If a candidate boasts about NOT accepting illegal campaign donations...

[NurseJackie]

If a candidate boasts about NOT accepting illegal campaign donations... is that the candidate's way of insinuating that his (or her) opponents DO accept illegal campaign donations?

Even if the candidate doesn't come right out and make an accusation, and even if the candidate avoids using very specific wording (such as "unlike my opponent...'') what other purpose could there be for making such a "contrast-and-compare" statement like that?

And I guess the same question could be asked of a candidate's supporters. When a supporter says: "Oh, I'm voting for Senator Acme because she doesn't accept money from corporations," isn't that a backhanded insinuation that the other candidates do accept corporate donations?

It seems to be a dishonest thing for anyone to do, and it reveals much about a candidate and his (or her) supporters when things like that happen. And I must say, what it reveals about those who do such things is not at all flattering.

[marble falls]

1. No more than saying "I do take bribes" mean no one else does ...

Or signing a pledge not to take bribes means you quit doing it vs never did.

It raises my suspicions when anyone makes a big deal out of their 'honor'.

[NurseJackie]

2. I agree.

It raises my suspicions when anyone makes a big deal out of their 'honor'.

I agree.

[relayerbob]

3. Reminds me of an old joke...

I's midnight and the first officer of a ship comes in to relive the captain, reeking of rum. The leaves but notes in the log, "First Officer drunk on duty tonight"

The next night the First Officer comes in and notes in the log, "Came on shift tonight, and the captain was not drunk tonight"

[George II]

4. If it's the candidate I think you're talking about, he's had an unprecedented contributions....

....flagged by the FEC as being improper or impermissible, including a number of contributions from foreign entities.

In his first go-round he had just shy of 100,000 contributions flagged by the FEC.

This time around, in only two quarters he had 9,100 flagged by the FEC, Biden had 360.

This is all a matter of public record at FEC.gov

[NurseJackie]

5. Oh, I was just...

Oh, I was just speaking in the broadest of generic and non-specific terms that I felt was safest to do (for obvious reasons) but, I can definitely confirm to you that the information you provided in your response is indeed quite interesting and very enlightening on this particular subject matter.

[George II]

6. It's all a matter of public record at FEC.gov

[NurseJackie]

7. This, in my opinion, is probably a good indicator...

This, in my opinion, is probably a good indicator and clue as to how a particular candidate would run the country if given the opportunity.

[George II]

8. You piqued my interest, so I checked FEC again. In February he received a 598 page letter....

...from the FEC, listing more than 23,000 "Excessive, Prohibited, and Impermissible Contributions".

https://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/922/202003180300060922/202003180300060922.pdf

[NurseJackie]

9. Excessive over than the limit? Prohibited & Impermissible foreign?

That's no way to run a campaign. The rules are in place for a reason. If the rules cannot be followed, then the candidate should be disqualified.

I mean... clearly... this appears to be a patter that they don't care about. They're not taking it seriously.