real to me. I think there are plenty of reasons Christie will never win the primary other than that slip of the tongue, but it crystallized just how much influence one man has over the course of our nation, and the influnce the Likud party has over that particular man. Maybe it's the other way around and he's running the Likud party from behind the scenes as well.

But I think I have convinced myself that you were right at first, and the problem really has to do more with one man than Likud party priorities.

First off, you keep saying he's a kingmaker. You state that you've always known Adelson determines the GOP primary winner. If so, why wasn't Newt Gingrich the nominee? In 2008, Adelson supported the candidacies of Fred Thompson, then Mitt Romney. Why did neither of these guys win the nomination in 2008? What sort of kingmaker is this, exactly, and how does he determine the GOP primary winner? Are you SURE about what you've "always known"?

To answer your questions:

1. Neither good nor bad for America. Personally, I'm a huge supporter of Israel, but not necessarily of Likud. So I don't hold much with what Adelson's trying to accomplish. Still, it's his money.

2. Take it up with the Supreme Court. As far as I'm concerned, it's his money if he wants to spend it. But as has been shown time and again, money cannot buy elections. Adelson is proof of this.

3. Does it bother me that in order to get Adelson's money, you need to agree with Adelson? Uh, no. That's as it should be.

If your comments re: 2008 and 2012 are true, apparently he's a pretty ####ty kingmaker.

 

[timschochet]

Saints, I don't believe Obama ever "supported" Louis Farrakhan. Seems extremely unlikely to me. I don't know anything about Khalidi, but not all supporters of Palestinian causes are anti-Semitic. And relatively or not, I don't think Obama's been antagonistic toward Israel.

 

[Clifford]

And why do you keep asserting that Sheldon Adelson is able to kill someone's chances of being President? Can you provide an example of somebody that he's "blackballed", who otherwise might be President right now?

Tim every single political commentator considers him exactly what you say he's not: a kingmaker for the GOP. So if you think he isn't, make a case.

Since you're the only one here, do you think it's a good thing for America that

A) Sheldon Adelson, a major political force, is a strong supporter of the Likud party

B) Sheldon Adelson though funding is able to play a large, large role in who runs for President on GOP side

C) That a GOP presidential hopeful needs to agree with Adelson's priorities in order to obtain his funding

I have always known that Adelson basically determines the GOP primary winner, but the slip of the tongue thing kind of made it more real to me. I think there are plenty of reasons Christie will never win the primary other than that slip of the tongue, but it crystallized just how much influence one man has over the course of our nation, and the influnce the Likud party has over that particular man. Maybe it's the other way around and he's running the Likud party from behind the scenes as well.

But I think I have convinced myself that you were right at first, and the problem really has to do more with one man than Likud party priorities.

First off, you keep saying he's a kingmaker. You state that you've always known Adelson determines the GOP primary winner. If so, why wasn't Newt Gingrich the nominee? In 2008, Adelson supported the candidacies of Fred Thompson, then Mitt Romney. Why did neither of these guys win the nomination in 2008? What sort of kingmaker is this, exactly, and how does he determine the GOP primary winner? Are you SURE about what you've "always known"?

To answer your questions:

1. Neither good nor bad for America. Personally, I'm a huge supporter of Israel, but not necessarily of Likud. So I don't hold much with what Adelson's trying to accomplish. Still, it's his money.

2. Take it up with the Supreme Court. As far as I'm concerned, it's his money if he wants to spend it. But as has been shown time and again, money cannot buy elections. Adelson is proof of this.

3. Does it bother me that in order to get Adelson's money, you need to agree with Adelson? Uh, no. That's as it should be.

Gingrich, then Romney in 2012, Bush in 2004, 2008 couldn't find.

He supported Romney after Romney won the nomination. And he supported Bush when there was no other candidate.

So, putting aside everything but 2012, he supported Newt against Romney, and then Romney against Obama. Exactly how influential do you think he is, again?

Very. So much so that every GOP presidential candidate makes a pilgrimage to win his political favor. And I am hardly alone in that opinion.

