March 25, 200422 yr The issue that I cannot resolve is this; *if* I had southsider2k4's money and wanted to spend $100,000 telling you why I think George W is the perfect man for our time, shouldn't I be allowed to do that? If I decided that the environment was a huge issue, and had the money to spend, shouldn't I be allowed to take out commercials and educate y'all? That sounds ok to most people. But when you see the ads and they are obviously partisan, because so many issues are partisan 1/2 the population cries "no fair"! i guess the other side of the coin would be: isn't it fair that we all be allowed to contribute the same amount? without going into an exact amount, should the government regulate a cap on"soft money" so that we all have an equitable stake. every citizen, regardless of weath, only gets one vote. should we extrapolate that to campaign contributions so that everyone has the same amount vested. obviously you can abstain from voting so you could also abstain from making a contribution.
March 25, 200422 yr i guess the other side of the coin would be: isn't it fair that we all be allowed to contribute the same amount? without going into an exact amount, should the government regulate a cap on"soft money" so that we all have an equitable stake. every citizen, regardless of weath, only gets one vote. should we extrapolate that to campaign contributions so that everyone has the same amount vested. obviously you can abstain from voting so you could also abstain from making a contribution. They do. I think it's $10,000. But, like the salary cap, there's fancy and sneaky ways around it.
March 25, 200422 yr My problem is, where do the poor people with no money fit in? They effectively become less "equal" than other people. No money? None at all to contribute?
March 25, 200422 yr No money? None at all to contribute? Essentially yes. I am talking about the bottom quartile of the population that has an MPC of 100. They live paycheck to paycheck, and can't save any money, let alone send $10,000 or even $100 to their cause or canditate of choice. Essentially that WHOLE sector of the population has no voice up until election day.
March 25, 200422 yr Essentially yes. I am talking about the bottom quartile of the population that has an MPC of 100. They live paycheck to paycheck, and can't save any money, let alone send $10,000 or even $100 to their cause or canditate of choice. Essentially that WHOLE sector of the population has no voice up until election day. I hear what you're saying, but I disagree. They can put a sign in their yard, a bumper sticker on their vehicle, go door to door, volunteer for their candidate. They could even join a local group that supports the candidate. I know it's not the same, but they CAN be involved without spending a dime.
March 25, 200422 yr I hear what you're saying, but I disagree. They can put a sign in their yard, a bumper sticker on their vehicle, go door to door, volunteer for their candidate. They could even join a local group that supports the candidate. I know it's not the same, but they CAN be involved without spending a dime. But how influencial is that when compared to the $5 million that a guy like Soros can spend at the drop of a hat.
March 25, 200422 yr But how influencial is that when compared to the $5 million that a guy like Soros can spend at the drop of a hat. I guess it's not, but it's more influential than my $100.
March 25, 200422 yr I hear what you're saying, but I disagree. They can put a sign in their yard, a bumper sticker on their vehicle, go door to door, volunteer for their candidate. They could even join a local group that supports the candidate. I know it's not the same, but they CAN be involved without spending a dime. But TV makes or breaks big campaigns. I hadn't really thought about 2k4's point. It is interesting. I think this is an area that the founding fathers would not have anticipated. When the constitution was written, all campaigning would be primarily face to face or, at worse, very regional. Now a thousand volunteers cannot reach as many voters as one TV spot. Another interesting factor I had never considered before seeing it on West Wing goes something like this. I admire the way I4E runs his corporation. We share similar values and ideas, believe in the same causes. He decides to donate to my campaign. His company runs into trouble from whatever and it is within my control as a Congressman, President, whatever to help him out. If I make a decision that helps him, is it automatically because he donated money, or is it because we share a common set of values and of course I would agree with him? I had always sided on the idea they are greedy bastard corrupt politicians, now I am not so certain. Everything a President does effects someone or else some else would be making the decision. If his actions didn;t help those whose values are similar, something wouldn't be right.
