Does /pol/ support money in politics? If not, what do you guys wanna do about it?
>pic is very related
I want to keep Wall Street jewish money out of politics that's for sure
I'm fine if the NRA gets money though, the jews are always trying to kike us out of the 2nd amendment.
>>71075695
>>71075555
There's no real way to keep it out.
>>71075555
>I'm against money in politics!
>is funded by George Soros
It's just a front for installing more globalists and champagne leftists.
>>71075661
Speaking of gun control kikes, Bloomberg has 10 times more money than the NRA and the entire US gun industry combined.
You will never hear lefties speak against him though, because he's one of their sugar daddies.
>>71076051
Kill every jew before they kill you.
>>71075555
You have two choices really. Either you can have elections and campaigning budgets set by the public and paid by the public. Or you can let people privately finance themselves through donations and sponsorships. Both have their upsides and downsides. Most countries opt for something in between. People like transparency but generally dont want to have to pay for it.
Doesnt really matter since it's always corrupt in the end.
>>71075695
Saved this pic.
Jeb Bush's miserable failure of a campaign proves that the influence of money is overrated.
He wasted over $130,000,000 and got low single digits.
>>71076705
It effects more what the politicians do when elected than how they get elected.
The problem is not 'money in politics' it is retarded voters
>>71076921
If that was true then why do they keep getting elected?
>>71077276
Small seats are much easier to rig with money than that on the presidential scale. Jim Bob Joe running for senator of a state can get that sear much easier if he has the donors to pay for his non stop brainwashing of the sheep in that state and not have the main stream media bash him.
>>71077663
The voters are the problem then
>>71077663
To be fair if anyone other than Jeb had got that money they probably would have won
Jeb is such a goofball though.
>>71077902
It's tru, the only thing I give millennials is that they don't trust the main stream media but there 1st choice for news isn't much better. They do atleast try to research the candidate and are mostly high information voters from the ones I've encountered.
I support public financing of elections
>>71078234
>are mostly high information voters from the ones I've encountered.
Ha
Then why are they voting for Bernie?
>>71075661
>Money in politics is okay if I support who it's coming from.
Then that's a double standard, and hypocrisy.
This is why libertarians hate conservatives, you're identical to liberals in that you approve of the corrupt and means that justify an arbitrary end that will never be agreed upon.
>>71078234
The Iraq war and the wall street bailout ruined all trust anyone in this generation will ever have in the media.
It's literally the only good thing about this generation everything else is worthless leftist SJW identity politics shit
>>71078390
It's not hypocrisy when the common people are allowed to have a say versus billionaire kikes.
>>71076705
You know that's a special case, and that this election is an anomaly with Trump.
>>71078303
>implying the average Hillary or Trump supporter is a highly informed voter.
>>71078522
at least Trump doesn't think deodorant causes poverty
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8hAJ2IdNDE
>>71078621
or support bread lines
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJBjjP8WSbc
>>71078674
or support Castro
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E14lsC4WLV0
>>71078621
Holy shit
>>71078494
Yes it is
>The jews do it so we should do it too
Also since when were the NRA ordinary people? They get their money from gun manufacturers.
I'm all for gun ownership but influencing government with money is morally wrong in my book, as is the existence of the coercive monopoly that is government
>>71078719
or think whites can't be poor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYFO5fiPfP0
>>71078803
Its still funny how I'd rather trust Bernie who is actually Jewish over Hillary.
>>71078778
Wall Street gets its money from FED handouts
At least gun manufacturers produce something Wall Street literally just gets it's free money from the jew running the central bank.
Then they turn around and use the free money they just got handed to lobby the government for more jewish leftist policies
>>71078921
Bernie is just a commie retard. Hillary is a cold calculating liar
>>71078921
>tfw Bernie is a literal communist and I trust him over Hillary
I hate my life
>>71078962
I don't care, it's nothing to do with Wall Street vs manufacturers, it's all groups influencing government with donations and lobbying period
>>71079020
>this will be your next president
JUST.
>>71075555
I have no problem at all with money in politics. Businesses/PACs or whatever pay for 30 second ads on tv. 99% of media is filled with liberal garbage. How much value do you think that liberal content has compared to the small minority of conservative ads?
>>71079580
Err, money in politics is not the counter to a liberal media. There is plenty of money in politics as it is and yet the media is still leftist.
Essentially you're saying you support the ability of corporations and the wealthy to get policies that benefit them, like increased regulation to protect their monopolies, and more bailouts to protect them from their own mistakes, and more military spending on firms that donate to candidates to make the firms more profit. Not sure how you could support this unless you're being edgy.
>>71079159
there parasitical financial sector should have no say in politics
It's like letting the town drunk run your fire department.
