Wilber Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 No need to change the Constitution, just put it up for sale. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/27/us/politics/kochs-plan-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-campaign.html?_r=0 Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
TimG Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) No need to change the Constitution, just put it up for sale.The NYT is a bunch of sycophantic hypocrites. Where were they when Tom Steyer put $100 million into the last election with the express objective to defeat politicians that did not show enough obeisance to the cult if AGW? The Steyer example also shows something else: money can't convince voters to support causes they don't already believe in. Edited February 2, 2015 by TimG Quote
Wilber Posted February 2, 2015 Author Report Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) The NYT is a bunch of sycophantic hypocrites. Where were they when Tom Steyer put $100 million into the last election with the express objective to defeat politicians that did not show enough obeisance to the cult if AGW? The Steyer example also shows something else: money can't convince voters to support causes they don't already believe in. You can make it about the NYT if you want but the fact is, the Koch's and their supporters are going to put more money into this campaign than was spent by both parties in the last election. Anyone can do it, not just Republican supporters. It's a sick system. Edited February 2, 2015 by Wilber Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 You can make it about the NYT if you want but the fact is, the Koch's and their supporters are going to put more money into this campaign than was spent by both parties in the last election. Anyone can do it, not just Republican supporters. It's a sick system. So what ? What "system" is any better ? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Wilber Posted February 2, 2015 Author Report Posted February 2, 2015 So what ? What "system" is any better ? One that doesn't go begging to be corrupt. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
TimG Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) You can make it about the NYT if you want but the fact is, the Koch's and their supporters are going to put more money into this campaign than was spent by both parties in the last election. Anyone can do it, not just Republican supporters. It's a sick system.Why? In a media driven society getting a message to voters takes money. This money has to come from somewhere and there are lots of rich people and organizations that support each side. Like minded people pooling their resources to promote a cause they believe in is the essence of free speech. That was the basis for the SCC decision on public service unions and the right to strike. Edited February 2, 2015 by TimG Quote
Wilber Posted February 2, 2015 Author Report Posted February 2, 2015 Why? In a media driven society getting a message to voters takes money. This money has to come from somewhere and there are lots of rich people and organizations that support each side. We are talking about politicians lining up to be bought by 300 people, out of a population of 300 million. That's not a lot of people. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 One that doesn't go begging to be corrupt. Name one....nearly every other endeavor and enterprise in the U.S., public or private, are directly or indirectly related to financial resources. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Wilber Posted February 2, 2015 Author Report Posted February 2, 2015 The financial resources of .0001% of your population. 1/1000th of the 1% Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 The financial resources of .0001% of your population. 1/1000th of the 1% Exactly my point...those same resources are taxed or invested to support public and private enterprise. Pretty selective moral outrage.... Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
TimG Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 We are talking about politicians lining up to be bought by 300 people, out of a population of 300 million. That's not a lot of people.Who says the people are willing to be bought? Tom Steyer's millions did not accomplish much because he was pushing an issue that the average voter did not care about. Having money does not guarantee a result. It only guarantees that your views will be heard. Quote
Wilber Posted February 2, 2015 Author Report Posted February 2, 2015 Exactly my point...those same resources are taxed or invested to support public and private enterprise. Pretty selective moral outrage.... I'm not outraged but you should be. It's your system. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 I'm not outraged but you should be. It's your system. I like it just the way it is. Money matters....and it's not just an American concept. Think it doesn't exist in Canada ? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Wilber Posted February 2, 2015 Author Report Posted February 2, 2015 Who says the people are willing to be bought? Tom Steyer's millions did not accomplish much because he was pushing an issue that the average voter did not care about. Having money does not guarantee a result. It only guarantees that your views will be heard. So you think these financial giants are going to blow 900M on something they don't think will work? It can also make it difficult for others to be heard. That kind of money can be used to put pressure on media as well. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 If you can't raise the cash...then you can't get the votes either. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Moonlight Graham Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) Why? In a media driven society getting a message to voters takes money. This money has to come from somewhere and there are lots of rich people and organizations that support each side. Like minded people pooling their resources to promote a cause they believe in is the essence of free speech. That was the basis for the SCC decision on public service unions and the right to strike. So you're all for a small bunch of filthy rich people controlling election media and propaganda?...Not to mention being owed favours by whatever politicians/parties they put their money behind. They're paying to stack the deck on election results and outright buying policy on a grand scale. This is by its very nature anti-democratic. Edited February 2, 2015 by Moonlight Graham Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
Wilber Posted February 2, 2015 Author Report Posted February 2, 2015 I like it just the way it is. Money matters....and it's not just an American concept. Think it doesn't exist in Canada ? No, Individuals and companies are limited when it comes to campaign contributions. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
TimG Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) So you think these financial giants are going to blow 900M on something they don't think will work?$1 billion was spent on Romney's failed campaign. I am sure that Steyer believed that his money would work too. He was wrong. Business people make bad bets all of the time. Having money does not guarantee success. Edited February 2, 2015 by TimG Quote
Moonlight Graham Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 Why? In a media driven society getting a message to voters takes money. Hardly. Build a simple website where your views are outlined, film some youtube videos, talk to media by phone...or let them pay to come to you if you're any kind of interesting/serious candidate. Campaign money pays for politicians to run mostly lying BS ads in key markets, pays to fly them around to strategic markets to make speeches, pays people to help organize to influence people to physically get out and vote in their favour...these things aren't necessary to run an informed campaign. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 No, Individuals and companies are limited when it comes to campaign contributions. Well....there ya go....perfect system....no "corruption"...ever. Just ask PM Chretien. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 So you're all for a small bunch of filthy rich people controlling election media and propaganda?...Not to mention being owed favours by whatever politicians/parties they put their money behind. They're paying to stack the deck on election results and outright buying policy on a grand scale. This is by its very nature anti-democratic. Nope...it's very democratic. Votes are bought and sold in many ways...before and after elections. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
TimG Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) Hardly. Build a simple website where your views are outlined, film some youtube videos, talk to media by phone...or let them pay to come to you if you're any kind of interesting/serious candidate.Anyone can create a website. It takes money to get people to look at it. Campaign money pays for politicians to run mostly lying BS ads in key markets, pays to fly them around to strategic markets to make speeches, pays people to help organize to influence people to physically get out and vote in their favour...these things aren't necessary to run an informed campaign.That is how the electoral system is and all players engage in these tactics. Look at the union money in the last Ontario election: perfect example of "lying BS ads". Now if the NYT would run an expose of how union money is distorting elections just as much as Koch money is then they could claim the moral high ground. But they won't because they are partisan hacks that slavishly support Democrats under the ruse of being a news organization. Edited February 2, 2015 by TimG Quote
Michael Hardner Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 Anyone can create a website. It takes money to get people to look at it. You pay people to look at a website ? How does that work ? Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 You pay people to look at a website ? How does that work ? Offer them free cell phones. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
TimG Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 You pay people to look at a website ? How does that work ?Advertising in places where people are already reading (e.g. google search). Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.