Did you not read and understand the second picture you posted at all?
Yes, I did. Unlike you and my response to you.
The largest percentage of donors is at the top there. It’s not AIPAC or corporate interests, it’s small donors.
Again, the combination of the latter two is very much more relevant than the two separately. The donations NOT from small donors outweigh the donations FROM small donors
What in the world are you not understanding about your own posts here?
Literally nothing. It’s you that seem to refuse to acknowledge my solid point that a comparison of “small donors” and “not small donors” is the more apt one and that 55.25 is a larger percentage than 44.74.
Either way, over 72% of those PAC donations coming from business interests is an even more revealing stat.
Did you not read and understand the second picture you posted at all?
The largest percentage of donors is at the top there. It’s not AIPAC or corporate interests, it’s small donors.
What in the world are you not understanding about your own posts here?
Add up the large individual contributions and the PAC contributions.
Is that larger or smaller than the small individual contributions %?
Is the small individual contributions greater or lesser than 50%? Keep in mind that to be the “majority” you must have more than 50%.
Yes, I did. Unlike you and my response to you.
Again, the combination of the latter two is very much more relevant than the two separately. The donations NOT from small donors outweigh the donations FROM small donors
Literally nothing. It’s you that seem to refuse to acknowledge my solid point that a comparison of “small donors” and “not small donors” is the more apt one and that 55.25 is a larger percentage than 44.74.
Either way, over 72% of those PAC donations coming from business interests is an even more revealing stat.