>>71079006
I'd rather have s commie bastard over a Angela Merkel V2
>>71079979
The first counter to the liberal media is regulating the FCC again
every jewish run media monopoly needs to be broken up.
>>71080191
same goes for the internet
>>71075555
>money in politics
What exactly does this mean?
Are the campaign staff supposed to work for free?
>>71079979
>Essentially you're saying you support the ability of corporations and the wealthy to get policies that benefit them
It's free speech. paying for ads is literally paying for your voice to be heard. As jeb bush recently proved it doesn't matter how much money you spend if you are a shit candidate.
>>71080091
In reality government will always be completely corrupt and the only way to solve that problem is to get rid of it. Unfortunately people's natural reaction to Anarchism is that of fear and disgust since we are taught that anarchy=chaos and that government is a moral power akin to a religion that has some kind of divine right to tax and rule over us because they got people to vote for them to redistribute wealth from others
>>71079020
>big banks meme
nigger they aren't even that big. they're dwarfed by those of other countries
just shitty regulation desu
>>71075555
Politician are legally a representation of your or the people's idea.
A person should and is legally allowed to put all their money into a cause.
Therefore, it is freedom of speech and I support it.
It is the government who fucked up making corporation legal entities but your question isn't about corporate money in politics
>>71080282
Donating to political candidates who then represent your interests by spending tax payer dollars helping you and regulating out your competition is NOT free speech.
>>71080449
>Free speech
>>71080486
so individuals donating to political causes should be illegal? what are you talking about?
>i'm a retard and donated to bernie, he will give me free gimmedats
that's illegal in your world?
>>71080721
I've already made it clear I'm a libertarian and anti-government, I'm simply pointing out how silly and counter-productive conservatives are when they say money in politics isn't a problem. No wonder you are losing followers to Trump.
>>71080712
now replace"Department of Defense" with any other government government department, and replace that corporation with any union or some liberal corporation.
It's still free speech.
>>71075555
The thing is that more money implies more power for advertising and paying people for manipulating tendencies in social networks. And we all know that money call for more money.
Now, why is that a bad thing? Because it reduces democracy to a game of looks than what it is on the paper and the concept of republic the current states born with: a government where everybody has their right to talk.
But nowadays people think they know everything while they barely have time to think in the repercusion of what they think, they barely have time and guts to discuss politics with others, and the only resemblances of a common word of "let's make our world better" always devolve into a shitstorm between two closed-minded groups.
That's the sad true. Human mind needs to make new connections every time you change your mind, and that's tiring. It's in our nature to be closed-minded fucks, and that makes us to never get into a consensus.
I have some hope in the future though, in which Asimov's Psychohistory would be a thing.
>>71075555
Money is apart of politics
>>71080816
It's not a problem though. Like I stated before. Where does all this ad money go? into ads on liberal media. The liberal media that they spew for the majority of the programing costs nothing to liberal politicians. they get it for free. But the small bit of extra conservative ads are somehow ruining the political process? BS
>>71080330
Yeah they are that big
they are so big they threatened the US with financial collapse. They went from controlling 10% of ht market to 60% of it because Carter decided to deregulate wall street.
http://cepr.net/documents/publications/dereg-timeline-2009-07.pdf
>>71075555
To some extent, yes. Businesses should have a say in our elections. Otherwise you just have economically-challenged people voting for Bernie Sanders types to bring them glorious socialism. I'm not really thrilled with the effects of the Citizens United ruling though.
>>71081043
Unions are free speech when they do not involve government.
I would say the same about a "liberal" corporation as the military industrial complex though I remind you that people in corporations don't care about left/right, they care about abusing government to make a profit, and politicians abuse power to make a profit for themselves with corporations.
Since when did corruption become free speech? Government has a coercive (force based) monopoly. Using money to change that coercion to benefit you at the expense of others is corruption. It's slightly worse when corprations do it as it's less democratic than millions donating 10 dollars, which is still bad.
If I had ten billion dollars I could easily lobby politicians to pass laws to get you imprisoned for an arbitrary offense you committed, just because I didn't like you. Then claim I was exercising my free speech.
>>71075661
Can you show me one source of any politician saying that we are coming to take guns away from responsible gun owners?
>>71081603
What are "businesses"? A business is not a person, how can a non-human, concept, have a say in an election?
Businesses are collections of people who each have a vote. Therefore they have a say in elections.
Just because you don't like Bernie's policies (Neither do I) doesn't mean you should support corruption in favor of people who aren't him
>>71081769
The whole point of the term "assault weapon" is to give guns a scary name so that they can be banned
>>71081814
>how can a non-human, concept, have a say in an election?
