What’s The Difference Between Wealthy (Koch) Republicans And (Soros) Democrats?

The billionaire Koch brothers have been corrupting democracy for decades. Their labyrinthine web of front groups toil 24/7 to distort the facts on issues like climate change, voter suppression, gun control, and taxes. And if that collection of topics sounds familiar, it’s because the Kochs almost single-handedly created the Tea Party (with PR help from Fox News) to push their views on those subjects unto a gullible sector of the American populace.

Koch Bros. Fatcat

AT&T and Verizon users: Stop funding the Tea Party.
Switch to CREDO Mobile, the progressive cell phone company, today!

One of the right’s favorite knee-jerk responses to criticisms of the Kochs is to point to wealthy Democrats who contribute to candidates and causes that lean more to the liberal side of the political spectrum and claim that the Koch’s critics are hypocrites. However, there have always been some obvious distinctions between the right and left wing upper-crusters. The false argument of equivalency falls flat when given scrutiny.

For one thing, the Republican rich can usually be found bankrolling people and projects that benefit them personally or professionally. Thus the Kochs’ fixation on opposing unions and denying climate change is closely aligned with their exploitative and polluting business interests. Well-off Dems, on the other hand, commonly finance more philanthropic endeavors (civil rights, environment, aid to the poor) that aim to improve the quality of life without necessarily enriching themselves.

It is also notable that conservatives advocate for less regulation of money in politics, creating an environment where the rich get ever more power to bend society to their will. Liberals, conversely, spend more of their cash on trying to remove money from politics. As an example, it was conservatives, including the Kochs, who pushed for Citizens United so that they could fund their self-serving projects without restrictions or even identification. But Jonathan Soros, the son of the right’s favorite wealthy liberal George Soros, created the Friends of Democracy PAC, a SuperPAC aimed at ending the influence of SuperPACs.

A new survey was just published that affirms these distinctions between the rightist rich and the lefty leisure class. Conducted by the Spectrem Group for CNBC (Wall Street’s cable news network) the Millionaire Survey “polled 514 people with investable assets of $1 million or more, which represents the top 8 percent of American households.” Among the sometimes surprising findings was that more than half of the respondents agreed that “inequality of wealth in our nation is a major problem.” Also, 64% favored higher taxes on the rich. A similar number (63%) support an increase in the minimum wage. And only 13% said that unemployment benefits should be reduced. Remember, these are all millionaires in this survey.

Digging a little deeper into these numbers, another interesting trend takes shape. It turns out that there is a marked difference in the views expressed by the millionaire class depending on their political affiliation.

“Democratic millionaires are far more supportive of taxing the rich and raising the minimum wage. Among Democratic millionaires, 78 percent support higher taxes on the wealthy, and 77 percent back a higher minimum wage. That compares with 31 percent and 38 percent, respectively, for Republicans.”

CNBC Millionaire Survey

So the breakdown reveals that it is the Democratic wealthy who are the most conscientious and concerned about their country and their fellow citizens. While the Republican rich are selfishly and characteristically concerned mainly with themselves. It’s the difference between Patriotic Millionaires and Ayn Rand sociopaths. That’s not a particularly surprising revelation, but it is nevertheless useful to see it validated by hard data.


9 thoughts on “What’s The Difference Between Wealthy (Koch) Republicans And (Soros) Democrats?

  1. You have really embarrassed yourself again. One of George Soros’ front groups has just given a boat load of money to some lame-brained ballot measure in my home state to get marijuana legalized. Tom Steyer is going to shell out $100 million to get environmental chokehold-like regulations passed so he can bankroll a bunch of subsidized alternative energy projects that he will make money off of.

    Democratic mega-money good? Republican mega-money bad? What hypocrisy. This website continues to corrupt media analysis – or actually, it tries to. Most people don’t even pay attention to this claptrap. That’s why Harry Reid’s non-stop Koch tantrums will not bear any fruit for the Dems.

    • How does George Soros benefit from legalizing Marijuana? Note the distinction that Mark noted above, about Democrats funding sources that don’t necessarily benefit them. While legalizing marijuana is considered controversial, there are arguments FOR it as much as against, which would lead some to support a move. So it’s a funding of a cause that is in line with his beliefs. As the like of you are the first to point out, what’s wrong with funding what you believe in (as opposed to what you expect to fill your wallets), pointing to how numerous Republican Millionaires have funded Republican organizations? (strangely enough though, Soros gets flak when he does the same).

      Also you’re talking about THIS Tom Steyr right?



      Looks like funding what he believs in to me. It’s especially pointed that he’s funding environmental measures in general, not specific policies that can be tied back to investment projects.

      So, nows the time for you to show that Steyr is only doing this because “he can bankroll a bunch of subsidized alternative energy projects that he will make money off of”. I’ll be waiting for your link.

      All things said and done, Mark has shown why he believes Democratic Money = Good, Republican Money = bad. That may not be true on a case by case basis, but on the general level, Republican Billionaires like Koch seem to be firmly at the back of big oil companies and such where they do reap great profits. Call it an aspect of association, but the things they seem to fund seem to tie back to their own self-interests in general. If they want to get rid of that impression they should try to distance themselves from this sort of bankrolling.

      Just as how you can stop embarrassing yourself by actually thinking before you write.

      • Hahaha, a conservative sheep *thinking*? Please.

    • Scott obviously didn’t view the link you provided prior to making his last comment. He would probably call it a lie anyway.

  2. No amount of trying to explain away this hypocrisy is going to work.

  3. So why are you determined to demonstrate your hypocrisy Scott? You concede that you cannot defend it.

  4. I’m no fan of the Kochs, but George Soros is a thouroughly corrupt individual. He collaborated with nazis, made much of his money by insider trading, supports world government bets against against america and cheerleads for the end of the dollar and the US as the top superpower.

Comments are closed.