Will Republicans give up their belief in unlimited $$ in Politics if they lose due to it?

[Vector1]

Originally Posted by golgi1

Grassroots Right wing beliefs are intentionally caricatured and therefore mostly hidden from less sophisticated people by the Press.

Which is a situation that is complicated by the fact that most Left Wing believers are either ignorant about politics or malevolent (looking to harm people with their beliefs so that they are weaker competition for their special interest group).

Meaning that the Left often takes corporate explanations of the Right on their face or has an interest in promoting them in order to create an asymmetrical political battlefield where even the rules of the game and the goals of the participants are hidden (how can you play chess when you can't see the board or don't know the rules?).

What this means is that framing the ostensible Right's interest in "big money in politics" as anything but a corporatized and possibly false caricature of what being on the "Right" entails, is probably a false construct.

In my opinion, its a false construct. I hold that the presented choices don't reflect the reality of the views and interests of the Right or even the Left.

Sadly your moderate and reasoned view is not what partisans on either side want to hear. Many people that are staunch (R's or D's) do not like all the money that can flow into a campaign. The OP points out CU which I do not care for either.

However that did not spring up in a vacuum, and organizations like the various big unions had been pouring in money for decades. One of the differences was of course mandatory dues extracted from workers, going to the Democrat party.
But of course the Democrats were not complaining about that.

As to corporate money, at least in most cases it flows from profits. Unless of course it is a pay for play scheme where the powers in DC will grant lucrative contracts or carve outs, then expect part of it back in campaign contributions.
While either side can do it, the only complaints you hear about from partisans is how the other guys are doing it, not realizing (or caring) that their own party is also doing it.

Thus the OP's one sided thread is a perfect example of the hypocrisy of ideologically driven partisanship.




`

[PedroMartinez]

Liberal, "Something needs to be done about all these billionaires and their influence on politics, unless they are liberal and support the right candidates."

So much hypocrisy.

[animalcrazy]

Originally Posted by ottomobeale

Im politically all over the place.
Constitutional amendment to prohibit paid lobbying, allow term limits, prohibit work arounds like book deals and speech making. Low and enforced campaign spending limits and time limits for campaigning that does not directly involve the shoe leather express.

This. Who hoo I can rep again. Money is just the tool for the beginning of corruption. Take away the tool, take away the lobbyists. Unfortunately, "money makes the world go round" in to many nefarious ways.

[Swingblade]

Originally Posted by scarabchuck

I'm wondering how the Democrats will feel about unlimited $$ in Politics if they win due to it ?

Just look at how quickly Bloomberg is rising in the polls, and personally I think he will be the DNC candidate and Trump will have a hard time beating him.

I have same prediction about Bloomberg being the nominee. I wonder who the OP will vote for? I can see the OP in a Bloomberg 2020 tshirt as his future.

[PedroMartinez]

OP, so why don't you limit the amount of money candidates can receive instead of taking away freedom of speech?

[Buckeye77]

According to the left wing loony toons on here, Russian got Trump elected with a measly $47,000 investment on Facebook, after Hillary spent untold $$. How can big money in the Republican coffers be an issue?