Now
Fair
67°
High
86°
Low
66°

Buffett says he prefers a Democrat for president

Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

By The Associated Press

Monday, May 19, 2008 - 02:03:26 pm CDT

FRANKFURT, Germany — Billionaire investor Warren Buffett said Monday he would be happy if either Barack Obama or Hillary Rodham Clinton were the Democratic nominee because both have what it takes to be president.

Buffett, who dubbed himself “a political bigamist,” explained that he told both candidates that they would have his support when they were deciding to run for president. Buffett was in Frankfurt as part of a European tour to check out possible acquisitions for Omaha, Neb.-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc., of which he is chairman and chief executive.

“I told both Hillary and Barack I’d support them, and I’d be equally happy if either of them were the nominee,” he said. “Barack appears to have the nomination.”

Story Photo
Warren Buffett smiles during a news conference in Frankfurt, Germany, on Monday. (AP)

As for Republican John McCain, Buffett described him as a “first-class human being. I think he’s admirable. I don’t agree with him as much as I agree with Barack. I think the U.S. will do well over time whether the president becomes Barack or John McCain.”

He said the presidency was not unlike running a business.

“They say in the stock market, ’Buy into a business that’s doing so well an idiot could run it, because sooner or later, one will,“’ Buffett said. “The U.S. is sort of like that. I think the country will do fine whether it’s the Democratic or Republican candidate, but I strongly prefer the Democrats.”


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Nebraska > Back to Top of Story

All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Dano wrote on May 19, 2008 2:14 pm:
" Have to agree with Warrne on this one.

Love the idiot comment. Was that a shot at current affairs or future ones? His candor and honesty are exactly what Nebraskans are made of. "

Eric wrote on May 19, 2008 2:34 pm:
" Talk about being noncommittal. This is the worse endorsement I've ever seen. "

How Brave wrote on May 19, 2008 2:35 pm:
" She could still win in a long shot, and he won't risk alienating either candidate, because they could push policies that could cost him billions in retribution for endorsing their opponent. "

mTm wrote on May 19, 2008 3:10 pm:
" I'm sick of Buffett being an expert on everything. The guy is a successful, very successful business NERD who is rich. That's it...... He has clearly shown his colors chosing to give to the Gates Foundation to help elsewhere rather than the City and State he claims to be from. He has no idea of the life of a normal Nebraskan or person. He is no expert on politics, life and anything else. So to the article WHO CARES

Have a nice day... "

Kent wrote on May 19, 2008 3:14 pm:
" Doesn't say much for his morals. I don't guess it takes good moral values to run a successful business. Too bad. He is a role model and a bad one. Pro-abortion, pro-taxes, pro-immigration, pro-gays, pro-stem cell research, pro-liberal everything. That is what his Democrats are for. "

Dan wrote on May 19, 2008 3:57 pm:
" Based on helping the economy, it's really impossible to argue with Warren. I think he might know what he's talking about. "

Of course wrote on May 19, 2008 3:58 pm:
" Buffett prefers a Democratic president! Is that any shock? Why is that news? He also wants to maintain the estate tax which is just one more way the government can tax success. It's ridiculous. I respect and admire Buffett for his business savvy & accomplishments, but find his politics very tired. "

Jose wrote on May 19, 2008 4:05 pm:
" I agree with Buffett that the Democratic candidate would be the best this time around. The fact that one of the candiates is even considering Sen. Hagel as Vice President shows thinking outside the box.

