• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme Court takes up a Republican appeal to end limits on party spending in federal elections

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
107,566
Reaction score
90,073
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left

Supreme Court takes up a Republican appeal to end limits on party spending in federal elections

The Supreme Court will take up a Republican-led drive to wipe away limits on how much political parties can spend in coordination with candidates for Congress and president.
apnews.com


Trump playing for more control by the Oligarchy. Only the rich need apply.
 
Ikari said:
Trump playing for more control by the Oligarchy. Only the rich need apply.
Click to expand...
Fortunately, it doesn't always work out the way the Oligarchy wants it to...

Harris, With an Online Avalanche, Outspends Trump by Tens of Millions

The week of their debate, Kamala Harris outspent Donald Trump by 20 to 1 on Facebook and Instagram. It was just one sign of how uneven their online advertising battle has become.
www.nytimes.com

Perhaps the Oligarchy is better at making money than hand-selecting candidates.
 
You don't think Trump was approved of by oligarchy? lmao.
 
Just more legalised corruption. I wonder how many Americans actually realise how corrupt American politics already is when compared to most other first world nations??
 
To me this is the number one reason politics in this country are so ****ed up. Both sides take advantage, Trump has ramped up to a new level. We desperately need campaign finance reform.
 
They just have to fund candidates to get what they want. It's how it's been going, Trump just wants to take the brakes off. Sell out the Republic to the highest bidder.
 
This has been the conservative response to money in politics now that Trump has set up a very public bribery ring in the WH.
 
It’s working out exactly how they want. Trump puts on his clown show for his morons while he robs us blind.
 
Taylor said:
You don't think the Oligarchy screwed up by backing Harris?
Click to expand...
They would have gotten some shit they wanted out of her too. But Trump was backed by the Oligarchy, funded by billionaires. They get far more out of Trump than they would have out of Harris, but they fund both sides to own both sides.
 

The Roberts Supreme Court, itself corrupt via bribery (Thomas/Alito), will of course comply with the campaign-contribution demands of the wealthy.

We'll have the most corrupt governments money can buy. Can you say "banana republic"?

P.S. If the SC doesn't have 5 Justices to vote Yes on birthright citizenship, we are truly truly ****ed.

This is why they only voted on proceedural rather than on substantive grounds the other day viv-a-vis birthright citizenship.

If birthright citizenship doesn't exist, then who the **** are we as Americans? As a cohesive people?

Who would be American if no one is actually born American?? No other country in the world has such problems with basic birthrights.

Neither did we until the Federalist Society engineered our current Supreme Court. And dark money payrolled the Federalist Society.

We are more corrupt than 1998 Ukraine for Christ's sake. wtf?
 
Last edited:
Only Congress ( according to SCOTUS "money is speech" ) can do campaign reform and even there it would have to be public financing
 
Ikari said:
They would have gotten some shit they wanted out of her too. But Trump was backed by the Oligarchy, funded by billionaires. They get far more out of Trump than they would have out of Harris, but they fund both sides to own both sides.
Click to expand...
That's the only "both sides" argument that actually has legs.
 
Ikari said:
They would have gotten some shit they wanted out of her too. But Trump was backed by the Oligarchy, funded by billionaires. They get far more out of Trump than they would have out of Harris, but they fund both sides to own both sides.
Click to expand...

More Billionaires Back Kamala Harris Over Donald Trump. Who They Are

As the 2024 US presidential race heats up, billionaires across the country are quietly taking sides, providing significant financial backing to either Vice President Kamala Harris or former President Donald Trump.
www.ndtv.com

They wanted to rob us blind.
 
Must be another example of "MAGA condemnations are just confessions" when they were running about saying how Biden was gonna turn us into a banana republic.
 
They are robbing us blind. While you're like "your billionaires are worse!" the rest of us don't want billionaires to run politics.

Big difference. Shouldn't be a partisan issue.
 
lynnwinslow said:
@anatta and @Taylor , do you think this country needs campaign finance reform?
Click to expand...
It would be preferrable.. need is a big question. Like i said though the only thing that would pass SCOTUS muster is public financing.
Only Congress can do that and they wont
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…