It doesn't. All the money in the world does not gaurantee you a single vote.
It does. You choose to ignore the reality of the situation because there is no upfront benefit.
Again, this is based on the perspective/opinion that because they don't have upfront benefits, and don't get votes right away or in discrete quantities, it is negligible. That logic is completely and totally fallacious, and fundamentally flawed.
No, people didn't buy what Soros was selling. Corporations by and large would be for more and more and more government spending. That idea was dismissed despite all the money they may have spent in the last elections. Now does all of this money have an effect on the individual politician? That's a much better arguement but your complaint should be with the politician not with free speech.
People did buy from Soros, he just didn't get enough to buy it, because he didn't use his money in the most efficient manner. If 2 quantities of money are used for equal relative efficiency, the larger quantity will have the larger effect.
Corporations' wishes by and large are muffled by the voices of the largest corporations, such as Goldman Sachs, which want less govt. regulation, and thus less government. There is nothing equal or balanced in the current contribution system, and these fundamental imbalances result with its incompatibility with democracy. Again, the principle of 1 man, 1 vote is not true with the system as it is.
I do also have complaints about the effect of this money on politicians, but that is an entirely different topic then the one at hand.
I've seen little in the way of complaints concerning the incestous relationship Obama had with Immelt.
Just because people choose to be hypocritical, doesn't mean they don't have a point. Thats one of the problems with the entire political world right now. One group points out a problem, and then an oppossing group prevents any progress towards fixing the problem, because the first group has a similar problem. You can't fix everything at the same time, you have to take it one step at a time, and blaming the other group for hypocrisy, and using that as an excuse to altogether prevent progress is unacceptable.