Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The long term impact of the spending by the outside groups during this election will be to lay the groundwork for an even bigger effort during the presidential campaign two years from now. That will substantially diminish the role of the two political parties, according to campaign finance experts.
Other than running primaries, “who needs (political parties)? After this election, all of that can be outsourced to unregulated entities that don’t have to disclose their donors.”
Thanks, Supremes! (Citizens United was "the latest in a series of decisions (four, to be exact) from the Roberts Court knocking down campaign finance laws. The floodgates, such as they are, were opened three years ago in a different case, Wisconsin Right to Life v. FEC." Implications of the Supreme Court's Decision in 'Citizen's United' - The Takeaway)
When you decide to remove your blinders and condemn questionable sources of funding for both Democrats and Republicans there may actually be something to discuss.
Until such time it comes across as sour grapes due to Republican funding producing better results than Democrat funding in the midterm elections.
When you decide to remove your blinders and condemn questionable sources of funding for both Democrats and Republicans there may actually be something to discuss.
Until such time it comes across as sour grapes due to Republican funding producing better results than Democrat funding in the midterm elections.
Classic... "Lalalala, I can't hear you"
I'm not trying to force you to accept reality but is it that scary to even read an article? Wow.
When you decide to remove your blinders and condemn questionable sources of funding for both Democrats and Republicans there may actually be something to discuss.
Until such time it comes across as sour grapes due to Republican funding producing better results than Democrat funding in the midterm elections.
Exactly!
But that is the entire foundation of the lib party: wear blinders to anything and everything you do not agree with. Oh, and they also wear earplugs and can't hear anything either.
"Compounding the issue is the Supreme Court’s “Citizens United” decision, which paved the way for corporations and unions to give unlimited amounts of money to such groups.
"A Washington Post story yesterday reported that interest groups are spending five times as much as they did in the last midterm election, and that more than half of it is coming from undisclosed donors, compared with less than 10 percent in the 2006 election."
You would think the left would get it. Ok here it goes, money doesn't make people do what they do not want to do. Look at California, Fiorina and Whitman spent a fortune and lost. The left shouldn't be so afraid of information. But this goes back to the way the left views people. They think they know all and need to shield the rest of the dummies.
You would think the left would get it. Ok here it goes, money doesn't make people do what they do not want to do. Look at California, Fiorina and Whitman spent a fortune and lost. The left shouldn't be so afraid of information. But this goes back to the way the left views people. They think they know all and need to shield the rest of the dummies.
Sigh. I thought you guys fancied yourselves defenders of individuals, citizens, one man one vote. But here you are defending unlimited corporate advertising contributions.
Put it this way since you didn't get it the first two times. This Supreme Court's Citizen United decision has paved the way for the unions and associated worker-sympathetic groups to heavily influence and win elections, and this midterm was only the first election after the SC opened the door -- wait until corporate donorship becomes fully established in every political race.
Sigh. I thought you guys fancied yourselves defenders of individuals, citizens, one man one vote. But here you are defending unlimited corporate advertising contributions.
Put it this way since you didn't get it the first two times. This Supreme Court's Citizen United decision has paved the way for the unions and associated worker-sympathetic groups to heavily influence and win elections, and this midterm was only the first election after the SC opened the door -- wait until corporate donorship becomes fully established in every political race.
Yikes what does one man one vote have to do with this issue? I am defending free speech, yes I know it threatens the left.
You still haven't established that money makes people vote in a away they normally would not.
Don't be afraid of information. People are smart enough to evaluate political ads without your help. Let your fear go.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
