You know...I wanted to look at the lists of contributors for John McCain vs. Obama and it shows the following: - McCain did not get near the money contributed as did Obama - McCain's top 5 were: Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan Chase - Obama's top 5: UC Berkley, Goldman Sachs, Microsoft, Google, Harvard - Others of note: McCain had several other investment banks etc. on his list in fact they predominate his list but Obama's #6 and 7 were JP Morgan Chase and Citigroup - Obama also had Columbia and Stanford as major contributors What does all this mean? It seems as if Obama had a much broader range of contributors whereas the investment banking community loved McCain more than any other sector did but they loved Obama in bigger amounts. Anyone care to read the tea leaves on this one? http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638
It's a shame that a public university like UCBerkley is able to make campaign contributions. Shouldn't they be spending all their disposable funds on the students and faculty? Of course UC Berkley sets the standard for liberal wacko's.
It surprises me that universities can be such huge political contributors. I am also wondering why such academic stalwarts as Cal, Harvard, Stanford and Columbia are all such Obama fans. I wonder also why the predominant sector contributing funds to McCain are in fact the investment/banking community. What's behind that? I can only guess as to why Obama received so much more dough but that may just be an indicator of the support he had vs. the support that MCCain had. This difference was born out in the election results. It's funny how the investment banks hedge their bets....just in case the other guy wins. Can't make up their minds or just covering their ass?