Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

If you believe in the people, believe in article 5

2

Comments

  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    Fuck, Hondao, seriously?
    Talk it out. What's wrong with my position?
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    I'll agree to this tentatively in principle in exchange for an accompanying amendment of term limits on all members of Congress. 2 terms max. So there won't be any more Pelosis or Clintons or Bushes or Romneys in the future. Break up the oligarchy. Congress is the House of Lords. Break up the cliques before they can consolidate power. But first you need to address the taxation issue that was raised.

    While I agree on term limits. As long as there's money in politics the way it is now. The replacements will be bought off the same.
  • SoutherndawgSoutherndawg Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 8,326 Founders Club
  • GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,516 Standard Supporter
    2001400ex said:

    Talk it out. What's wrong with my position?
    What does the corporate tax rate have to do with lobbying? They are two different issues.

    What, at least a third? Taxation, revenue and regulation.

    And honestly, I think all lobbying with money should be gone, not just lobbying from corporations.

    Patently unconstitutional.

    Look at it this way, the electoral college was setup so the large wealthy states didn't have a disproportionate advantage in voting than smaller states. Why is our lobbying system setup where it favors the wealthy and corporations? Not only federal politics but local City politics too.

    Feels non sequitur ( @Octavian?) but I guess this is the larger question about "money in politics." Whatever.

    The easy but impossible way to remove money from politics is to remove money from politicians.
  • phineasphineas Member Posts: 4,732
    I cant even troll in support of this. Chunk is a fat piece of shit.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    What does the corporate tax rate have to do with lobbying? They are two different issues.

    What, at least a third? Taxation, revenue and regulation.

    And honestly, I think all lobbying with money should be gone, not just lobbying from corporations.

    Patently unconstitutional.

    Look at it this way, the electoral college was setup so the large wealthy states didn't have a disproportionate advantage in voting than smaller states. Why is our lobbying system setup where it favors the wealthy and corporations? Not only federal politics but local City politics too.

    Feels non sequitur ( @Octavian?) but I guess this is the larger question about "money in politics." Whatever.

    The easy but impossible way to remove money from politics is to remove money from politicians.
    How is blowing up the lobbying system unconstitutional? I know the courts have decided that lobbying money equates to free speech (roughly, it's more complicated of course). I don't know of anything in the Constitution that allows for a system where politicians are legally bribed and bought off.

    But maybe you know something I don't.
  • phineasphineas Member Posts: 4,732
    Guys, we have this amazing invention, it's called Google. Go ahead and Google it!
  • GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,516 Standard Supporter
    2001400ex said:

    How is blowing up the lobbying system unconstitutional? I know the courts have decided that lobbying money equates to free speech (roughly, it's more complicated of course). I don't know of anything in the Constitution that allows for a system where politicians are legally bribed and bought off.

    But maybe you know something I don't.
    I was a couple mules in and missed you're money stipulation, but looks like you answered that one yourself.
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781

    I don’t think you know what a false equivalency is, Michael. See I asked a question, in order for me to say that two things are equivalent I would have to make a statement.

    Stop using big words when you don’t know what they mean.
    We all know what you meant and it was fucking stupid.
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 110,594 Founders Club
    Hilary outspent Trump 2 to 1

    Hillary outspent Bernie by more than that

    She lost to both of them

    Money can't buy a good candidate

    JEB! was the GOP money choice and the first one out
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    I was a couple mules in and missed you're money stipulation, but looks like you answered that one yourself.
    I thought you did your best work a couple of mules in?
  • GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,516 Standard Supporter
    2001400ex said:

    I thought you did your best work in a couple of mules?
    FTFY
  • KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,896
    Please stop with the Young Turk links. Maybe attend Politics fantasy camp if you can’t get enough of this guy.
  • USMChawkUSMChawk Member Posts: 1,800
    2001400ex said:

    How is blowing up the lobbying system unconstitutional? I know the courts have decided that lobbying money equates to free speech (roughly, it's more complicated of course). I don't know of anything in the Constitution that allows for a system where politicians are legally bribed and bought off.

    But maybe you know something I don't.
    The simple answer is that corporations can lobby because the Supreme Court has recognized them as “citizens” and, as you mentioned, the courts have interpreted it as a free speech issue.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    USMChawk said:

    The simple answer is that corporations can lobby because the Supreme Court has recognized them as “citizens” and, as you mentioned, the courts have interpreted it as a free speech issue.
    It sounds like you are just repeating what I'm saying.
  • SquirtSquirt Member Posts: 485

    Hilary outspent Trump 2 to 1

    Hillary outspent Bernie by more than that

    She lost to both of them

    Money can't buy a good candidate

    JEB! was the GOP money choice and the first one out

    Shoot me now, but I agree with Race. The evidence suggests that money in politics is overblown.

    http://freakonomics.com/2012/01/12/does-money-really-buy-elections-a-new-marketplace-podcast/

    http://freakonomics.com/2012/01/17/how-much-does-campaign-spending-influence-the-election-a-freakonomics-quorum/

    http://liberation.typepad.com/liberation/2007/05/freakonomics_th.html

    But there is this: http://freakonomics.com/2014/04/04/some-evidence-on-whether-money-buys-political-influence/

    As a citizen, I kinda like the idea that I can organize with fellow citizens to try to influence electoral and legislative outcomes.
  • SquirtSquirt Member Posts: 485
    Squirt said:

    Shoot me now, but I agree with Race. The evidence suggests that money in politics is overblown.

    http://freakonomics.com/2012/01/12/does-money-really-buy-elections-a-new-marketplace-podcast/

    http://freakonomics.com/2012/01/17/how-much-does-campaign-spending-influence-the-election-a-freakonomics-quorum/

    http://liberation.typepad.com/liberation/2007/05/freakonomics_th.html

    But there is this: http://freakonomics.com/2014/04/04/some-evidence-on-whether-money-buys-political-influence/

    As a citizen, I kinda like the idea that I can organize with fellow citizens to try to influence electoral and legislative outcomes.

    Also, it strikes me as wrong that the government (the City of Seattle, for example) can compel one citizen to finance another citizen's political speech. The "Democracy Voucher" stuff bugs me. I can't imagine it would be upheld if even litigated all the way to the Supreme Court.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Squirt said:

    Shoot me now, but I agree with Race. The evidence suggests that money in politics is overblown.

    http://freakonomics.com/2012/01/12/does-money-really-buy-elections-a-new-marketplace-podcast/

    http://freakonomics.com/2012/01/17/how-much-does-campaign-spending-influence-the-election-a-freakonomics-quorum/

    http://liberation.typepad.com/liberation/2007/05/freakonomics_th.html

    But there is this: http://freakonomics.com/2014/04/04/some-evidence-on-whether-money-buys-political-influence/

    As a citizen, I kinda like the idea that I can organize with fellow citizens to try to influence electoral and legislative outcomes.
    There's a reason the election campaign fund was established and Obama blew that up. That being said, politicians still act on the wishes of the people who donate money. Not the people who elected them.
  • USMChawkUSMChawk Member Posts: 1,800
    2001400ex said:

    It sounds like you are just repeating what I'm saying.
    It sounds like you don’t know the difference between clarifying and repeating. Should I only post when I disagree with you entirely? Maybe through in a couple of ‘fucktards’ so you know I disagree?

  • USMChawkUSMChawk Member Posts: 1,800
Sign In or Register to comment.