But no single donor's endorsement may be more powerful than Adelson, who is among the 10 richest people in the world. The casino magnate almost single-handedly bankrolled the group behind former House Speaker Newt Gingrich's 2012 campaign. Now, he's casting for a new presidential candidate on whom to shower his millions in campaign cash.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/walker-christie-court-gop-donors-las-vegas-23113029

Mr. Adelson’s political prominence will be on display Thursday in Las Vegas at the start of the four-day meeting of the Republican Jewish Coalition — an event that has attracted several 2016 presidential prospects, including Jeb Bush, a former governor of Florida; Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey; Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin; and Gov. John R. Kasich of Ohio.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/28/us/politics/major-gop-donor-tests-his-influence-in-push-to-ban-online-gambling.html?_r=0

One of the biggest pocketbooks there belongs to prominent Republican donor and billionaire casino owner Sheldon Adelson.

Adelson, who has spent tens of millions of dollars supporting conservative candidates, met privately with all the presidential contenders, a source told CNN, including former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who was at the summit earlier in the week.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/03/29/gop-2016-hopefuls-address-big-donors-in-vegas/

I think his influence is without question. Whether he always picks the right horse is a legit question, so kingmaker is off I will admit.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

And why do you keep asserting that Sheldon Adelson is able to kill someone's chances of being President? Can you provide an example of somebody that he's "blackballed", who otherwise might be President right now?

Tim every single political commentator considers him exactly what you say he's not: a kingmaker for the GOP. So if you think he isn't, make a case.

Since you're the only one here, do you think it's a good thing for America that

A) Sheldon Adelson, a major political force, is a strong supporter of the Likud party

B) Sheldon Adelson though funding is able to play a large, large role in who runs for President on GOP side

C) That a GOP presidential hopeful needs to agree with Adelson's priorities in order to obtain his funding

I have always known that Adelson basically determines the GOP primary winner, but the slip of the tongue thing kind of made it more real to me. I think there are plenty of reasons Christie will never win the primary other than that slip of the tongue, but it crystallized just how much influence one man has over the course of our nation, and the influnce the Likud party has over that particular man. Maybe it's the other way around and he's running the Likud party from behind the scenes as well.

But I think I have convinced myself that you were right at first, and the problem really has to do more with one man than Likud party priorities.

First off, you keep saying he's a kingmaker. You state that you've always known Adelson determines the GOP primary winner. If so, why wasn't Newt Gingrich the nominee? In 2008, Adelson supported the candidacies of Fred Thompson, then Mitt Romney. Why did neither of these guys win the nomination in 2008? What sort of kingmaker is this, exactly, and how does he determine the GOP primary winner? Are you SURE about what you've "always known"?

To answer your questions:

1. Neither good nor bad for America. Personally, I'm a huge supporter of Israel, but not necessarily of Likud. So I don't hold much with what Adelson's trying to accomplish. Still, it's his money.

2. Take it up with the Supreme Court. As far as I'm concerned, it's his money if he wants to spend it. But as has been shown time and again, money cannot buy elections. Adelson is proof of this.

3. Does it bother me that in order to get Adelson's money, you need to agree with Adelson? Uh, no. That's as it should be.

If your comments re: 2008 and 2012 are true, apparently he's a pretty ####ty kingmaker.

And of course the kingmaker is (what else) Jewish. And you know "they say" they control the media and finance and all. This political correctness thing is funny.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

And why do you keep asserting that Sheldon Adelson is able to kill someone's chances of being President? Can you provide an example of somebody that he's "blackballed", who otherwise might be President right now?

Tim every single political commentator considers him exactly what you say he's not: a kingmaker for the GOP. So if you think he isn't, make a case.

Since you're the only one here, do you think it's a good thing for America that

A) Sheldon Adelson, a major political force, is a strong supporter of the Likud party

B) Sheldon Adelson though funding is able to play a large, large role in who runs for President on GOP side

C) That a GOP presidential hopeful needs to agree with Adelson's priorities in order to obtain his funding

I have always known that Adelson basically determines the GOP primary winner, but the slip of the tongue thing kind of made it more real to me. I think there are plenty of reasons Christie will never win the primary other than that slip of the tongue, but it crystallized just how much influence one man has over the course of our nation, and the influnce the Likud party has over that particular man. Maybe it's the other way around and he's running the Likud party from behind the scenes as well.

But I think I have convinced myself that you were right at first, and the problem really has to do more with one man than Likud party priorities.

