In the wake of Citizens United, should democrats look at all funding routes.

[bluestate10]

I don't like fighting with one hand tied behind my back. Citizens United has tilted the field dramatically in favor of republicans. The question is will democrats stand pat while republicans use donated funds that have no limit attached? While the idea is noble, it damages the democratic party. As a contributor to democratic campaigns, I have to provide legal assurances if I give more than a few hundred dollars. People on the other side can contribute millions without any concern and without providing information that allows any peering i9individual to get their identity. I know this will enrage some, but democrats must change and set up organizations that can take unlimited funds from individuals. And as soon as democrats have firm control of Congress, pass a law that outlaws the Citizens United ruling from an extreme court. My vision may sound like a pipe dream, but it is no more such than ignoring the corrosive effects that an unbalanced use of Citizens United has on the country's societal health.

[Ozymanithrax]

1. Yes. If you let the other side outsspend you because you are above the fray...

you will lose.

[sudopod]

2. I heard the Devil is rolling in dough.

Let's see if he'll make us a deal.

Seriously, though. If the number of votes is directly proportional to the advertising budget, we're already fucked.