View Poll Results: Would you vote for an Amendment like this?

Voters
40. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes.

    20 50.00%
  • No.

    15 37.50%
  • Other.

    5 12.50%
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 42

Thread: Another new amendment...how would you vote?

  1. #21
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,505

    Re: Another new amendment...how would you vote?

    A million should be plenty if TV ads were eliminated. In fact, limiting campaigns to a million would pretty much preclude the current practice of spreading BS through ad campaigns.

    It shouldn't matter who donates either, as pretty much any serious candidate could raise a million nationwide. That amounts to only a third of a cent per capita, after all.

    So, really, all you'd have to do is limit what can be spent on campaigns.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  2. #22
    Sage
    Sherman123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Northeast US
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,774

    Re: Another new amendment...how would you vote?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    This amendment would ban all super pacs and companies from donating to candidates and would only allow individuals to donate funds to a candidate that they support. The max funds that they can donate would be $1,000 per candidate that they support. In addition as a second clause/paragraph no candidate can spend more than $1 million dollars to campaign for their election, all of it must come from donations of individuals 18 and older.
    It would be impossible to run a campaign for a country the size of the United States for $1,000,000. Even for a dictator trying to mobilize the vote that would be an impressive feat. Besides this is still all an abridgment of speech.

  3. #23
    Sage
    Sherman123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Northeast US
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,774

    Re: Another new amendment...how would you vote?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    A million should be plenty if TV ads were eliminated. In fact, limiting campaigns to a million would pretty much preclude the current practice of spreading BS through ad campaigns.

    It shouldn't matter who donates either, as pretty much any serious candidate could raise a million nationwide. That amounts to only a third of a cent per capita, after all.

    So, really, all you'd have to do is limit what can be spent on campaigns.
    You couldn't run a Presidential campaign in Denmark for $1,000,000. Staff and transportation costs alone would explode this budget.

  4. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Seen
    06-24-16 @ 03:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    1,073

    Re: Another new amendment...how would you vote?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    This amendment would ban all super pacs and companies from donating to candidates and would only allow individuals to donate funds to a candidate that they support. The max funds that they can donate would be $1,000 per candidate that they support. In addition as a second clause/paragraph no candidate can spend more than $1 million dollars to campaign for their election, all of it must come from donations of individuals 18 and older.
    Liberals would never go for it because it would eliminate super pac money from unions.

  5. #25
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:16 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    43,217

    Re: Another new amendment...how would you vote?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    This amendment would ban all super pacs and companies from donating to candidates and would only allow individuals to donate funds to a candidate that they support. The max funds that they can donate would be $1,000 per candidate that they support. In addition as a second clause/paragraph no candidate can spend more than $1 million dollars to campaign for their election, all of it must come from donations of individuals 18 and older.
    I don't know. If you are talking about the Presidency, you are talking about a pretty important race and there is a lot of information and analysis to transmit. I am not sure I would feel comfortable in restricting the funding and funding process that much and preventing people from talking their mind and putting their money, where their mouth is?

  6. #26
    Global Moderator
    Bodhidarma approves bigly
    Andalublue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Granada, España
    Last Seen
    11-29-17 @ 01:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    26,111

    Re: Another new amendment...how would you vote?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sherman123 View Post
    You couldn't run a Presidential campaign in Denmark for $1,000,000.
    That's probably got more to do with the fact that Queen Margrethe might feel a little threatened.
    "The crisis will end when fear changes sides" - Pablo Iglesias Turrión

    "Austerity is used as a cover to reconfigure society and increase inequality and injustice." - Jeremy Corbyn

  7. #27
    Anti-Hypocrite
    molten_dragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southeast Michigan
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,351

    Re: Another new amendment...how would you vote?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    This amendment would ban all super pacs and companies from donating to candidates and would only allow individuals to donate funds to a candidate that they support. The max funds that they can donate would be $1,000 per candidate that they support. In addition as a second clause/paragraph no candidate can spend more than $1 million dollars to campaign for their election, all of it must come from donations of individuals 18 and older.
    More than likely, yes. A million dollars seems a little bit low, so I might raise that cap some.
    If you build a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day.

    If you set a man on fire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

  8. #28
    Kinky
    tres borrachos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 06:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    38,951

    Re: Another new amendment...how would you vote?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    Completely against it. I'm not good with telling other people and companies how to spend their money.

    Dollars can only do so much. People still vote under their own volition, and you get the same number of votes as any member of the Walton family - one.
    I was reading through the posts in here, clicking the "like" button when I happened on one I liked, all the while waiting until I got to the end of the thread to post, virtually word for word, exactly what you posted here.

  9. #29
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,505

    Re: Another new amendment...how would you vote?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sherman123 View Post
    You couldn't run a Presidential campaign in Denmark for $1,000,000. Staff and transportation costs alone would explode this budget.
    Why does the presidential candidate have to travel about the country anyway? Just interview them on TV, pay for the interviews the same way the broadcasters pay for everything from soap operas to ball games, then stage debates paid for the same way, and let the voters hear first hand what the candidates have to say on the issues. That has to be better than hearing ads repeated ad nauseum telling us how terrible the opposition is and repeating half truths and outright lies to mislead the voters.

    After all the money is spent, and all the "speech" is broadcast, the voters still don't really know much about the candidates or where they really stand on issues. A lot of what they think they know is false.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  10. #30
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,544

    Re: Another new amendment...how would you vote?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    This amendment would ban all super pacs and companies from donating to candidates and would only allow individuals to donate funds to a candidate that they support. The max funds that they can donate would be $1,000 per candidate that they support. In addition as a second clause/paragraph no candidate can spend more than $1 million dollars to campaign for their election, all of it must come from donations of individuals 18 and older.
    Using your above math, after the first 1,000 people have donated their maximum $1,000/person then the candidate is done with their fundraising. That $1,000,000 would not even cover the cost of a typical Superbowl ad. How would you possibly enforce such a thing?
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 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
  •