How do we get the money out of politics?

[Aletheia4u]

Our entire political system has been corrupted by big money donors and the two major political parties.

And money is the primary problem. We allow a few big money donors to exert control over the parties that decide who will run for president and ultimately who will be elected. This corruption permeates the entire federal government right down to the lowliest congress person.

Foreign money should not be allowed at all but we see foreign interests giving huge dollar amounts to the RNC and DNC we even allow foreign money donations for candidates of Congress and the presidency.

WHat can we do to get rid of at least foreign contributions and limit the big money donors from exerting control over our political system?

 

[Blues Man]

get rid of citizen's united.

lol ... good luck.

we could put limits on the tax deductibility of campaign donations.

Remove the incentive for big money donors to play both sides

Huh?

Limits on tax deductibility?

Since when was a political campaign donation deductible?

Am I debating people who have no idea what they are debating?

Blues Man...I have absolutely no idea what your political ideology is. You may see things exactly as I see them....or maybe the other way........but for you to post what you did?

You dont belong in this conversation. You have no idea what you are talking about.

I can admit if I made a mistake so I stand corrected.

But you are not the arbiter of who can participate in any discussion here

 

[LoneLaugher]

Easy. Elect people who are committed to taking big money out of politics. They're usually progressive democrats.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Our entire political system has been corrupted by big money donors and the two major political parties.

And money is the primary problem. We allow a few big money donors to exert control over the parties that decide who will run for president and ultimately who will be elected. This corruption permeates the entire federal government right down to the lowliest congress person.

Foreign money should not be allowed at all but we see foreign interests giving huge dollar amounts to the RNC and DNC we even allow foreign money donations for candidates of Congress and the presidency.

WHat can we do to get rid of at least foreign contributions and limit the big money donors from exerting control over our political system?

Any political who believes that money corrupts needs to recuse themselves from voting on all spending.

Problem solved

 

[playtime]

get rid of citizen's united.

lol ... good luck.

That did NOT stop anyone from donating to politics. It only stopped certain groups from speaking out on their own. You really should understand the law and ruling before commenting on it.

Either that or you are simply intentionally misrepresenting the issue.

citizen's united allows dark money & super pacs to steer any politician willing to take it.

The law did NOT stop people or corporations from donating to politicians or the parties. Learn what it was before commenting on it.

bernie has been trying from day one to get it overturned, & was always a main focus within his platform. is it the only answer? of course not ... but a damn good way to help correct the wrong.

Politicians sadly want to cut those not a part of the parties from having a say outside of the party. The law stopped NO ONE from donating to politicians or the parties.

dude - citizen's united ALLOWS MORE weight to those who can afford it.

The question was how to get money out of politics. Not how do we keep those outside of politics from having a say.

i never said it STOPPED the money. quite the opposite in fact AND nobody has to account for that cash being funneled in; thereby circumventing the whole 'limit' on how much cash can go to any pol willing to take it.

are we clear yet?

All the money being "funneled in" must be accounted for.

& overturning citizen's united is

a

start.

you can't account for any cash if it's not declared because no individual is donating; but rather from sources not regulated & obligated to do so... per the decion by the SC to allow CI to be the norm.

we are on the same side here.

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You have no idea what you are even saying. Politicians and the parties are required to report every single penny they take in. There is no such thing as unregulated sources they do not have to report.

alrighty then - seems like you flunked reading comp. i am not talking out both sides of my mouth. i answered the OP BY SAYING A GOOD WAY TO GET CASH OUTA POLITICS WAS TO OVERTURN CI.

i NEVER said politicians & parties aren't required to report donations.
i am talking about dark money; which CI was designed for.

Dark Money Basics
Dark Money Basics

next time make sure YOU know what you're attacking b4 you fly off the handle, m'k?

 

[pknopp]

get rid of citizen's united.

lol ... good luck.

That did NOT stop anyone from donating to politics. It only stopped certain groups from speaking out on their own. You really should understand the law and ruling before commenting on it.

Either that or you are simply intentionally misrepresenting the issue.

citizen's united allows dark money & super pacs to steer any politician willing to take it.

The law did NOT stop people or corporations from donating to politicians or the parties. Learn what it was before commenting on it.

bernie has been trying from day one to get it overturned, & was always a main focus within his platform. is it the only answer? of course not ... but a damn good way to help correct the wrong.

Politicians sadly want to cut those not a part of the parties from having a say outside of the party. The law stopped NO ONE from donating to politicians or the parties.

dude - citizen's united ALLOWS MORE weight to those who can afford it.

The question was how to get money out of politics. Not how do we keep those outside of politics from having a say.

i never said it STOPPED the money. quite the opposite in fact AND nobody has to account for that cash being funneled in; thereby circumventing the whole 'limit' on how much cash can go to any pol willing to take it.

are we clear yet?

All the money being "funneled in" must be accounted for.

