Page 85 of 105 FirstFirst ... 3575838485868795 ... LastLast
Results 841 to 850 of 1049

Thread: Supreme Court Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

  1. #841
    Professor
    Cassandra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Maine
    Last Seen
    11-02-17 @ 02:39 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,319

    Re: Supreme Court Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    It was hardly an analysis, but yes, I disagree. Union money is probably behind corporate money, but not by much.
    If G.E.- just one company- chose to spend 10% of its yearly profits, it would have 8.5 Billion to play with: many,many more times than the Obama, McCain campaigns and all the House and Senate seats combined.

  2. #842
    Professor
    Cassandra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Maine
    Last Seen
    11-02-17 @ 02:39 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,319

    Re: Supreme Court Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

    Quote Originally Posted by Coronado View Post
    Is English not your first language? You said only corporate money can get people on the ballot, which is bull**** because most people can afford the filing fees. Even dip****s like Ralph Nader, and more power to him if he wants to be on a ballot and raise as much money from as many idiots as he can. He can make all the speeches he wants and buy all the commercials he can afford. But not with my money and I hope with nobody else's.

    Now, before you choose to post again, please learn to ****ing read the English language. Thanks.
    Apparently, I should not have assumed that it was obvious to everyone that no one would choose to put their name on a ballot who does not have a strategy to raise large wadges of cash. I don't live in some fantasy world where it is enough to just put a name on a ballot.

  3. #843
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: Supreme Court Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    If G.E.- just one company- chose to spend 10% of its yearly profits, it would have 8.5 Billion to play with: many,many more times than the Obama, McCain campaigns and all the House and Senate seats combined.
    Cassandra, GE could already spend as much as it wanted on political ads before this decision. It just had to pretend it wasn't political by avoiding words like "vote for." That's it. Nothing has really changed.

    But if you think GE is eager to spend 10%, or even 0.1%, on political ads, you should think again.

    In any event, the voters aren't idiots, and they can make informed decisions even if there are some ads thrown in their faces - which would probably backfire anyway as they got sick of the ads and questioned their motivation.

    You don't think voters are idiots who need to be protected from hearing certain messages or getting too much information, do you? Do you?

  4. #844
    Professor Charles Martel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Seen
    03-21-10 @ 08:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,668

    Re: Supreme Court Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    Do you believe that advertising works?
    How can anyone deny it.

    Hope and Change. Change we can believe in. Yes, we can.

    It's clear a nearly trillion dollar advertising campaign just got an inexperienced bumbling backtracking jester into the Oval Office, of course advertising works.

    Who did you vote for Cassandra? How can anyone on this forum deny advertising works, look to some of the posts in here. Advertising swallowed hook, link, and sinker on a daily basis.
    It was the Austrasians, that hewed on bravely through the thick of the fight, it was they who found and cut down the Saracen King.

  5. #845
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Supreme Court Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    I am not the only one. You better take that up with Newt Gingrich who has opined that this is a great victory for non-incumbents -the individuals who can muster support from those that have money- corporations. Of course, they always toss in unions as though unions had parity with corporations in the ability to spend $$$ to influence elections..
    And as was pointed out to you pages ago, UNIONS SPEND MORE THAN CORPORATIONS.

    http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaki...post1058514838

    If you're continuing to pretend otherwise, then you're being deliberately disingenuous.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    If G.E.- just one company- chose to spend 10% of its yearly profits, it would have 8.5 Billion to play with: many,many more times than the Obama, McCain campaigns and all the House and Senate seats combined.
    And if Obama chose to nuke the world, we'd all be dead! Those two events have roughly the same likelihood of occurring.

