View Poll Results: How much should corporations be allowed to contribute to political campaigns?

Voters
54. You may not vote on this poll
  • No limits. However much money they can manage.

    17 31.48%
  • Up to 100 million dollars

    0 0%
  • up to 50 million dollars

    0 0%
  • Up to 10 million dollars

    0 0%
  • Up to 1 million dollars

    0 0%
  • Up to 500K

    1 1.85%
  • Up to 100K

    0 0%
  • Up to 50K

    1 1.85%
  • Up to $200

    2 3.70%
  • NONE. All political campaigns should be grassroots with money ONLY from the people

    33 61.11%
Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 82

Thread: How much should corporations be allowed to contribute to political campaigns?

  1. #71
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: How much should corporations be allowed to contribute to political campaigns?

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    Your question is irrelevant. We have those programs because they were needed. You see in a society... never mind.
    Actually, we have those programs because the prohibitions on them in the Constitution were ignored.

    In this constitutional republic, "majority rules" isn't the lawful option. It's supposed to be "majority rules inside this limited area".

  2. #72
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    06-23-10 @ 11:33 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,320

    Re: How much should corporations be allowed to contribute to political campaigns?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Quite well.
    You may be doing quite well. But thanks for once again confirming your lack of empathy.

    But glad to see you're such a devoted follower of GW Bush.
    Even a broken watch is correct twice a day.

    Bushie imposed tariffs on steel, to "protect" American steel workers.

    This raised the price of steel, and steel is used in almost every manufactured good in the country.

    So the prices of all manufactured goods went up.

    When prices go up, people buy less.

    When people buy less, companies make less or don't expand.

    Aren't tariffs wonderful?
    And the alternative:
    We don't impose tariffs so it's cheaper to make it elsewhere.
    When it's made elsewhere we lose jobs.

    When people have no jobs they don't buy things.

    When people don't buy things, companies go out of business and employ NO ONE.

    The cost of goods might very well increase and people will buy less but at least WE, the USA are in control of the process.

    Yes, the price of steel went up. Maybe it was too low because we outsourced it.

  3. #73
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: How much should corporations be allowed to contribute to political campaigns?

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    WTF are you talking about. FDR left office in 1945 and the USA saw the greatest social and economic advancement in every category until Nixon came along. The government floundered until Carter, who did the dirty work to fix things and lost re-election because of it. Reagan came in with a "new way" of doing things and we've seen the country go downhill since then. The Clinton years were a fluke of short lived prosperity in a declining graph. That was due to the computer revolution which would have happened under a democrat or repub admin. Clinton's government sat back and watched the tech bubble happen.
    What ****ing alternate universe have you been living in?

    Your credibility just took a fatal shot in the foot.
    There is no such thing as a “Natural Born Dual-Citizen“.

    Originally Posted by PogueMoran
    I didnt have to read the article to tell you that you cant read.

  4. #74
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: How much should corporations be allowed to contribute to political campaigns?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    That was true until a few weeks ago.
    Everybody stop so we can get some basic facts straight.

    Corporations have been banned from giving money from their treasuries to political candidates since 1903. They are still banned from doing that.

    Corporations can sponsor political action committees, which take voluntary contributions from employees, stockholders, etc. and give that money to candidates, but only up to certain limits (usually 10K per election).

    The Supreme Court's recent decision didn't change any of the above. The decision affected money that corporations spend directly on speech - buying ads, etc. - that talk about elections. It didn't touch campaign contributions.

    And it's illegal for a politician to just go ask someone to buy them an ad, or anything else.

    Okay, carry on.

  5. #75
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: How much should corporations be allowed to contribute to political campaigns?

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    But the reality is that a corporation cannot directly contribute to a campaign but may contribute to a PAC, or a 527 which can run an ad and which amounts to the same thing.
    No, a corporation may not contribute to a PAC. That money has to come from voluntary donations from stockholders or employees. Same with union PACs.

    A 527 can run an ad, but not give donations to a campaign.

  6. #76
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: How much should corporations be allowed to contribute to political campaigns?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    I'm all in favor of creating a central pool where *ANY* contributions go. On a certain date, anyone who is legally registered to run gets an equal cut of the take. I want to see equality in funding so that it's the ISSUES, not the money that decides elections.

    Not that we'll ever see that.
    That's basically what we have for Presidential elections now.

  7. #77
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: How much should corporations be allowed to contribute to political campaigns?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    Personally, I would much rather money be removed entirely from politics. But how, I have no idea.
    Voters could start getting their information by reading newspapers and other inexpensive, reliable, extensive sources and stop drooling over 30-second TV ads.

    In other words, it'll never happen.

  8. #78
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: How much should corporations be allowed to contribute to political campaigns?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    There is nothing in the constitution that properly allows the federal government to limit contributions so the only legitimate answer is NO LIMIT
    Buckley v. Valeo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  9. #79
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: How much should corporations be allowed to contribute to political campaigns?

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    You may be doing quite well. But thanks for once again confirming your lack of empathy.
    Empathy fades when comprehension kicks in.

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    Even a broken watch is correct twice a day.
    So you're saying the liberals aren't broken watches, because they're never right ever.


    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    And the alternative:
    We don't impose tariffs so it's cheaper to make it elsewhere.
    Tariffs cost money.

    What sense is there in imposing taxes that hurt the economy?

    Outside of playing favoritism on the political scene?

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    When it's made elsewhere we lose jobs.
    No. People who used to make it here lose jobs. People who buy it here save money, and the money saved is used to finance other industries, so people in those industries gain jobs.

    The goonion fish cleaners in the American tuna industry were demanding $15 an hour to clean fish. Guamanians were willing to clean fish for a hell of a lot less. Goonions priced themselves out of work, the housewives that made tuna benefitted. So did their kids.

    You people suddenly object to the concept of "the greatest good for the greatest number" when it means your goonions aren't benefitted?

    What a big surprise there.

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    When people have no jobs they don't buy things.
    When people can buy things cheaper, they create jobs.

    Levi Strauss closed it's pants factory in Georgia. Some broad whose only skill was zipper attachment was put out of work. All broads buying jeans saved money. The zipper lady should have learned a more marketable skill.

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    When people don't buy things, companies go out of business and employ NO ONE.
    Really?

    So you're saying that all the companies that produced products with steel in them would have gone out of business if Bushy hadn't imposed the tariffs?

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    The cost of goods might very well increase and people will buy less but at least WE, the USA are in control of the process.
    Really? So people buying less is good for the economy? It's the government's job to control steel prices?

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    Yes, the price of steel went up. Maybe it was too low because we outsourced it.
    Yes, the price of steel went up. The price of steel was not too low. The price of American goonions was too high.

  10. #80
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,755

    Re: How much should corporations be allowed to contribute to political campaigns?

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    That's basically what we have for Presidential elections now.
    No, now whoever has the most money and can get themselves in front of the voters and spew the most soothing crap gets elected. Most elections are bought, not earned.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 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
  •