T Nation

Which is the Party of the Elites?

If you follow the money, it looks like it’s the Democrats…

http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=N2I4ODc3MGY4ODY1OGEyYTQ0OTBhYzc1OTQzYTM5ZmY=

http://rossdouthat.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/05/the_party_of_sams_club.php

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWMxNjhhNTk5OGRhNGNkYTQ5NGYyZjIyYmJjNDgzNzU=

Excerpt from the first link:

[i]Through May 1, the Democratic presidential field has suctioned up a cool $5.7 million from the more than 4,000 donors who list their occupation as �??CEO.�?? The Republicans�?? take was only $2.3 million. Chief financial officers, general counsels, directors, and chief information officers also break the Democrats�?? way by more than two-to-one margins. The Democrats�?? advantage among �??presidents�?? is a less dramatic but still significant $7.2 million to $6.1 million. And this isn�??t new: In 2004 all but one of these categories of top corporate officers broke just as dramatically for the Democrats, the �??presidents�?? being the exception.

Republicans do somewhat better further down the corporate food chain, but still lose the competition for contributions from executive vice presidents, vice presidents, and managers.

Wall Street firms, long a symbol of American elite accomplishment, also tilt decisively toward the Democrats. Employees in storied Wall Street institutions such as Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, and Morgan Stanley have all favored the Democratic field by a large margin. Even both sides of the recent Bear Stearns/JP Morgan Chase deal choose Democratic candidates over Republicans by two-to-one margins.

Democrats also enjoy enormous fundraising advantages among well-educated professionals �?? lawyers, teachers, accountants, journalists and writers. They carry practitioners of the hard sciences, winning solidly among physicians ($8 million to $4 million), biologists, chemists, physicists, and plain old scientists. Republicans must settle for a slender advantage among rocket scientists.

Not surprisingly, universities offer Democrats a hotbed of support. Professors favor Democrats over Republicans by a nine-to-one margin ($3.7 million to $430,000). Their students, though presumably struggling with sky-high tuition bills, nevertheless sacrificed enough late-night pizza and chips to send $4.1 million to their professors�?? favorite candidates and another $1.4 million to the GOP. The �??objective�?? media �?? reporters, journalists, publishers and editors �?? also breaks heavily for the Democrats. But no listed occupation gives the Democrats a greater edge than the unemployed. These presumably idle folks have dropped over $14.6 million into the laps of the Democrats. Their idle Republican neighbors, in contrast, have unburdened themselves of a mere $9,775. Go figure.

Who favors the Republicans? The Democratic field, after all, enjoys an overall fundraising edge in excess of $200 million, so any pocket of Republican strength is noteworthy.

In this upside-down campaign season when populist GOP campaigners like John McCain and Mike Huckabee surprised the pundits with their primary victories or, in the case of Ron Paul, their fundraising prowess, it almost makes sense that the party of the country club set has been winning the fundraising race among the common man. That�??s right. The white-shirt/red-tie brigade of Republican presidential aspirants holds a nearly three-to-one edge among janitors, custodians, cleaners, sanitation workers, factory workers, truckers, bus drivers, barbers, security guards, and secretaries. While Democrats command the financial loyalty of architects, Republicans successfully woo contributions from the skilled craftsmen who turn their blueprints into reality �?? specifically, contractors, hardhats, plumbers, stonemasons, electricians, carpenters mechanics, and roofers. This trend extends to the saloons, where the Democrats carry the bartenders and the Republicans the waitresses. The GOP field even secures more financial support from teamsters, steelworkers, bricklayers, and autoworkers.[/i]

And how exactly is that news?

[quote]lixy wrote:
And how exactly is that news?[/quote]

Go away idiot.

I’m gonna go with POLITICIANS.

How can you want to govern and not be a bit elitist?

And besides, would you prefer idiots support your party?

Elitism isn’t synonymous with “supported by the wealthy and intelligent”. It means that some is ‘out of touch’ with the common man, something both parties have in spades.

You’re assuming a two party system here, BB.

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
I’m gonna go with POLITICIANS.

How can you want to govern and not be a bit elitist?

And besides, would you prefer idiots support your party?

Elitism isn’t synonymous with “supported by the wealthy and intelligent”. It means that some is ‘out of touch’ with the common man, something both parties have in spades.[/quote]

Some people seem to think that if you follow the money, you follow the influence and prioritization. If that’s the standard, then apparently the Dems are not the party who will act in the interest of the median person.