The country needs and deserves a new direction. "

Man wrote on May 19, 2008 4:18 pm:
" I wonder if GW is going to be insulted . I would guess that buffet was referring to bush. Let a idiot run it I mean. Check it out nebraskans, one of the smartest business people in the world likes the dems. Maybe this state won't vote republican after all. Personally I think Buffet is right on the money. In all terms. "

Terry wrote on May 19, 2008 4:19 pm:
" Just goes to show that you don't have to have brains to get rich, you just have to be lucky! "

duh wrote on May 19, 2008 4:33 pm:
" if either of the democrats get into the white house then we'll see how the country will run with an idiot. "

nemo captain wrote on May 19, 2008 4:51 pm:
" I prefer someone who won't rob me blind on taxes. Warren Bufffett can afford the millions he'll be paying in, I can't. "

Nina wrote on May 19, 2008 5:56 pm:
" Warren and I think alike on politics (and I only wish I could think like him in finance!) A man who's known for not only making sound decisions, but who encourages youth, gives generously to the needy, knows how to live wisely, and has a bright outlook is also apt to give sage advice, and I believe Nebraskans should take it and vote Democrat, so we can start climbing out of the hole we're in, both economically and with our reputation worldwide. "

Jan wrote on May 19, 2008 6:10 pm:
" What I find so tiresome is the same old GOP mantra. Someone else can pay taxes, just not me. Very very shallow and mindless. "

BlueInRedState wrote on May 19, 2008 6:26 pm:
" Hey Kent, you say Democrats and Buffet are pro-abortion, pro-taxes, pro-immigration, pro-gays, pro-stem cell research, pro-liberal everything. I say, you are damn right. Get used to it! Pro-choice is the true term, as most people in America don't like old men telling women what they can do with their bodies...There couldn't be more taxes than what Bush has caused us, hello gas prices, tax cuts for the rich, while the middle class and poor pay much more than our rich counterparts??? Not to mention the cost of the botched Iraq War...Pro-immigration? So I assume you will take a job in the farm fields or packing plants of Nebraska for low wages? You like your hot dogs on the grill for a good price, right? ...There are, and always will, be gay people in our country, paying taxes, contributing to society, hell, one of the heroes on United 93 on 9/11 was a gay man. Get over it! Can you accept and admit a 9/11 hero was a gay man? Stem cell research could save the world. Pro liberal? Again, you are damn right. Get used to it. Liberal is no longer a dirty word. It is common sense, not bigoted thinking like your politics. Nebraska will never be as conservative as it used to be, and even though it will probably go red again for this election...hey I respect McCain too… it's only a matter of time before the youth of Nebraska and forward thinkers vote backward thinking out for good. Go Obama Go! "

Me thinks wrote on May 19, 2008 8:08 pm:
" the article stepped on some REPUBLICAN TOES. I suppose buffett should give to lincoln to help the young folks have a new arena. Is this what that statement meant. He made the money , and he can damn well give it to who he wants. Notice his kids didn't get much.!! I agree about those who make the 100 K are the biggest whinners about a democrat getting elected. I made a lot of money two years ago and got breaks on taxes I couldn't even imagine existed. A cpa knew the angles. We need someone who would have taken more from me two years ago. Bush administration has almost put this country in bankruptsy and may still have time to finish the job. He did you know run every company he was with into the ground. Idiot taking over a company but good enough company that it can't be ruined fits bush really good.
q "

Dave K wrote on May 19, 2008 8:13 pm:
" Ah, Warren Buffett ... putting partisan politics above all else. He stands to lose hundreds of millions of dollars to taxes if either of those two socialists wins, yet he's 'endorsing' them anyways. I guess you have to respect a man who has made so much money that he can afford to throw his political support around foolishly. "

Dallas reader wrote on May 19, 2008 9:26 pm:
" Who says republicans have a lock on morals. They have always focused on the moral issues of abortion and gays. I respect them on their right to life issues but I see nothing else in the party that can be interpreted as moral. They have no consideration for the poor or infirm or our children's future. They support a war that has no basis and is killing thousands while draining our bank and ruining our reputation throughout the world. They also have been led to believe that they are among the "rich". Fewer and fewer people control the wealth in this country and we are giving them a free pass. Although I don't agree with Mr Buffett or the Dems on all issues, it is time for change with a conscious. "

