I heard that the Democrats, (and I'm sure Republicans), were pouring money into the race. How is that legal. Guess I am naive, but I would think that in an election for state representation in Congress, it would all have to happen in the state. I know money is the object in politics, but one would think there would be some rules??
Did I hear the story correctly?
I heard that the Democrats, (and I'm sure Republicans), were pouring money into the race. How is that legal. Guess I am naive, but I would think that in an election for state representation in Congress, it would all have to happen in the state. I know money is the object in politics, but one would think there would be some rules??
Did I hear the story correctly?
I heard that the Democrats, (and I'm sure Republicans), were pouring money into the race. How is that legal. Guess I am naive, but I would think that in an election for state representation in Congress, it would all have to happen in the state. I know money is the object in politics, but one would think there would be some rules??
Did I hear the story correctly?
People don't like it when the shoe is on the other foot.
Where does it tell you which foot the shoe is on?
Where does it tell you which foot the shoe is on?
I guess there is a good reason that the last two posters are labeled 'professors'. I'm 'barefooted'.
:lamoMoney in politics is the Koch Brothers MO. 2 billionaires bought your congress. If Ossoff flips GA-6 because of his war chest, that's beating the Koch brothers at their own game. No Republican notices when the Tea Party rides a magic carpet of dollars into congress, but when massively well funded Democrats start retaking congress, the excuses come out in full force.
If it takes Ossoff flipping GA-6, for Republicans to come to the right position on Money in Politics, bring it on.
:lamo
Can you say "Koch Brothers" without saying George Soros? How many millions do you see hollywood socialist elitists dumping into election campaigns. HTF do people like you actually make such stupid statements as "boy...those republicans...they sure do spend a lot of money on elections. Just look at the Koch brothers" and not collapse out of shame?
Do you realize that Soros was fully invested in all of the top 9 Clinton campaign contributors? Or that 4 of the top 9 where investment companies? Or that the number 2 campaign contributor has a CEO born and raised in Moscow? Or that 2 of her top 20 financial contributors were the US Government and the State department? that her top investors are ALL multi billionaires including the richest men on the planet?
**** stinks. You running around holding your nose at 'their' pile of **** doesnt change the fact that the pile of **** you are craddling stinks just as bad.
I heard that the Democrats, (and I'm sure Republicans), were pouring money into the race. How is that legal. Guess I am naive, but I would think that in an election for state representation in Congress, it would all have to happen in the state. I know money is the object in politics, but one would think there would be some rules??
Did I hear the story correctly?
The Koch bros are a rat nemesis but they arent the problem. Like I said....as soon as you start shrieking about what THOSE GUYS do...well...you kinda out yourself. If its a problem its a universal problem.I'm not a Democrat and I don't support George Soros, Podesta, David Brock, Ken Salazar, Bloomberg, or any of the left wing think tanks and SuperPACs. They are all big business oriented. They don't give a **** about democracy, they just care that they stay rich and the peanut gallery stays poor.
Not a HRC supporter. I get it from both sides. I've battled people on this website about HRC. HRC was perhaps the most significant symbol in modern times, of the corrupting influence of money in politics. That still doesn't make what the Koch bros do right. And the damage they have done in the past 8 years, will take decades to undo.
The Koch bros are a rat nemesis but they arent the problem. Like I said....as soon as you start shrieking about what THOSE GUYS do...well...you kinda out yourself. If its a problem its a universal problem.
I'm not a Democrat and I don't support George Soros, Podesta, David Brock, Ken Salazar, Bloomberg, or any of the left wing think tanks and SuperPACs. They are all big business oriented. They don't give a **** about democracy, they just care that they stay rich and the peanut gallery stays poor.
Not a HRC supporter. I get it from both sides. I've battled people on this website about HRC. HRC was perhaps the most significant symbol in modern times, of the corrupting influence of money in politics. That still doesn't make what the Koch bros do right. And the damage they have done in the past 8 years, will take decades to undo.
According to Citizen's United, Money=Speech. The government cannot restrict a corporations ability to express themselves, by pouring large amounts of money into the political process. If you're really upset about it, there are people working to overturn the Citizen's United decision.
Until, then SuperPACs will continue to pour large amounts of money into our democratic process.
If Ossoff flipping a Red seat in GA, is what gets people to change their mind about money in politics, then that is a hefty dose of irony. People don't like it when the shoe is on the other foot.
Guess I am naive, but I would think that in an election for state representation in Congress, it would all have to happen in the state.
Why would one think that? I don't live in Georgia but it sure as hell impacts me if Paul Ryan is the Speaker of the House in 2019.
well, your other choice will be the Botox screech owl out of California, better get voting!
Depending on the topic, I have my moments.
If I were to run for office, getting money out of politics would be a part of my platform. And I would raise money from grassroots, small dollar contributions.
I'm also involved in Wolf PAC
Which is working at the state level to call for a constitional convention, to overturn Citizen's United and get money out of politics.
In the House the 2 year terms force congressmen to be perpetually campaigning and raising money, instead of focusing on working on legislation. The idea is to overturn the USSC Money=Speech decision and level the playing field. I support the idea of giving every tax-payer a tax credit to apply to the candidates of their choosing. They can choose to allocate 100% to this candidate, or 50% and 50% to a Senate race here and a congressional district race there.
As it stands we live in a broken system. Next to gerrymandering, Money in Politics, is the primary reason for unfairness in a Democratic system. And when you add in the aspect that SuperPAC, basically bribe politicians to legislate on their behalf, it becomes a different animal. Because not only are the elections unfair, the corporate sponsored candidate actually blocks legislation that would benefit regular people, if it hurts a special interest. Look at Booker's pharmeceutical vote.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?