Is this good or bad?
>>81447352
>further unbalance the powers that are supposed to keep each other in check
How could this be a good thing at all?
wasnt citizens united that ruling that essentially allowed unlimited donations to politicians? Fuck that ruling.
>>81447599
>Fuck that ruling.
Bluepill spotted.
>>81447352
the issue with introducing an amendment that will overturn a supreme court ruling is that it creates precedence for other supreme court rulings to be overturned. So it basically shits on every single right you thought you had.
As far as campaign finance reform, if she wants to overturn that, name one senator that's gonna be like "nooo i don't want more money"
>>81447692
>wanting corporations and special interests to be able to donate absurd amounts to a Politician in exchange for favors
they did it anyway but fuck man, dont make it worse
>>81448016
>the issue with introducing an amendment that will overturn a supreme court ruling is that it creates precedence for other supreme court rulings to be overturned. So it basically shits on every single right you thought you had.
You are retarded. The point of judicial review is to determine if an existing law or ruling is Constitutional. Rulings aren't meant to create or negate laws and other rulings permanently. It's intended to place the onus back on legislation to make those Constitutional.
>>81447352
/pol/fags and right wing retards love it when billionaires and Jews can buy elections so of course they love the Citizens United decisions.
>>81448148
>he thinks Citizens United regards all organizations
Protip: there's a reason the pro/anti-Citizens United crowd divides among Republicans and Democrats and it's not the LE REPUBS ARE CORPORATISTS meme
>>81447352
This is just an attempt to get Bernouts to like her again because they are all too stupid to realize that: 1st, the president can't introduce a constitutional amendment; 2nd, she knows damn well that there won't even be the 2/3 support in both houses to get the proposal; 3rd, IF they even get the 2/3 support for a proposal they won't get the 3/4 vote to ratify it.
Of course she would try to neuter campaign finances after she was elected.
Capitalists need to be crushed. It's gotta be overturned.
>>81447352
there's no way a greedy kike like her would actually do it but its a nice thought
>>81448801
>there's no way a greedy kike like her would actually do it
She definitely would once she becomes the incumbent of the highest elected position in the country.
>>81448479
Only now, Hillary is the one benefiting from the sort of SuperPACS that Citizens United enabled. Quite a pulling up of the ladder.
>>81448016
You mean like basically every amendment?
>>81448016
You're a fucking retard.
Reread what this guy said a few times and think long and hard about what you said and the point of checks and balances >>81448362
She should lead by example and ask that all the PAC's supporting her limit their size and liquidity to the pre-Citizens United liit.
>>81447352
It's a good thing and I'll be voting for Hillary now.
>>81447485
To be fair the Supreme Court was never meant to operate with the kind of sweeping, pseudo-legislative jurisdiction that it has taken for itself to adopt ever since Brown v Board of Education. The power of the states has been slowly (and recently very quickly) been suffocating by the federal branch of 9 lawyers who are instituted for life or until retirement. It's no wonder that the Supreme Court has become heavily politicize when it makes decisions such as Obergefell v. Hodges, District of Columbia v. Heller, Bush v. Gore, and Roe v. Wade. These are matters for the people to decide, not the federal government.
good thing. im with her now!!!
>>81447352
/pol/ would normally back this 100%, but since it's Hillary saying it, I'm pretty sure they'll come out against it.
>>81449784
>These are matters for the people to decide, not the federal government.
Then the people can decide them by introducing legislation that decisively deals with these issues instead of leaving them open to interpretation.
Jesus Christ, it's no wonder our country is shit when all you faggots have no idea how our government works.
>>81449989
I think it's more who the fuck trusts her to keep her word on this?
Citizen's United is the name of a movie company formed to make a film about Hillary Clinton. She doesn't come out well in it.
Movies are really expensive. With previous campaign finances laws, one person couldn't contribute more than a small amount to the movie's production. This is a perfect case showing how limiting the flow of money can limit free speech.
>>81448362
like to believe this, but then there was that cali marriage amendment...
>>81447352
The left lies (as they do about everything) and claim citizens united was their effort to keep those evil rascally Koch brothers and other evil right-wing billionaires from creating political movements; notice they don't bitch about Soros.
Citizens United is really about media. It's about people being able to pool together and make documentaries about their political rivals and release them during election cycles. The left, as always, wants a monopoly on propaganda. The left has it's Marxist trash working 24/7 on almost every channel pushing leftist ideology and attacking any opposing figures or ideologies. Citizens United is really about stopping people like Dinesh D'souza, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Drudge Report, Breitbart, the Tea Party, Mark Dice, anyone else who wants to inform the public about the left since the media won't.
Of course Hillary wants an end to any form of media that opposes the leftist narrative. It's another reason why the cunt belongs in a prison cell.
>>81450459
Why are the Republicunts so bent on screwing over a super moderate, super hawkish Democrat? Hillary's practically a Neo-Con. Is it a pot-kettle situation?
>>81450526
>but then there was that cali marriage amendment...
Which was overturned by the feds, not the state court. This is federalism.
>>81448801
Democrats rely on illegal contributions so it makes since to try to remove as many legal ones as possible.
>>81447352
>hillary against citizens united
who between trump, hillary and bernie got the most money from super pacs?
why on earth would she really be against it, fake against it to get elected but not really
>>81451599
>why on earth would she really be against it, fake against it to get elected but not really
Why wouldn't she be against it if she got elected to President? She literally has no use for election financing at that point, her incumbency is worth a billion dollars in re-election.
>>81451841
maybe but she will still need money in the second term
democrats have been raising more money than reps for several elections in a row now.
>>81448148
how you going to overturn it without gutting the first amendment?
>>81451986
>maybe but she will still need money in the second term
Democrats, especially incumbent ones, don't need Citizens United. As for the reason you listed:
>democrats have been raising more money than reps for several elections in a row now.
This money is not related to the Citizens United ruling. All it did was level the playing field, which is why the Dems generally don't like it.
You shouldn't trust any politician who takes issue with campaign financing. All they really want is a monopoly on fundraising. Money is speech and corporations are people. Period.
>>81452407
she doesnt dislike citizens united for practical reasons
the dems have been benifiting from it more than reps
if it were the other way around she would change her mind
it has nothing to do with issues and only practicality
the only reason she says she doesnt like it is cause she thinks she will get more bernouts not cause she wants too
also an amendment is basically guaranteed to fail. you need so much support for an amendment. she is basically saying lets sign a petition online to get rid of it!
>>81447352
I'd say it would be good as long as it wasn't easy to do. Maybe a 2/3-3/4 vote in congress.
>>81451599
>why on earth would she really be against it
Let's see, the same reason Obama campaigned on bringing down the big banks while they were actually his biggest donors? The left's target audience are retarded people who are incapable of critical thinking. Look at that decrepid kike Sanders; " Hillawy Cwinton is bot by da banks! Hillawy Cwinton is not fit to be pwezident! I am now endowsin' Hillawy Cwinton! (applause)."
Also, keep in mind Clinton doesn't see herself beholden to the law, especially now. To the political left, the law is something that only applies to us mortals and peasants.
>we have never been at war with eurasia. this just in, we are at war with eurasia, we have always been at war with eurasia