whatever wrote on May 19, 2008 9:26 pm:
" Let's see record spending and budget deficits the past 8 years. Republicans in charge. More pro-gay marriage laws on the books than 8 years ago. Again, Republicans in charge. Higher taxes, runaway inflation, stagnant economy, more welfare for farmers than ever before, tax breaks(read corporate welfare) for big corporations and hardly a break for the small businessperson. Yup, you guessed it Republicans in charge. Securing the borders? We can sure count on John "Amnesty" McCain for help on that one can't we? How 'bout the rest of those "open border" Republicans led by Bush and Cheney. I'm with Kent, I'm sick of it all. This Republican ain't voting Republican this year, not one of them. "

mom wrote on May 19, 2008 10:56 pm:
" It is totally amazing how some people who comment here refuse to see reality. Bush and company have nearly run this country into the ground financially with a nine trillion dollar deficit and committed us to an ill-conceived war that we cannot win. All of this with a Republican-controlled Congress and a Republican administration. And there's people out there who think our situation is great??? You want more of the same??? Sorry, it's obvious that Warren Buffet is right on the money this time! "

Jack wrote on May 19, 2008 11:12 pm:
" This is really old news. Not only is Buffet a Demo but so is the second wealthiest man, Bill Gates. buffet something is wrong when he pays less taxes than does his secretary. He thinks hunger and disease are more important than sending some red neck in Nebraska his bucks. He thinks Bush is an idiot and thinks McCain is more of the same. He is a very smart guy and has the ability to think about how chains of economics affect his investments and knows a whole lot about people. Get over it. "

steverl wrote on May 20, 2008 12:06 am:
" I think he is a very wise man. He is a successful man with a lot of character. Yea he's rich but that doesn't mean he has to think like one. I'll vote for Obama or Clinton as well even if I'm not as rich as he is. "

The pro-business party wrote on May 20, 2008 6:24 am:
" Amazing how the Republicans who post here can turn like jackals on the most successful modern businessman in the US as soon as he makes the statement that he prefers the Democratic candidates over the Republican ones. I thought the Republican party was pro-business? This guy (Buffet) is business personified. He is the richest of the rich and supports change over the status quo (which probably benefits him more than anyone, financially). One has to assume that Buffet knows what is good for business. I wonder if the real message our Republican posters are sending is that the Republican party has shifted over the last ten years from the pro-business party to the pro-greed party. "

Yup wrote on May 20, 2008 7:10 am:
" to Me Thinks, if you really believe you should have paid more taxes two years ago, then, by all means, donate that money to the local food bank. Warren Buffet can endorse anyone he wants, I never take stock who another person likes, I vote for who I think is the best candidate. I'm not star struck. "

sutton_curmudgeon wrote on May 20, 2008 8:17 am:
" Quick!,someone name five economic accomplishments of the Bush administration And I'm not talking about recession, higher gas prices, higher food prices, rising unemployment, and the credit debacle. "

adam wrote on May 20, 2008 8:19 am:
" No surprise, he's always shown his ties to the dems. He likes them b/c he's rich and doesn't want anyone else to become rich. Why else would he want more taxes that would directly hurt him? He is successful at investing (mainly b/c he puts enough money in to move the markets in his favor) but knows nothing about politics. It's funny how Nebraskans praise him just b/c he's from here, but does he support anything in nebraska? "

Warren make a mistake wrote on May 20, 2008 8:21 am:
" I think if you actually READ his comments, he's saying it doesn't really matter who gets elected over the long term; things will continue mostly as they have. But I'm not so sure thats true. You have to ask yourself if Al Gore had been elected, if we would be in Iraq right now. I highly doubt it. This president has been very, very bad for America, and we'll be feeling the effects of his Trillions Dollars War for the next generation or two. "

economist wrote on May 20, 2008 8:21 am:
" Ask any top economist in this country and they have said since the beginning of this election that McCain would be the best President to help our economy. It's even been written in the WSJ. Warren, Obama, and Clinton's ideas of raising taxes will do nothing but hurt the working citizens of this country. "

