Sam Ronan for DNC Chair

USAF veteran Sam Ronan’s positions are closer to Bernie’s (and mine) than Keith Ellison’s are.  Unlike Keith, Ronan is calling for an end to all corporate donations to the Democratic party and Democratic candidates.  His platform is more unapologetically progressive.  http://www.ronanfordnc.org/the-vision-for-our-future/

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Sam Ronan for DNC Chair

  1. Appears to be an excellent candidate!

  2. Shade says:

    Although I appreciate the sentiment, I don’t think putting an end to corporate donations is realistic. While Bernie was able to get substantial funding from individuals, as more similar candidates appear, they will end up competing for money from the same pool of funds – a pool that due to inequal income distribution is shrinking.

    If you don’t believe me about funding requests from individuals being overtaxed, I’ll forward some of the emails from my inbox. If I was to give even a few dollars to each of worthy candidates & causes I receive solicitations from, I’d go broke. And when I do give small amounts of money, the money is often squandered on sending me USPS mail asking for more.

  3. halginsberg says:

    I agree with you Shade that trying to finance campaigns on the backs of individual donors is tough on the donors and the candidates. Still there are several reasons the Democrats should ban corporate contributions. 1) They are inherently corrupting. 2) Thus the desire/need to attract corporate bundlers have led them largely to abandon the poor, working, and middle-class. This is why Democrats keep losing elections despite out-raising Republicans in a number of recent elections. 3) The rise of social media and the value of committed volunteers make fundraising less critical.

  4. Pat says:

    Hal-I find your arguments for ending corporate donations compelling, but have to agree with Shade that totally refusing them is not practical at present. Regardless of the increasing use of social media and committed volunteers, campaigns are expensive to run. Paid professional staffers, office rent, phones, printed material, travel, etc., etc. all cost money-a lot of it. This has to come from somewhere, and Shade’s point about the over-taxed small donors is well made. I’m in the same position. I get numerous donation requests daily, and I have to pick and choose, as do most of us. Corporate donations can bridge the funding gap that small donors can’t fill. If we had public financing of elections, as we should, we could stop relying on the corporations, but until then, they’re a “necessary evil”-sad to say.

    • Looking at the results of the last two elections, 2014 and 2016, continuing with the same methods doesn’t appear to be smart. It is past time for the Democrats to break away from corporate control and become a party of the people. If that means refusing corporate money, so be it. Bernie proved that grass-roots money can accumulate a nice war chest. Most importantly, it would inspire and motivate voters.

    • Shade says:

      Good points Pat. In my opinion, Dems trying to take all our candidates into an election without accepting any corporate money would be like going to a gunfight armed only with a knife & with one hand tied behind our back. Besides, there is already a progressive party with such high moral values. The Green party doesn’t accept donations from corporations or businesses, and look how successful they are in getting their candidates elected.

      I’d love to try public financing. However, with Trump as president and Republicans about to control all three branches of government, that isn’t about to happen. Instead, we’ll be lucky if we don’t lose 3-5 million current Democratic voters given Trump’s allegation that it was that many illegal voters that cost him the popular vote and the Republican penchant for innovative voter purges.

Leave a Reply to Arlen Grossman Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *