Originally Posted by
indy_93accordex
The fact that 10,000 people from one specific company gave $120K to one presidential candidate seems very suspicious to me. The fact that they were able to contribute $4.8 million for various political campaigns over 20 years also seems very suspicious to me. I've worked for several companies who had employees totalling 40,000 people -- and we've never come close to approaching those kinds of numbers. Most folks wouldn't give a dime to any politician (even the ones that they like).
Why is Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac so heavily involved in politics?
And why are their contributions so heavily favoring one particular political party?
Umm, look at the actual numbers.
Obama has raised 401 million dollars. That means the total contributions of Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac employees accounts for ~.03% of the money he has raised so far from the general public.
So, follow me on the math on this one:
FM contribtions account for .03% of Obama's money. So, assuming half of FM employees are dems, we can roughly use 5K people for this "project".
To expand a percentage (based on the premise that.03 of his contributions come from 5000 people), we can divide 5000 by .03 to get an estimated number of people who would be required to contribute $25 dollars to meet Obama's 401 million.
5000/.03= 166,666.667, or a little over half of the US population. (Currently, over half of the registered voters are democrat as well)
Now throw in the people like my mother and I (We've contributed about 1K combined), you can see how Obama has received a statistically normal amount of money from FM employees, as their contributions are largely in line with the math involving the rest of the nation. Sure, it's a bit blurry, but I feel the premise is solid.
And the reason the contributions are heavily favoring one political party is that Obama's support network is from the population, and he's raised 2.35 times as much money as McCain. And a significant part of McCain's money comes from PACs.