March 25, 200422 yr But TV makes or breaks big campaigns. I hadn't really thought about 2k4's point. It is interesting. I think this is an area that the founding fathers would not have anticipated. When the constitution was written, all campaigning would be primarily face to face or, at worse, very regional. Now a thousand volunteers cannot reach as many voters as one TV spot. Another interesting factor I had never considered before seeing it on West Wing goes something like this. I admire the way I4E runs his corporation. We share similar values and ideas, believe in the same causes. He decides to donate to my campaign. His company runs into trouble from whatever and it is within my control as a Congressman, President, whatever to help him out. If I make a decision that helps him, is it automatically because he donated money, or is it because we share a common set of values and of course I would agree with him? I had always sided on the idea they are greedy bastard corrupt politicians, now I am not so certain. Everything a President does effects someone or else some else would be making the decision. If his actions didn;t help those whose values are similar, something wouldn't be right. Yeah. I hate when people say "special interests". Look, we're all part of a special interrest group. Are you in a 401K? Special interest. Work for a semi major corporation? Special interest. Own stocks? Special interest. Pro Choice? Special interest. Pro life? Special interest. "Special interest groups" are looking out for your beliefs, they're not evil.
March 25, 200422 yr Yeah. I hate when people say "special interests". Look, we're all part of a special interrest group. Are you in a 401K? Special interest. Work for a semi major corporation? Special interest. Own stocks? Special interest. Pro Choice? Special interest. Pro life? Special interest. "Special interest groups" are looking out for your beliefs, they're not evil. Worse when they dismiss your thoughts because you are part of a Special Interest Group. Man that is the cornerstone of democracy. Everyone who voted for Bush was part of a special interest group. A textbook example of how the minority can win over the majority If your views are so far out there you are alone, worry then. If others are also thinking the same way, be happy. That's a SIG. But when only wealthy politicians can win, all we will have are wealthy politicians.
March 25, 200422 yr Worse when they dismiss your thoughts because you are part of a Special Interest Group. Man that is the cornerstone of democracy. Everyone who voted for Bush was part of a special interest group. A textbook example of how the minority can win over the majority If your views are so far out there you are alone, worry then. If others are also thinking the same way, be happy. That's a SIG. But when only wealthy politicians can win, all we will have are wealthy politicians. Uh, all we do have is wealth politicians. There hasn't been a middle class politician on a national level for probably a generation.
March 25, 200422 yr Author But how influencial is that when compared to the $5 million that a guy like Soros can spend at the drop of a hat. I'll be looking for your posts on what Richard Scarife dropped on the Republicans 1997-2000 because I know you are not one sided partisan.... oh wait...
March 25, 200422 yr I'll be looking for your posts on what Richard Scarife dropped on the Republicans 1997-2000 because I know you are not one sided partisan.... oh wait... In all seriousness, and putting aside partisian politics, this is a pet peeve of mine. And I have yet to hear a good resolution for it.
March 25, 200422 yr In all seriousness, and putting aside partisian politics, this is a pet peeve of mine. And I have yet to hear a good resolution for it. I don't believe there is one. Just which shade of bad you want to go on. And money doesn't just buy you political spoils It also buys you justice in America
March 25, 200422 yr I will probably get laughed at, but I'm a bit of a romantic and believe that an average Joe could still run for and win the Presidency. Yes, it would be extremely difficult and would have to be the perfect campaign, but I think it could happen.
March 25, 200422 yr Didn't Carol Mosley Braun make it to the senate in 92 being ridiculously outspent in the primary? Being a 14 yo in Indiana, I didn't even know she was running til she won the Democratic nod! What I think is awesome is that George Bush came to Boston, stays in a hotel for a fundraiser - and because of security concerns, kids aren't going to get home from school on time and the Boston Renaissance Academy has to close for the day. For a fundraiser. Probably to make sure no child is left behind.
March 25, 200422 yr Didn't Carol Mosley Braun make it to the senate in 92 being ridiculously outspent in the primary? Being a 14 yo in Indiana, I didn't even know she was running til she won the Democratic nod! What I think is awesome is that George Bush came to Boston, stays in a hotel for a fundraiser - and because of security concerns, kids aren't going to get home from school on time and the Boston Renaissance Academy has to close for the day. For a fundraiser. Probably to make sure no child is left behind. Heck Obama got outspent big time, and still won the primary. I am not talking about being outspent though. I am talking about people who don't have the means to spend.
March 25, 200422 yr F**k em. I'll probably rot in hell for this one but I can't resist... Spoken like a true gay republican
March 25, 200422 yr F**k em. And I'll be rotting in hell next to you but . . . errr, could you define "'em"
March 25, 200422 yr And I'll be rotting in hell next to you but . . . errr, could you define "'em" Yeah.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.