Tuesday, October 9, 2012

Goldman Putting Money Behind Romney

WSJ reports:

When Barack Obama ran for president in 2008, no major U.S. corporation did more to finance his campaign than Goldman Sachs Group Inc. GS +0.13%

This election, none has done more to help defeat him.

Prompted by what they call regulatory attacks on their business and personal attacks on their character, executives and employees of Goldman Sachs have largely abandoned Mr. Obama and are now the top sources of money to presidential candidate Mitt Romney and the Republican Party.

In the four decades since Congress created the campaign-finance system, no company's employees have switched sides so abruptly, moving from top supporters of one camp to the top of its rival, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of campaign-finance data compiled by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

Employees at Goldman donated more than $1 million to Mr. Obama when he first ran for president. This election, they have given the president's campaign $136,000—less than Mr. Obama has collected from employees of the State Department. The employees have contributed nothing to the leading Democratic super PAC supporting his re-election.

By contrast, Goldman employees have given Mr. Romney's campaign $900,000, plus another $900,000 to the super PAC founded to help him.


  1. This is surprising given that Warren Buffet, Obama's pet billionaire, is a major stockholder.

  2. Look past the trees of deception and you will find Warren has a mongrel dog and a pure breed cat on his property this year. They will be feed and pampered and given lots of treats until their time for euthanasia arrives.

  3. Not surprising at all. Goldman supports both sides of the tyrannical equation (left and right foot of same party) and observes or determines which way the wind blows so they're covered either way.


  4. This action doesn't jive with Bernanke's "QE-Eternal" at face value.

    I doubt very much that Bernanke would do something greatly out of sync with GS.

    If this information is true and complete, I'd have to evaluate whether QE-Eternal is likely to be a Con-Job (in more than the usual sense) and marketing ploy.

    So, what if Bernanke really DOESN'T plan on printing hugely with QE-Eternal? What if QE-Eternal is just a way for them to say, "See? Now you don't have to ask for QE3 anymore. If we need it, we'll have it, with no bells or whistles."

    Alternatively, I wonder if the Banking cartel is beginning to crack under the strain? Perhaps GS is pulling one way, while JPM pushes another?

  5. Don't those big banks always pour heaps of money into both candidates? By doing this, it is obvious these donations are bribes. A "normal" donor would put their money behind only their preferred candidate wouldn't they?