How George Soros Returned to the Political Landscape

George Soros is one of the most impressive investors that the United States has ever seen and he is completely a self made businessman. Soros was born and raised in Hungary before he was forced to flee his home country during the Nazi occupation. Soros would move to London where he would work his way through school, studying at the London School of Economics while moonlighting as a porter and a waiter. After earning his degree Soros would set sail to America where he would eventually start the Soros Hedge Fund and become one of the most prolific businessmen that the United States has ever seen. Due to his progressive nature and his willingness to back progressive causes, he has become one of the greatest opponents to the modern day right wing — and that hit a fever pitch during the 2016 presidential election. Learn more about his profile at businessinsider.com.

The presidential election of 2016 in the United States is going to be scrutinized for generations to come. The rise of Donald Trump and his dangerous brand of vitriolic populism is something that the country won’t ever forget and will hopefully choose to learn from. Still, Trump’s rise and legacy will have to include his inspiration to get George Soros back into the political fray. Soros has never been afraid to invest in politics, especially when he fiercely believes in the cause, but he mostly wants to keep money away from the political machine. Still, as Soros’ adviser Michael Vachon would say, the stakes were simply too high. Donald Trump was more than a political threat, he was an existential threat and Soros had to respond in kind.

So, George Soros leaped back into the fray in order to start backing some of the bigger progressive causes in the political game. Soros would end up giving $25 million to pro-progressive PACs up and down the ticket. He would support End Citizens United, a special PAC focused on campaign finance reform, as well as a slew of other PACs including: immigrant voter rights, opposition research for the DNC, the DNC itself, and Pro-Clinton PACs. Soros has never been afraid to put money down when he believes in a cause and the $25 million he set into place probably wouldn’t even be noticed from his bank account. Read more at The New York Times about George.

Most people are probably aware of George Soros for his 2004 run as a backer alongside then Presidential nominee Al Gore. At the time Soros was one of the biggest political donors in the country, giving a record breaking $30 million to help Gore try and get elected. Now Soros seems more content to watch from the sidelines, pushing his weight and power toward concepts that he believes strongly in — such as preventing Donald Trump from installing his populist agenda.

Efforts of End Citizen United Could Soon End Big and Dark Money In Politics

In 2010, the Supreme Court passed the Citizen United bill, which has changed the nature of American elections. Citizen United opened doors for billionaires and other people with special interests to spend unlimited amounts in campaigns making the electioneering process unaccountable. End Citizen United was established in March 2015 and registered as a super Political Action Committee that aims at overturning the disastrous Citizen United decision.

End Citizen United is committed to stop big and dark money in politics and restructure the United States’ rigged political system. The PAC has laid down strategies to help it achieve its mission. The plans include;

  • Using grassroots membership to demonstrate the political power on matters concerning money in politics
  • Making the issue of money in politics a national priority
  • Campaigning for pro-reform candidates

End Citizen United plan was to support Democrats because they believed that Democrats have a meaningful leadership that can implement the change.

The Strategy to Reverse Citizen United

After its launch in 2015, End Citizens United developed strategies that would see it make a significant impact in the 2016 electioneering season. The political action committee plan was to funnel millions of dollars to Democratic candidates running for various competitive House and Senate positions across the country. In less than a month into its inception, the agency received over $2 million from small donors, and the goal was to have over $25 million by the 2016 campaign season.

The group was formed with a goal to pass a constitutional amendment that will reverse the Citizen United ruling made by the Supreme Court. Citizen United was enacted in 2010 and has been criticized for unleashing dirty money into the nation’s politics through the use of super PACs. Two months into its formation, the super PAC had already collected 325,000 signatures and partnered with Ready for Hillary in their quest to collect the required four million signatures required to petition the decision.

In their pursuit for the constitutional amendment, the agency had endorsed 11 Democratic candidates by August 2015, and the figures were expected to increase. The endorsement was made as a move to back candidates who were in favor of campaign finance reform. In 2016, the PAC would set up an independent expenditure arm to back their preferred candidates through television ads, polling, and direct mailers.

The Breakthrough

Although End Citizens United is planning to enact finance reforms on local and state level, overturning the 2010 Supreme Court decision remains their priority. However, overturning this ruling won’t be an easy task because it will require backing from two-thirds of the House and Senate as well as ratification from three-fourths of the states. Policy experts and senior advisors believe that having $ 25 million in ads will be a big deal and may have a positive impact on overturning the decision. Additionally, some Republicans in Congress were expected to support the motion making it easier for End Citizen United.

Follow the group on facebook.com

Jose Manuel Gonzalez brings his business acumen into Venezuelan politics

In a recent article on RUNRUN.ES, Jose Manuel Gonzalez argues that politics in the hands of politics alone is a recipe for disaster. First, Mr. Jose Manuel Gonzalez refers his experience in public and private service as the perfect balance necessary for a person interested in holding a civil service job.

Mr. Gonzalez is a renowned businessman with extensive interest in agricultural products and markets. Since joining politics, he has chaired FEDECAMARAS and is currently a member of the Guarico state assembly. He is currently a candidate for the gubernatorial seat for the Guarico state.

Speaking on matters of development, Manuel lamented the challenges facing the country. He argues that even when the country lacks the necessary income to trade sufficiently with partners, part of the blame goes into poorly constituted policies. While it has been important to tap on to foreign investments, overemphasis on them can slow local capacities. He noted that most local producers lack the requisite material and technical ability to produce, a factor that hinders economic growth.

Since agriculture is the backbone of the Venezuelan economy, only policies focused on the needs of players in the sector and their proper implementation can give the country the security and the freedom to even trade outside its boundaries.He opined that leaders with such visions were badly needed.

Concerning nomination for the gubernatorial seats, Manuel noted that focusing on empty rhetoric at the expense of proven development track record continues to deny the electorate, good leaders. He lamented that even the worst of leaders could hire the best speech writers to hoodwink the electorate.

Empty charisma with promises of a perfect world stands to nothing if the leaders lack the strategy to get around doing things. A leader, therefore, must show capability beyond the obvious oratory charisma.Leaders ought to show respect for fundamental human dignity. People lacking in this department cannot be trusted to impart the same values on the electorate.

Finally, Mr. Gonzalez was vocal when he lamented about the model of democracy. In a flawed nomination process, the best candidate may lose out to an average candidate. This would be a travesty.