    Again, if GE wanted to spend 8.5B on politics, they could have done so already. You keep on pretending that this isn't the case.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  6. #846
    Voluntary Resignation

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    11-30-10 @ 05:20 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,059

    Re: Supreme Court Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    Apparently, I should not have assumed that it was obvious to everyone that no one would choose to put their name on a ballot who does not have a strategy to raise large wadges of cash. I don't live in some fantasy world where it is enough to just put a name on a ballot.
    Then do not engage in hyperbole. You were running around saying that people wouldn't be able to get on the ballot now that corporate money could be spent. I showed you how wrong that was. Save the Chicken Little act for the Ralph Nader rallies.

  7. #847
    Professor
    Cassandra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Maine
    Last Seen
    11-02-17 @ 02:39 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,319

    Re: Supreme Court Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    You don't think voters are idiots who need to be protected from hearing certain messages or getting too much information, do you? Do you?
    You keep saying this. I am the last person on the block advocating "cover your ears". Hey I voluntarily engage in debate on a starboard leaning forum like this to try to understand why people I disagree with, think the way they do. I have also seen what happens when one point of view drowns out other points of view. Last time H.C. reform was under consideration, BiG Pharma and the Health Insurance Assoc. of America spent up to 20 million to defeat it- I am sure you remember the Harry and Louise ads. Why do you suppose that Obama made this concession, now? Do you think maybe he hoped not to buy their cooperation?


    Obama gives powerful drug lobby a seat at healthcare table
    The pharmaceutical industry, once condemned by the president as a source of healthcare problems, has become a White House partner.

    August 04, 2009|Tom Hamburger L.A.Times

    WASHINGTON As a candidate for president, Barack Obama lambasted drug companies and the influence they wielded in Washington. He even ran a television ad targeting the industry's chief lobbyist, former Louisiana congressman Billy Tauzin, and the role Tauzin played in preventing Medicare from negotiating for lower drug prices.

    Since the election, Tauzin has morphed into the president's partner. He has been invited to the White House half a dozen times in recent months. There, he says, he eventually secured an agreement that the administration wouldn't try to overturn the very Medicare drug policy that Obama had criticized on the campaign trail.

    It was important, he said, to block the threat of Medicare price negotiations, which he called tantamount to price-setting and a threat to the industry. In addition, Tauzin said the industry asked the administration not to allow the import of cheaper drugs because of safety concerns.


    So this ruling doesn't change much - that is true- the problem is the system is already corrupted and this ruling just opens the door a little further.

  8. #848
    Professor
    Cassandra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Maine
    Last Seen
    11-02-17 @ 02:39 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,319

    Re: Supreme Court Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

    Quote Originally Posted by Charles Martel View Post
    How can anyone deny it.

    Hope and Change. Change we can believe in. Yes, we can.

    It's clear a nearly trillion dollar advertising campaign just got an inexperienced bumbling backtracking jester into the Oval Office, of course advertising works.

    Who did you vote for Cassandra? How can anyone on this forum deny advertising works, look to some of the posts in here. Advertising swallowed hook, link, and sinker on a daily basis.
    Absolutely true- Just the way Bush was going to bring the country together and promised not to engage in nation building.

  9. #849
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Supreme Court Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    What makes you think he is liberal?
    His posts............
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

  10. #850
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: Supreme Court Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    You keep saying this. I am the last person on the block advocating "cover your ears".
    I didn't say that - you're trying to cover everyone else's ears.

    I have also seen what happens when one point of view drowns out other points of view. Last time H.C. reform was under consideration, BiG Pharma and the Health Insurance Assoc. of America spent up to 20 million to defeat it- I am sure you remember the Harry and Louise ads. Why do you suppose that Obama made this concession, now? Do you think maybe he hoped not to buy their cooperation?
    Tough. That's free speech!

    Do you think there should be limits on the amount of speech everyone should have? A dollar amount for everyone? Political parties, wealthy individuals, etc?

    So this ruling doesn't change much - that is true- the problem is the system is already corrupted and this ruling just opens the door a little further.
    Speech isn't corruption.

Page 85 of 105 FirstFirst ... 3575838485868795 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •