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.
How is this remotely fair? Hillary is spending and raising more than anybody else combined! That's not fair. We should put a 90% tax rate on everything Hillary raises - like a rainfall tax.
Keep in mind that she didn't earn most of those money if any. On the other hand, poor people are struggling on minimum wage.
How is this remotely fair? Hillary is spending and raising more than anybody else combined! That's not fair. We should put a 90% tax rate on everything Hillary raises - like a rainfall tax.
Keep in mind that she didn't earn most of those money if any. On the other hand, poor people are struggling on minimum wage.
I don't want to hear a single Republican dare say anything about campaign financing.
Since government wants to regulate everything...they should put a cap on political campaigns. D's spent 1.1 bn in 2012 and Rs spent 1.2 bn. That's just ridiculous.
Campaign finance reform is completely essential. I'd actually argue that there are things about our campaign system in general that aren't especially productive. But name recognition and money are the two things you need to be president anymore, not merit or good ideas. I honestly think Martin O'Malley lost simply because Hillary has been known for decades and most couldn't be bothered to Google who he was. They already knew her.
Regardless, money is too influential in politics and something needs to change. A system on merit, not status, would logically be a must in politics.
Since government wants to regulate everything...they should put a cap on political campaigns. D's spent 1.1 bn in 2012 and Rs spent 1.2 bn. That's just ridiculous.
So..., bad that government regulates "everything?" And..., bad the level of campaign spending?
Where does that leave us? Just bad off I suppose...
Are you sure that the better question wouldn't be:
How is this remotely fair? Donald Trump, by making deliberately inflammatory statements, often untrue statements, has managed to dominate the news while rarely providing anything substantive, and is even profiting from his candidacy via his brand name!
We should be putting an extra tax on these profits, like a rainfall tax. And chances are that he's already paying less tax than either of the other two candidates!
What do you expect in a country where "Corporations are people my friend" (Romney) and the Citizens United court decision allows unlimited election spending by individuals and corporations.
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.