MarkyMark wrote on May 20, 2008 9:18 am:
" Republican Morality is a mythological oxymoron anyway. Another my perpetrated is that Republicans are Conservative. For the first time in 100 years they had full control of Washington for 6 years and were able to spend money like drunken Democrats. That is the other urban legend. Sadly, all the Republicans have left is "Social Conservatism", which means nothing in a country like America, where freeom rings. Just more Big Brother is all that Social Conservatism is. "

JR wrote on May 20, 2008 9:27 am:
" My, but some of you are angry. Why such hate for Buffett? Because he is rich? Isn't that class warfare? Is it because he speaks his mind? I thought that is what Nebraskans were known for. Or is it because he dares to prefer a Democrat over a Republican? Ahhh yes ... now we are getting to the crux of the situation. Replace the word Democrat with republican, and all you haters would be falling all over yourselves with admiration and how he is a "true American Hero". But instead, you can't understand why anyone who is that wealthy would ever be willing to part with his money to help his country, as well as charities. Maybe Warren Buffett really is a "true American Hero" ... and you are just too blind to see it. "

Chris wrote on May 20, 2008 10:12 am:
" To: Of Course, Would you rather we tax failure? Tax success, what a farce. Where did you come up with that line? Buffett wants to maintain the estate tax and raise taxes on the wealthy, removing the tax burden from the lower and middle classes because he correctly assumes that the wealthy are in a better position to bear a larger tax burden, leaving the middle class to build wealth and continue to spend, which is the heart of our economy. Trust me, he knows what he's talking about. "

Ryan wrote on May 20, 2008 10:45 am:
" ANY economist in the US would say McCain would be best for the US? Umm, I think not. And, please, let's not forget that the WSJ is is a right-wing, conservative paper. Not biased at all. "

godsofwrath wrote on May 20, 2008 11:42 am:
" I hope you Democrats get what you want! Then you`ll see how high taxed your butts will be!! Face it democrats believe in wealth redistribution and thats ok if you have billions of dollars to spare like ohhh wally here. "

rac wrote on May 20, 2008 12:19 pm:
" Well, I guess this just proves that one cannot know everything about everything...

Stick to stocks Warren. "

Bob wrote on May 20, 2008 12:26 pm:
" I could care less with WB does with his own money. (Interesting that most of the Gates' trust bequests goes outside the US). But, the Berkshire stockholders will suffer large due to the expected cap gains increase. I imagine that is why the stock is down almost 20% in the last few months from the peak. Fortunately, I heard Doug Kass downgrade the stock, and got out in time. Be interesting to see if people continue to flock to the annual meeting with that kind of stock performance. "

Former Republican wrote on May 20, 2008 12:58 pm:
" After watching the fiasco of this administration with the war, deficit spending, holier than thou moral values, I can not in good conscience vote for the republicans. I was brought up to believe the republican party gave you choice, individual liberties, and wouldn't waste your money. Well, 0/3 isn't bad eh? I'm supporting Obama and Kleeb in November. "

Zoomie wrote on May 20, 2008 1:22 pm:
" No less than 3 long term studies (ie. Money Magazine) have all concluded the more Democratic the gov't, the better the economy performs. Best economic performances in the US since the 1910s came under a Dem-controlled House, Senate and WH. Worst? Under GOP-controlled House, Senate and WH! Simple truth is, if you're a businessman (except in crony industries like oil or defense) you want Dem gov't, as it'll outperform a GOP run gov't every time (always has, always will)! "

Actual Economist wrote on May 20, 2008 1:56 pm:
" I am an economist who thinks tax cuts are good. We have a major problem right now because we owe other countries, mostly china, many trillions of dollars and we have no way to pay it back because of tax cuts. That has caused huge economic problems in this country. Here is what Mr. buffet is trying to say, you need to raise taxes to pay off the deficit or we go in the tank and you have to take it from those who can most afford it. Someone has to pay for all this Republican spending. Not the middle class as it is now. The other thing he is saying is this is a great country that can sort of run itself in spite of the idiots running it. A hint: the idiots are the Republicans in the administration. End of story. "