& overturning citizen's united is

a

start.

you can't account for any cash if it's not declared because no individual is donating; but rather from sources not regulated & obligated to do so... per the decion by the SC to allow CI to be the norm.

we are on the same side here.

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You have no idea what you are even saying. Politicians and the parties are required to report every single penny they take in. There is no such thing as unregulated sources they do not have to report.

alrighty then - seems like you flunked reading comp. i am not talking out both sides of my mouth. i answered the OP BY SAYING A GOOD WAY TO GET CASH OUTA POLITICS WAS TO OVERTURN CI.

i NEVER said politicians & parties aren't required to report donations.
i am talking about dark money; which CI was designed for.

Dark Money Basics
Dark Money Basics

next time make sure YOU know what you're attacking b4 you fly off the handle, m'k?

"Dark Money" Money that the politicians and parties don't control.

 

[playtime]

get rid of citizen's united.

lol ... good luck.

That did NOT stop anyone from donating to politics. It only stopped certain groups from speaking out on their own. You really should understand the law and ruling before commenting on it.

Either that or you are simply intentionally misrepresenting the issue.

citizen's united allows dark money & super pacs to steer any politician willing to take it.

The law did NOT stop people or corporations from donating to politicians or the parties. Learn what it was before commenting on it.

bernie has been trying from day one to get it overturned, & was always a main focus within his platform. is it the only answer? of course not ... but a damn good way to help correct the wrong.

Politicians sadly want to cut those not a part of the parties from having a say outside of the party. The law stopped NO ONE from donating to politicians or the parties.

dude - citizen's united ALLOWS MORE weight to those who can afford it.

The question was how to get money out of politics. Not how do we keep those outside of politics from having a say.

i never said it STOPPED the money. quite the opposite in fact AND nobody has to account for that cash being funneled in; thereby circumventing the whole 'limit' on how much cash can go to any pol willing to take it.

are we clear yet?

All the money being "funneled in" must be accounted for.

& overturning citizen's united is

a

start.

you can't account for any cash if it's not declared because no individual is donating; but rather from sources not regulated & obligated to do so... per the decion by the SC to allow CI to be the norm.

we are on the same side here.

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You have no idea what you are even saying. Politicians and the parties are required to report every single penny they take in. There is no such thing as unregulated sources they do not have to report.

alrighty then - seems like you flunked reading comp. i am not talking out both sides of my mouth. i answered the OP BY SAYING A GOOD WAY TO GET CASH OUTA POLITICS WAS TO OVERTURN CI.

i NEVER said politicians & parties aren't required to report donations.
i am talking about dark money; which CI was designed for.

Dark Money Basics
Dark Money Basics

next time make sure YOU know what you're attacking b4 you fly off the handle, m'k?

"Dark Money" Money that the politicians and parties don't control.

they don't 'control' it ... but sure benefit from & is influenced by it.
which ... that cash ... is basically what the OP was wondering how to stop.

 

[pknopp]

get rid of citizen's united.

lol ... good luck.

That did NOT stop anyone from donating to politics. It only stopped certain groups from speaking out on their own. You really should understand the law and ruling before commenting on it.

Either that or you are simply intentionally misrepresenting the issue.

citizen's united allows dark money & super pacs to steer any politician willing to take it.

The law did NOT stop people or corporations from donating to politicians or the parties. Learn what it was before commenting on it.

bernie has been trying from day one to get it overturned, & was always a main focus within his platform. is it the only answer? of course not ... but a damn good way to help correct the wrong.

Politicians sadly want to cut those not a part of the parties from having a say outside of the party. The law stopped NO ONE from donating to politicians or the parties.

dude - citizen's united ALLOWS MORE weight to those who can afford it.

The question was how to get money out of politics. Not how do we keep those outside of politics from having a say.

i never said it STOPPED the money. quite the opposite in fact AND nobody has to account for that cash being funneled in; thereby circumventing the whole 'limit' on how much cash can go to any pol willing to take it.

are we clear yet?

All the money being "funneled in" must be accounted for.

& overturning citizen's united is

a

start.

you can't account for any cash if it's not declared because no individual is donating; but rather from sources not regulated & obligated to do so... per the decion by the SC to allow CI to be the norm.

we are on the same side here.

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You have no idea what you are even saying. Politicians and the parties are required to report every single penny they take in. There is no such thing as unregulated sources they do not have to report.

alrighty then - seems like you flunked reading comp. i am not talking out both sides of my mouth. i answered the OP BY SAYING A GOOD WAY TO GET CASH OUTA POLITICS WAS TO OVERTURN CI.

i NEVER said politicians & parties aren't required to report donations.
i am talking about dark money; which CI was designed for.

Dark Money Basics
Dark Money Basics

next time make sure YOU know what you're attacking b4 you fly off the handle, m'k?

