Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Michigan
Related: About this forum
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 1483 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Should Battle Creek have spent $93k hosting Trump campaign? (Original Post)
LessAspin
Jan 2020
OP
Ridiculous. Not fair for a city to use funds from people with many political views to absorb costs
Karadeniz
Jan 2020
#2
muntrv
(14,505 posts)1. City should have demanded payment up front or else no rally.
Obviously rally won out.
Karadeniz
(23,424 posts)2. Ridiculous. Not fair for a city to use funds from people with many political views to absorb costs
To facilitate the GOP view.
safeinOhio
(34,084 posts)3. Cereal City making lots
of money off cheap cereal crops thanks to Dimwit Donnie.
3Hotdogs
(13,403 posts)4. This is one good thing about living in N.J. The primaries are settled by the time N.J. votes.
We get no say. But we also don't put up with ads and our taxpayers don't have to pay for rallies.
marble falls
(62,073 posts)5. I am, too - especially if tax payer bucks are in that pot.