MarkyMark wrote on May 20, 2008 3:12 pm:
" Buffett prefers Democrats and Dick Cheney prefers Republicans. That makes it easy right there. "

Dude wrote on May 20, 2008 4:54 pm:
" ANY economist in the US would say McCain would be best for the US? Well...if he's looking for a job. McCain has stated that needs to brush up on his economics, so that put far too much power in the hands of those that wish to remain powerful than someone who wishes to exercise financial discipline with respect to international debt and curb our extracirricular activities.
"

AWP wrote on May 20, 2008 5:06 pm:
" I am confused. Over and over again, posters on this board label the Republican Party as being in bed with the wealthy, and the Democrats act like they are all living in poverty and they wear it as a badge of honor. Yet, the Dems get more support from the evil upper class than that elitist Republican party does. The nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics did a study during the 2001-02 election cycle and found that people who contributed less than $200 to politicians or parties gave 64% of their money to Republicans; just 35% of their contributions went to Democrats. While people that gave $1 million or more to politicians or parties gave 92% to Democrats and just 8% to Republicans. Why would they do that? Remind me again, which politicians are beholden to the rich? "

One Out In The Third wrote on May 20, 2008 5:49 pm:
" Just goes to show you...Warren don't know everything. "

nemo wrote on May 20, 2008 6:34 pm:
" You think your gas prices are high now, wait till the oil companies have to pay more in taxes. "

Matt Poulsen wrote on May 20, 2008 6:55 pm:
" No...he's not an expert on everything. But who said he was?? The paper asked who HE would prefer. It is no different than if someone came up to you and asked who YOU would prefer. He simply said he prefers a democrat...what is wrong with that??

And how does this have anything to do with his morals for god's sake? Some of the posters on this board make me want to vomit. You're actually claiming its immoral to be a democrat...give me a break.

Warren Buffet is the antithesis of the greedy immoral business man. He is absolutely what every business man and woman should strive for and to suggest he is immoral is an absolute insult, based on a completely ignorant understanding of the facts. Are you seriously suggesting Buffett isn't intelligent?? Do you know how petty and pathetic these posts look? Good lord...this makes me embarrassed to be a republican...which is something that has been happening quite a bit lately. All of you who are making these type of accusations should be absolutely ashamed of yourselves. "

Chris wrote on May 20, 2008 7:07 pm:
" AWP Don't confuse individual's donations with business donations/industry donations, or further, industrial leaders (ahem, Dick Cheney). People correctly assume that Republicans are tied to the wealthy and Democrats to the poor because Republicans tend to cut programs aimed at poor and cut taxes to the wealthy, leaving lower and middle class taxes mostly unchanged. Democrats tend to increase social spending aimed at low-income citizens while increasing tax rates on wealthy.

Adam: perhaps he sees what's good for the country as a whole, instead of what's just good for his own pocketbook? Interesting way of thinking...Republicans should try it. It's what that Jesus character most of them supposedly emulate in their lifes would want. Unless, do you think maybe they are only giving lip-service to Christianity? Nooooo, couldn't be. "

