Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: When a friend is addicted to something that is harmful to them [View all]AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)77. I cannot craft a universal standard/principle that would apply to both sides fairly.
I didn't have a problem with Citizens United, because it fairly and equally applied to contributions we historically get in higher concentrations from public Unions. The principle by which it all happened was fair, even if the contribution levels from both sides are not equal, and it's up to the legislature to somehow level the field now that the SC ruled on how to implement the existing laws.
The field needs leveling somehow, I just am not quite sure how to accomplish it. (To realistically do so, in the current environment, specifically.)
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
130 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
There is no such thing as "corporate campaign cash." Corporations cannot, by law,
DanTex
Apr 2017
#1
Sure, have him speak about Dodd-Frank, the strongest set of financial regulations
DanTex
Apr 2017
#35
Glass Steagall was passed before WWII. And it wasn't necessarily more stringent,
DanTex
Apr 2017
#72
Who would you appoint as Secretary of the Treasury, Mike Ditka? Rachel Ray? Stephen Colbert?
George II
Apr 2017
#85
We have either ignorant progressives who dont understand your points or
Eliot Rosewater
Apr 2017
#52
On one memorable occasion, the money going to a SuperPAC actually came from one of the campaigns!
Kentonio
Apr 2017
#49
Yes, they can. But that's not "corporate campaign cash" it's corporate SuperPAC cash.
DanTex
Apr 2017
#7
That's true for presidential campaigns, and maybe some high profile state campaigns.
DanTex
Apr 2017
#13
There are plently of avenues to funnel cash to where campaigns can use it... so
annabanana
Apr 2017
#119
Would you like to name them? Or is this just something you read on the internet?
DanTex
Apr 2017
#129
It costs money to win elections...we have a good shot...so no to your entire post.
Demsrule86
Apr 2017
#16
Yes, many use them when they have no point and are easily confused by simple typos.
Vesper
Apr 2017
#128
Which is precisely why the solution you just suggested will never be implemented in this country.
AtheistCrusader
Apr 2017
#73
I cannot craft a universal standard/principle that would apply to both sides fairly.
AtheistCrusader
Apr 2017
#77
yes, there are some Democrats who have been fighting to improve the system and hooray for them.
ProfessorPlum
Apr 2017
#91
Saying that you have to be an "earner" to be part of the Democratic stable isn't a purity test.
That Guy 888
Apr 2017
#66
Why not give examples of corporate influence? Is it too much to ask for some evidence to back up
betsuni
Apr 2017
#96
Oh wait, get it! truthaddict247 -- when a friend is addicted, accusing me of being dishonest.
betsuni
Apr 2017
#127
Who or what is financing The Outreach Tour? The first step is to make sure "corporate"
delisen
Apr 2017
#106