An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right
The legitimate hypocrisy argument is about breaking a pledge (or, if true, encouraging and facilitating aggregated donations), not accepting small-scale donations from a broad base. The latter is the whole point.
Silhouette
I for one would like to put rumor aside and actually audit where all these little contributions are coming from. I still think it's very fishy that his supporters are statistically youngsters under 30, not established financially, often struggling college students...and yet...getting less than 1/2 the votes Hillary did from older, more established and financially secure supporters. Obama, from this suspect source, got FOUR TIMES the contribution funding Clinton did.
There's big money behind him being filtered in from a thousand different keyholes. If Clinton had outfunded him four times over from a base that was statistically struggling class...I can guarantee you there would not only be questions...but a formal audit of her funding as well.
Well, Silho, it's all public. Go for it. You got plenty outraged by Obama challenging bogus petition signatures. Here's your chance to challenge the legitimacy of his contributions. I haven't supported any candidate except Obama and my local Congressman, who is running for Senate. But I'm inspired by Obama's 1.5+ million individual donors, Obama rejecting PAC and lobbyist money, and then getting the DNC to take the same pledge. I'm happy to keep contributing to his general election campaign and you are welcome to verify that I'm just an individual supporting my candidate.