All Activity

From the linked U FL article, section 2: "Does money buy influence? Money matters in the most competitive races, open seat races that have no incumbent and those with high profile candidates. More money will be spent by the candidates in these races, but also by those who would like to influence the outcome. One concern that is often expressed is that winners answer to their donors and those organizations who support them. Since 2010, the role of outside money, or money from super PACs and political nonprofits, has raised alarms in the media and from reform groups. Some assert that self-financed candidates or those candidates who can demonstrate widespread support from small donors can allay concerns about the potential influence of donors on candidates and elected officials. The Center for Responsive Politics notes that outside organizations alone have outspent more than two dozen candidates in the last three electoral cycles and are poised to outspend 27 so far in 2018. However, it’s not always clear how useful that spending is. [snip dated examples] By 2016, it appears that super PACs were spending for more calculated effect, focusing on competitive races. In addition, much of that “outside money” comes from the super PACs associated with the two main parties. [snipped dated examples] Some candidates use their own money for their campaigns to avoid appearing indebted to donors. [snipped dated example] But self-funding does not resolve the democratic dilemma of responsiveness. First, Daily Kos found that most self-financed candidates lose – and the more they spend, the more likely they are to lose the election. Generally, the only exceptions are candidates like Rick Scott, who already hold elective office. Second, this way of improving responsiveness [better electoral outcomes by more spending] is limited because it effectively precludes anyone but the wealthy from holding office. Small donors seem like a democratic solution to wealthy donors dominating election giving. Several recent campaigns – Bernie Sanders, Rand Paul, Barack Obama and now Donald Trump – have created effective small-donor fundraising machines. More small donors means more widespread support, at least in theory, but that theory has limitations. Small donors are not yet giving enough to counter big money. In fact, the share small donors contribute relative to big money is declining. NOTE: both in volume and share of total, small dollar has increased since the article was written. See OpenSecrets.org for 2020 vs. 2016, See: section 2:The Funding Behind Record-Breaking Spending: [think before following links] https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2020/10/cost-of-2020-election-14billion-update/ Moreover, political science doesn’t yet know enough about who small donors are – whether they are economically representative of the U.S. as a whole or even if they are more ideologically motivated to give, contributing to polarization in politics." But this last part is important. You made two very key statements which are pure assumptions, seemingly motivated by the original video and like conversations. That is, small dollar donations are better -- that is an assumption which is challenged directly above. But two, that someone rich is merely buying influence. And to support that, you made comment about Musk [and I'm MAD at you for making me "defend" him at any level! haha]. To make that example work: What did DOGE do with Musk that it would have not done anyway. Financial deregulation has literally been on the Republican platform for decades. What did they do that they hide from view or didn't run on? Project 2025 and the like was well discussed during the 2024 Presidential run-in. To the idea the Harvard article about influence, well there are $10s to $100s of millions poured into Democratic and other anti-gun candidates who are not getting their moneys worth at the moment! See: Minneapolis: both sides now support concealed carry. That's new. Do you notice how they don't cite this opinion statement? The assumption of corruption is down the conspiracy theory road. This article suggests candidates only stay true to their position due to "outside" money. How many times do candidates get dinged for "flip-flopping" due to money. That was Sanders criticism of Clinton. Which is it? I get lost with this snippet from the Harvard article. They state the contributors want incumbents, but their money doesn't help them. So why are they beholden to those contributors? They continue here. "can" and "may" -- suggestive language and opinion. It is not fact. If it "can" or if it "may" it could also be "doesn't" or "may not." And again, if incumbents are elected on a certain set of values, why wouldn't they stay true? Don't voters hate "flip-floppers?"

At The Vault (London), about two weeks ago. Publicly fucked four times with anon deep loads and clean-up duties for cum cocks. And I fucked twice just to empty my balls.

I’m straight but love submitting to real men. I believe I’m a faggot not gay. I only want used as a cock sucker cum dump.

My little rosebud needs to grow up. Is there any daddy for it?

That would been funny after he left his DNA in my ass

Cool - I'm sure you'll be glad you did. It'll be a lot of fun - particularly going through the magnetometers at the airports. By now, most of the airline employees are used to guys like us flying off to Crisco-land all the time; just stand there trying to stifle a "shit-eatin-grin" and let them do their job while all the other travelers stare .... and try not to get a hardon - try really hard ... then hardly try .... 😇

No, the guy I am talking about does not live in NYC.

He could be a plainclothes or a covered police officer 😉😈

enjoy the process!! Your hole will open up and adapt!!

Lol.. I did ask if he was a cop. He proved me wrong by dragging me to the back and fucking me.

You could have raised the stakes by the SUV being a police car.😈

I wish I could go there!

You must live back in one of the Northern states ... or maybe Canada, given the "Imperial" reference .... I spent most of my life in Northern Illinois (Chicago), and I know all too well how hellish the cold can be. That's why I moved to FL - and the last time it was anywhere near this cold here was 15 years ago.

This one is so good, thanks for bringing it back up.

Welcum, matmat, and the other new members too. Looks like you're a busy boy; that sweet ass must attract breedcocks like a cum-magnet.

Glad to know that some of my old haunts are still servicing the local rawguys .... good times 😊

Two places are top of my places where I took a load. I was in a boiler room of a high rise apartment building. The most exciting was in the back of a suv in the police station parking lot at night. I was so nervous that their cameras would see us or cops catching us due to them driving in and out.

Was it the old location on 13th Street?

The Fair Theater is the granddaddy of New York City porn cinemas. Just last week there was a young white twink dotting around in a G-string and tank top in 9 degree weather with 10 inches of snow. Trecherous. I said to myself "girlfriend, you better work!"