First off, you keep saying he's a kingmaker. You state that you've always known Adelson determines the GOP primary winner. If so, why wasn't Newt Gingrich the nominee? In 2008, Adelson supported the candidacies of Fred Thompson, then Mitt Romney. Why did neither of these guys win the nomination in 2008? What sort of kingmaker is this, exactly, and how does he determine the GOP primary winner? Are you SURE about what you've "always known"?

To answer your questions:

1. Neither good nor bad for America. Personally, I'm a huge supporter of Israel, but not necessarily of Likud. So I don't hold much with what Adelson's trying to accomplish. Still, it's his money.

2. Take it up with the Supreme Court. As far as I'm concerned, it's his money if he wants to spend it. But as has been shown time and again, money cannot buy elections. Adelson is proof of this.

3. Does it bother me that in order to get Adelson's money, you need to agree with Adelson? Uh, no. That's as it should be.

Gingrich, then Romney in 2012, Bush in 2004, 2008 couldn't find.

He supported Romney after Romney won the nomination. And he supported Bush when there was no other candidate.

So, putting aside everything but 2012, he supported Newt against Romney, and then Romney against Obama. Exactly how influential do you think he is, again?

Very. So much so that every GOP presidential candidate makes a pilgrimage to win his political favor. And I am hardly alone in that opinion.

But no single donor's endorsement may be more powerful than Adelson, who is among the 10 richest people in the world. The casino magnate almost single-handedly bankrolled the group behind former House Speaker Newt Gingrich's 2012 campaign. Now, he's casting for a new presidential candidate on whom to shower his millions in campaign cash.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/walker-christie-court-gop-donors-las-vegas-23113029

Mr. Adelson’s political prominence will be on display Thursday in Las Vegas at the start of the four-day meeting of the Republican Jewish Coalition — an event that has attracted several 2016 presidential prospects, including Jeb Bush, a former governor of Florida; Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey; Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin; and Gov. John R. Kasich of Ohio.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/28/us/politics/major-gop-donor-tests-his-influence-in-push-to-ban-online-gambling.html?_r=0

One of the biggest pocketbooks there belongs to prominent Republican donor and billionaire casino owner Sheldon Adelson.

Adelson, who has spent tens of millions of dollars supporting conservative candidates, met privately with all the presidential contenders, a source told CNN, including former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who was at the summit earlier in the week.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/03/29/gop-2016-hopefuls-address-big-donors-in-vegas/

I think his influence is without question. Whether he always picks the right horse is a legit question, so kingmaker is off I will admit.

And who in your estimation are the kingmakers in the Democratic Party?

 

[RCon]

So what exactly is the problem? We have a very powerful political campaign donor / influencer. He is one of many, although perhaps one of the most powerful. He is particularly interested in certain issues and favors certain specific policies in regard to those issues. He is likely to not favor candidates who don't share his opinions on those specific issues. How is this new, exactly?

 

[timschochet]

All right. So now we've determined that he's not a kingmaker, but he is a billionaire willing to throw a lot of money at candidates who agree with him. And that Israel is very important to Adelson (specifically Likud's view of Israel's security.) First off, why does this bother you so much? And second, do you really suppose that without Adelson's influence, someone who did not support Israel would win the GOP nomination? (Like Ron Paul, perhaps?)

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Refresh my memory. Which party does the Jewish community overwhelmingly support again?

Let's start with presidential elections.

Anyone?

 

[Hooper31]

Tim every single political commentator considers him exactly what you say he's not: a kingmaker for the GOP. So if you think he isn't, make a case.

He hasn't selected and crowned any kings. That seems a pretty strong case.

 

[dickey moe]

Replace the name Adelson with Soros and surprise... no thread!

 

[CBusAlex]

Replace the name Adelson with Soros and surprise... no thread!

Link

 

[Fennis]

Replace the name Adelson with Soros and surprise... no thread!

Why would Christie go see Soros?

 

[Fennis]

Refresh my memory. Which party does the Jewish community overwhelmingly support again?

Let's start with presidential elections.

Anyone?

democrats?

 

[Mystery Achiever]

Another Adelson priority is fighting online gambling. So, if legalizing it in NJ hasn't already eliminated Christie, I doubt this faux pas would.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Refresh my memory. Which party does the Jewish community overwhelmingly support again?