AWP wrote on May 20, 2008 8:10 pm:
" Talk the talk, or walk the walk Chris. According to a 2006 study done by Arthur Brooks, Syracuse University professor, consider the following:
"Although liberal families' incomes average 6% higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30% more to charity than the average liberal-headed households"
and
"Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush."
Maybe they were just following their leaders. In 2000, Al Gore gave 0.2% of his family income to charity. What a big "Tipper"!
Lefties, what do you think of that? "

year Democrat wrote on May 20, 2008 8:28 pm:
" Let's have a do over.
Out of 250+ million citizens in this country.
Is this the best we can do ?
I vote for none of the above. "

you you wrote on May 20, 2008 8:46 pm:
" Most 'conservatives" actually believe in giving to charity willingly, not the government forcing charitable giving. Demos believe in forcing EVERYONE to give to the government and then big demo brother can dole it out from there to their favorite charities. "

timmy wrote on May 20, 2008 10:03 pm:
" Arthur Brooks provides a classic example of how carrying an agenda into statistical analysis can skew results. We need only picture the iconic map of "red" and "blue" states from recent elections to call Brooks' conclusions into question. His comparison suggests that cost-of-living on the East and West Coasts where liberal support is strongest is equal to that of the conservative red states occupying the center of the country. But, as Brooks should know from living in Palo Alto and nearby San Francisco, cost-of-living on the more liberal coasts is substantially higher than in the conservative center of the country, more than eating up the slightly higher incomes of liberals in those areas and leaving more liberal families with less income to devote to charity as they struggle to pay higher rents and mortgages, and often higher state taxes. And, conservative church tithing, though counted as charity, goes lots of different places (not all of which help the disadvantaged). "

Tax Increase wrote on May 21, 2008 7:26 am:
" Contrary to these so-called 'economists' that have posted, tax cuts do not help. For every tax dollar cut it reduces the economy by 25 cents.

I would love to see the proof that Buffet's secretary pays more taxes than he. BTW, he and Gates have said publicly on many occasions they feel the tax rates are too low.

Do any of you know who raised the taxes the most based on GNP in the last 50 years? Nope, not a democrat. It was your man Bonzo ( Ronald) Reagan! "

Lindsay wrote on May 21, 2008 9:56 am:
" I agree with Matt Poulsen...how embarrassing some of these comments are! The man is the richest man in the world...and self made to boot. He's obviously not an idiot, and all he stated was his preference (although he did say McCain isn't a bad choice either). Really it's time to grow up...I don't doubt him for wanting to give his money to starving people in Africa rather than whiny Nebraskans! "

actualeconwrong wrote on May 21, 2008 12:01 pm:
" being a smart business man doesnt always equate to understanding politics. as for who's paying the most taxes its the rich not the middle class. the 'rich' pay more than 80% of all tax revenue so to say the middle class is carrying the lions share is wrong and horribly uninformed for someone claiming to be an economist. "

Reminder to You You wrote on May 21, 2008 8:14 pm:
" If you recall - it was your fine city council representative Robyn Eschilman (Republican) that made a huge stink about city employees being uncharitable and attempted to force all city employees to give to United Way . . . "

Kent Morals wrote on May 21, 2008 8:21 pm:
" You have to be joking with playing the "morals" card. How does being pro-choice, supporting equality for all people socially and economically, being Pro-health register as being immoral? Your president W - is the least moral president this country has seen. He is responsible for +100,000 dead Iraqis, 4000 dead U.S. soliders, another 50,000 soldiers that will potentially be suffering from mental, emotional, physical and financial problems when and if they return home. So rethink what it means to be "Pro-life" . . . it is time that term was no longer hijacked by the extreme radical hatemongering right and associated with those who support human rights, stem cell research and the return of U.S. soldiers because that is truly the meaning of Pro-life . . . "

AWP wrote on May 21, 2008 9:41 pm:
" Do liberals choose to live in places with high costs of living, or do high costs of living occur in places where liberals live? "

geography vs. politics wrote on May 21, 2008 10:17 pm:
" All other things being equal, the most significant factor in cost of living tends to be housing costs. High costs of living tend to occur in places with high property densities where demand for housing is great (in other words, places where lots of people want to live) and development options are limited and land (due to demand and speculation) is expensive. It's a situation that is most pronounced on the coasts, and much less of a factor in low population density areas in the center of the country. It is mostly an issue of geography that does not seem to be easily linked to the political spectrum. "