They can buy political ads in the same way they can advertise their products. That's all SuperPacs really are: collections of people who pool their money to buy advertisements in support of their candidate. I realize it disproportionately benefits the wealthy and powerful, but the reasoning behind the Citizens United ruling was that people can pay to express their views.
Nobody has a problem when a corporation like Google takes a stance on gay marriage, but should they be allowed to pay for an advertisement supporting a issue or candidate? The Supreme Court of the United States says they can and they're protected by the First Amendment. I don't necessarily agree with that, but companies should be allowed to express some views on candidates and issues.
>>71081667
well the unions do involve government here in the US.
>since when did getting your opinion heard become free speech.
people who work for corporations are just as much people as unions and individual contributors.
>If I had ten billion dollars I could easily lobby politicians to pass laws to get you imprisoned for an arbitrary offense you committed, just because I didn't like you. Then claim I was exercising my free speech.
please give me some examples of this. The only thing I can think of close to this is modern liberals trying to use this against climate scientists who don't think global warming will destroy the world in the coming decades. Which I fully support their right to do.It hasn't passed but they can try all they want.
>>71081952
Ok thanks for the info but that's not what I asked you at all
Can you please just show me one source where any politicians says we are coming and taking guns away from responsible gun owners
>"assault weapon"
You are making it seem like as if they just started calling them assault weapons
>>71080091
so you support an aristocracy? Where corporations and billionaires have more of a say then the common man. There should be no money in politics, youre just as bad pushing your own agenda.
>>71076705
money in politics is a non factor.. when you have over 15 years of celebrity hype behind you empowering your every tweet.
>>71083517
the point is that you just define all gun owners as irresponsible and all guns as scary in order to ban them
>>71083605
I think people should be allowed to fund candidates, but there should probably be a cap to prohibit corporations or billionaires from rigging the system.
>>71083605
I support a constitutional republic with democratic processes as a political check.
>>71083943
2k should be the max or just have it bee 5-10% of whatever the average salary is.
>>71075889
artist?
>>71075555
Yes, we should figure out a way to keep big money out of politics. I would suggest that, at the end of each politician's terms, their finances must be an open book, and all elected officials get put on trial for accepting bribes and other wrong doing. We also need to figure out how to deal with the revolving door, i.e. being promised a good job after holding office in exchange for favors when in office.
>>71083943
>>71084521
Bros, there is a cap, and it's fairly low.
http://www.fec.gov/info/contriblimitschart1516.pdf
The issue with Citizens United is SuperPacs, where corporations and wealthy individuals pool their money to "independently" fund advertisements for whichever candidate they want to win. That's why they're not allowed to coordinate. Even though that's easy to get around. Example: Kasich telling the media that he doesn't like the new pro-Kasich SuperPac-funded add where the dick grows out of Cruz's nose and strangles him.
>>71083605
>Where corporations and billionaires have more of a say then the common man
Doing anything exceptionally well requires comitment and perseverence. The result of such efforts are those things that enjoy high regard, and stand the test of time. We are driven to create exceptional memes, by bringing together talent, creativity, determination, preparation, and painstaking craftsmanship. Anything less would not be worth the effort. Your /pol/ experience starts right now
>>71085032
>Why should anybody aspire to be a common man, an average man, do you realize what it means to be average? It means you're the best of the lousiest, and the lousiest of the best.Now if we demand more and more for producing less and less, while the have-not nations encourage and inspire and indeed require hard work and maximum effort. If we deify the common man while they encourage and reward the uncommon ones.....well the end result of such a lopsided race is that is too obvious to require elaboration.
>>71075555
Without money in politics, Incumbents will always win.
Do you think what's going on with Trump is such a miracle? It's happened before. Senator McCarthy challenged LBJ in the Democratic primaries, and had the backing of a few rich people.
He lost the primary, but he showed that incumbents can still be taken down. This started the age of "Money out of Politics".
Just look at what happened with Jeb Bush, he spent millions more than Donald Trump, and flopped completely. Rich people don't bribe candidates, they back ones that already have similar views. This doesn't change the people's vote, and restricting money in politics would only limit freedom of speech.
>>71075555
>muh democracy
the only way to keep money out of politics is to get politics out of money. If government didn't have the power to pick winners and losers in the market then corporations would have no reason to donate.
There is no legitimate reason to prevent people from spending money on whatever they want.
If you're afraid of rich people influencing the government, maybe that's a hint that the government has too much power.
>>71084963
obviously the cap would include banning any loopholes that we currently have
>>71075555
the only money in politics that i support is the money paid to people to assassinate scum like merkel and obama
>>71085323
feel the bern