Let's start with presidential elections.

Anyone?

democrats?

Haven't supported a Republican since Harding.

 

[McGarnicle]

So the thread title was changed?

Damn, the Jews control everything. :(

 

[Clifford]

And why do you keep asserting that Sheldon Adelson is able to kill someone's chances of being President? Can you provide an example of somebody that he's "blackballed", who otherwise might be President right now?

Tim every single political commentator considers him exactly what you say he's not: a kingmaker for the GOP. So if you think he isn't, make a case.

Since you're the only one here, do you think it's a good thing for America that

A) Sheldon Adelson, a major political force, is a strong supporter of the Likud party

B) Sheldon Adelson though funding is able to play a large, large role in who runs for President on GOP side

C) That a GOP presidential hopeful needs to agree with Adelson's priorities in order to obtain his funding

I have always known that Adelson basically determines the GOP primary winner, but the slip of the tongue thing kind of made it more real to me. I think there are plenty of reasons Christie will never win the primary other than that slip of the tongue, but it crystallized just how much influence one man has over the course of our nation, and the influnce the Likud party has over that particular man. Maybe it's the other way around and he's running the Likud party from behind the scenes as well.

But I think I have convinced myself that you were right at first, and the problem really has to do more with one man than Likud party priorities.

First off, you keep saying he's a kingmaker. You state that you've always known Adelson determines the GOP primary winner. If so, why wasn't Newt Gingrich the nominee? In 2008, Adelson supported the candidacies of Fred Thompson, then Mitt Romney. Why did neither of these guys win the nomination in 2008? What sort of kingmaker is this, exactly, and how does he determine the GOP primary winner? Are you SURE about what you've "always known"?

To answer your questions:

1. Neither good nor bad for America. Personally, I'm a huge supporter of Israel, but not necessarily of Likud. So I don't hold much with what Adelson's trying to accomplish. Still, it's his money.

2. Take it up with the Supreme Court. As far as I'm concerned, it's his money if he wants to spend it. But as has been shown time and again, money cannot buy elections. Adelson is proof of this.

3. Does it bother me that in order to get Adelson's money, you need to agree with Adelson? Uh, no. That's as it should be.

Gingrich, then Romney in 2012, Bush in 2004, 2008 couldn't find.

He supported Romney after Romney won the nomination. And he supported Bush when there was no other candidate.

So, putting aside everything but 2012, he supported Newt against Romney, and then Romney against Obama. Exactly how influential do you think he is, again?

Very. So much so that every GOP presidential candidate makes a pilgrimage to win his political favor. And I am hardly alone in that opinion.

But no single donor's endorsement may be more powerful than Adelson, who is among the 10 richest people in the world. The casino magnate almost single-handedly bankrolled the group behind former House Speaker Newt Gingrich's 2012 campaign. Now, he's casting for a new presidential candidate on whom to shower his millions in campaign cash.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/walker-christie-court-gop-donors-las-vegas-23113029

Mr. Adelson’s political prominence will be on display Thursday in Las Vegas at the start of the four-day meeting of the Republican Jewish Coalition — an event that has attracted several 2016 presidential prospects, including Jeb Bush, a former governor of Florida; Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey; Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin; and Gov. John R. Kasich of Ohio.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/28/us/politics/major-gop-donor-tests-his-influence-in-push-to-ban-online-gambling.html?_r=0

One of the biggest pocketbooks there belongs to prominent Republican donor and billionaire casino owner Sheldon Adelson.

Adelson, who has spent tens of millions of dollars supporting conservative candidates, met privately with all the presidential contenders, a source told CNN, including former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who was at the summit earlier in the week.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/03/29/gop-2016-hopefuls-address-big-donors-in-vegas/

I think his influence is without question. Whether he always picks the right horse is a legit question, so kingmaker is off I will admit.

And who in your estimation are the kingmakers in the Democratic Party?

If Soros funds and Bill Clinton campaigns, well, that seems to be a fairly lethal combo, but momentum has a lot to do with it too, which is the wild card.

