Zegion1
|
  |
| Joined: 06 Nov 2011 |
| Total Posts: 2814 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:31 PM |
so basically, since 2010, political ads can now directly tell who not to vote for. and in the 2012 election, we had more rich ppl and corporations donate more than any other election. there was a lot of stuff about this after the election, but anyways, do u think this is bad? i do, because it gives all the wealthy people the power in politics, giving them an undue amount of influence. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
thepit44
|
  |
| Joined: 05 Sep 2008 |
| Total Posts: 21143 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:37 PM |
| The wealthy made their money themselves, they should be allowed to spend it however they want. Corporations should not be allowed to donate for obvious reasons, but why can you just restrict wealthy people? No money=no campaign. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
gfdshbc
|
  |
| Joined: 17 Aug 2012 |
| Total Posts: 837 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:39 PM |
I agree with P-t, the wealthy should be able to spend it however they want. Like, if a wealthy man wanted someone dead, he could just hire someone to do it. They should be able to do anything. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:41 PM |
that's exactly what I was thinking Jimmie.
>Corporations should not be allowed to donate for obvious reasons
What reasons different from wealthy people? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:43 PM |
| Also, crippling democracy by tying it to the interest of a few is a more serious crime then murder. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
thepit44
|
  |
| Joined: 05 Sep 2008 |
| Total Posts: 21143 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:44 PM |
| So then how do you decide who can donate and who cannot? Without rich people donating, there is no way anyone can run a political campaign. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
gfdshbc
|
  |
| Joined: 17 Aug 2012 |
| Total Posts: 837 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:47 PM |
"there is no way anyone can run a political campaign"
maybe it's better this way |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Corridan
|
  |
| Joined: 23 Nov 2012 |
| Total Posts: 7344 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:50 PM |
"What reasons different from wealthy people?" One is a company, another is a person |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:50 PM |
>So then how do you decide who can donate and who cannot? Without rich people donating, there is no way anyone can run a political campaign.
Publicly Financed campaigns.
Or at the very least end super pacs and leave maximum donation to 2,500 |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
gfdshbc
|
  |
| Joined: 17 Aug 2012 |
| Total Posts: 837 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:51 PM |
| maximum donation should be even lower than $2500 i dont like that number |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:53 PM |
| Before you say "WE CANT AFFORD IT" Then I guess you ought to Cancel elections too and just having bidding for political positions, as you "can't afford" elections either. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
thepit44
|
  |
| Joined: 05 Sep 2008 |
| Total Posts: 21143 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:54 PM |
Publicly Financed campaigns. ___ The government financing campaigns? This would allow any idiot to run for president.
Or at the very least end super pacs and leave maximum donation to 2,500. ___ I am telling you there is no way you could run a campaign this way. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
gfdshbc
|
  |
| Joined: 17 Aug 2012 |
| Total Posts: 837 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:56 PM |
"I am telling you there is no way you could run a campaign this way"
I'm pretty sure he'd tell you there is a way to run a campaign that way, so. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:56 PM |
>The government financing campaigns? This would allow any idiot to run for president.
Why do you guys act as if something is ridiculous and unworkable, when it's ACTUALLY been done in a workable fashion?
To simplify it, the more petitions of support you get from the public, the more public funding you get in a tier based system. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Corridan
|
  |
| Joined: 23 Nov 2012 |
| Total Posts: 7344 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:57 PM |
| What if people support a terrorist or something as a joke then he gets elected? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:58 PM |
| The the people are stupid and deserve who the vote for. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Corridan
|
  |
| Joined: 23 Nov 2012 |
| Total Posts: 7344 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:59 PM |
| That's not really fair to the people who didn't vote for him and the people from other countries that die because that terrorist got elected |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:59 PM |
then*
Also, Recall Elections. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
thepit44
|
  |
| Joined: 05 Sep 2008 |
| Total Posts: 21143 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 03:59 PM |
To simplify it, the more petitions of support you get from the public, the more public funding you get in a tier based system. ___ But this is unfair. You cannot fund the bigger campaigns and not fund the small once. Not only will it not give smaller parties a chance, but it is also widely open to corruption. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 04:00 PM |
>widely open to corruption.
Explain how this is more open to corruption then the current system please? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
thepit44
|
  |
| Joined: 05 Sep 2008 |
| Total Posts: 21143 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 04:09 PM |
| Thw ruling party can secretly give more government funds to their party. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Zegion1
|
  |
| Joined: 06 Nov 2011 |
| Total Posts: 2814 |
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 04:16 PM |
Okay, individuals could only donate $2500 before and now they can donate an unlimited amount. All of the money that went to campaigns was usually government money, or just the candidate's own money. This is the main reason why the 2012 election was record-breaking in how much money was spent. This is unfair because it gives too much influence to the wealthy and sways voters in their favor. So ultimately, the wealthy are running politics, not people of average means whom the elected president could possibly hurt the most. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 04:16 PM |
What a simpleton assertion, I am disappointing by it too, I hoped for better. so could grow intellectually by countering it, but I get this stupid one.
If donates are in a tiered system of which the party with the most signatures say if you get 100, you get x amount of funding, 1000, you get x times 10, 1,000,000 you get x times 10000 funding, it would make it impossible for ruling party to give more funds to their party without ignoring the system. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 04:18 PM |
Also ruling parties could do that very thing now, but it does not happen because:
1.It's illegal
2.They would get caught by watchdogs in no time
3.Once this happens, they lose huge amounts of support.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Jan 2013 05:06 PM |
If rich people want to donate then let them.
If you want to be fascists by restricting the fundamental rights of people based on how successful they are, go ahead. That's not how it works in America, though. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|