Anyway, obviously I took the wrong tack to discuss what I wanted to discuss. So lemme fend off a few red herrings and maybe we can get back on track

• I don't believe either party is innocent of letting money determine their platform
• I don't think Adelson's money is the sole determiner of who becomes the GOP nominee
• I don't think that the Jews control everything or that there is some sort of conspiracy that links Jewish interests to all people in power
• I don't think there is a single Jewish interest that involves destroying the Palestinian state. I believe there is significant debate in Israel about how to deal with their issues. Therefore there is no single mind that could create an agenda

I doubt that will do it. I just found it interesting the way the author keyed on Christie's slip of the tongue with Adelson. These are private meetings. We don't know what goes on. But I would not be surprised if Israeli issues are as dominant as American ones in them.

 

[Clifford]

All right. So now we've determined that he's not a kingmaker, but he is a billionaire willing to throw a lot of money at candidates who agree with him. And that Israel is very important to Adelson (specifically Likud's view of Israel's security.) First off, why does this bother you so much? And second, do you really suppose that without Adelson's influence, someone who did not support Israel would win the GOP nomination? (Like Ron Paul, perhaps?)

Replace the name Israel with any other country and it bothers me. It bothers me because how someone would deal with the issues facing our country should be what determines someone's fitness for candidacy. While we are an international power and can't walk away from that, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is just one of many global issues we are facing, and should not even dominate our foreign policy discussions.

That is what bothers me about it. If Adelson had a litmus test on an American issue, like minimum wage for instance, it would bother me less. I still think money buys too much political influence. The point of this was to ask others what they thought.

 

[joffer]

Hopefully he'll waste his money on someone like Cruz

 

[Clifford]

So the thread title was changed?

Damn, the Jews control everything. :(

By arguing with Tim I realized my problem is more with Adelson's influence and not specific to Israel. I have a problem with any country having that much sway in a hypothetical scenario. Israel is the only country with that much influence in real life, but that doesn't mean that my problem is with Israeli policies or priorities, my problem is that one country holds that much sway over our democratic process.

 

[Mystery Achiever]

That is what bothers me about it. If Adelson had a litmus test on an American issue, like minimum wage for instance, it would bother me less. I still think money buys too much political influence. The point of this was to ask others what they thought.

As I alluded to above, I think online gambing could be that test. He is very active in trying to get rid of it and Christie is taking money out of his pocket. That writer is not necessarily correct about his priorities and I find it odd that he did not even mention the online gambling angle.

 

[Clifford]

So what exactly is the problem? We have a very powerful political campaign donor / influencer. He is one of many, although perhaps one of the most powerful. He is particularly interested in certain issues and favors certain specific policies in regard to those issues. He is likely to not favor candidates who don't share his opinions on those specific issues. How is this new, exactly?

It isn't new. Just the article crystallized it so neatly, and I wondering what others thought. I have a problem with it (I have a problem with any country having that much sway in a hypothetical scenario. Israel is the only country with that much influence in real life, but that doesn't mean that my problem is with Israeli policies or priorities, my problem is that one country holds that much sway over our democratic process.) but apparently many others do not.

So I got my answer

 

[Clifford]

That is what bothers me about it. If Adelson had a litmus test on an American issue, like minimum wage for instance, it would bother me less. I still think money buys too much political influence. The point of this was to ask others what they thought.

As I alluded to above, I think online gambing could be that test. He is very active in trying to get rid of it and Christie is taking money out of his pocket. That writer is not necessarily correct about his priorities and I find it odd that he did not even mention the online gambling angle.

I think because there was no misstep in that meeting around online gambling that the reporter knew of. Not done reading the article though. I would think that would have much greater bearing on who gets his money.

 

[Fennis]

Refresh my memory. Which party does the Jewish community overwhelmingly support again?

Let's start with presidential elections.

Anyone?

democrats?

Haven't supported a Republican since Harding.

our first black president

 

[Fennis]

So the thread title was changed?

Damn, the Jews control everything. :(

By arguing with Tim I realized my problem is more with Adelson's influence and not specific to Israel. I have a problem with any country having that much sway in a hypothetical scenario. Israel is the only country with that much influence in real life, but that doesn't mean that my problem is with Israeli policies or priorities, my problem is that one country holds that much sway over our democratic process.

what country has that much sway over our democratic process?