"Dark Money" Money that the politicians and parties don't control.

they don't 'control' it ... but sure benefit from & is influenced by it.
which ... that cash ... is basically what the OP was wondering how to stop.

Why would you want to stop the money from citizens while allowing the politicians to be bought off freely?

 

[playtime]

get rid of citizen's united.

lol ... good luck.

That did NOT stop anyone from donating to politics. It only stopped certain groups from speaking out on their own. You really should understand the law and ruling before commenting on it.

Either that or you are simply intentionally misrepresenting the issue.

citizen's united allows dark money & super pacs to steer any politician willing to take it.

The law did NOT stop people or corporations from donating to politicians or the parties. Learn what it was before commenting on it.

bernie has been trying from day one to get it overturned, & was always a main focus within his platform. is it the only answer? of course not ... but a damn good way to help correct the wrong.

Politicians sadly want to cut those not a part of the parties from having a say outside of the party. The law stopped NO ONE from donating to politicians or the parties.

dude - citizen's united ALLOWS MORE weight to those who can afford it.

The question was how to get money out of politics. Not how do we keep those outside of politics from having a say.

i never said it STOPPED the money. quite the opposite in fact AND nobody has to account for that cash being funneled in; thereby circumventing the whole 'limit' on how much cash can go to any pol willing to take it.

are we clear yet?

All the money being "funneled in" must be accounted for.

& overturning citizen's united is

a

start.

you can't account for any cash if it's not declared because no individual is donating; but rather from sources not regulated & obligated to do so... per the decion by the SC to allow CI to be the norm.

we are on the same side here.

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You have no idea what you are even saying. Politicians and the parties are required to report every single penny they take in. There is no such thing as unregulated sources they do not have to report.

alrighty then - seems like you flunked reading comp. i am not talking out both sides of my mouth. i answered the OP BY SAYING A GOOD WAY TO GET CASH OUTA POLITICS WAS TO OVERTURN CI.

i NEVER said politicians & parties aren't required to report donations.
i am talking about dark money; which CI was designed for.

Dark Money Basics
Dark Money Basics

next time make sure YOU know what you're attacking b4 you fly off the handle, m'k?

"Dark Money" Money that the politicians and parties don't control.

they don't 'control' it ... but sure benefit from & is influenced by it.
which ... that cash ... is basically what the OP was wondering how to stop.

Why would you want to stop the money from citizens while allowing the politicians to be bought off freely?

corporations aren't people, my friend.

 

[pknopp]

get rid of citizen's united.

lol ... good luck.

That did NOT stop anyone from donating to politics. It only stopped certain groups from speaking out on their own. You really should understand the law and ruling before commenting on it.

Either that or you are simply intentionally misrepresenting the issue.

citizen's united allows dark money & super pacs to steer any politician willing to take it.

The law did NOT stop people or corporations from donating to politicians or the parties. Learn what it was before commenting on it.

bernie has been trying from day one to get it overturned, & was always a main focus within his platform. is it the only answer? of course not ... but a damn good way to help correct the wrong.

Politicians sadly want to cut those not a part of the parties from having a say outside of the party. The law stopped NO ONE from donating to politicians or the parties.

dude - citizen's united ALLOWS MORE weight to those who can afford it.

The question was how to get money out of politics. Not how do we keep those outside of politics from having a say.

i never said it STOPPED the money. quite the opposite in fact AND nobody has to account for that cash being funneled in; thereby circumventing the whole 'limit' on how much cash can go to any pol willing to take it.

are we clear yet?

All the money being "funneled in" must be accounted for.

& overturning citizen's united is

a

start.

you can't account for any cash if it's not declared because no individual is donating; but rather from sources not regulated & obligated to do so... per the decion by the SC to allow CI to be the norm.

we are on the same side here.

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You have no idea what you are even saying. Politicians and the parties are required to report every single penny they take in. There is no such thing as unregulated sources they do not have to report.

alrighty then - seems like you flunked reading comp. i am not talking out both sides of my mouth. i answered the OP BY SAYING A GOOD WAY TO GET CASH OUTA POLITICS WAS TO OVERTURN CI.

i NEVER said politicians & parties aren't required to report donations.
i am talking about dark money; which CI was designed for.

Dark Money Basics
Dark Money Basics

next time make sure YOU know what you're attacking b4 you fly off the handle, m'k?

"Dark Money" Money that the politicians and parties don't control.

they don't 'control' it ... but sure benefit from & is influenced by it.
which ... that cash ... is basically what the OP was wondering how to stop.

Why would you want to stop the money from citizens while allowing the politicians to be bought off freely?

corporations aren't people, my friend.

You can avoid my question if you wish.

 

[playtime]

get rid of citizen's united.

lol ... good luck.

That did NOT stop anyone from donating to politics. It only stopped certain groups from speaking out on their own. You really should understand the law and ruling before commenting on it.

Either that or you are simply intentionally misrepresenting the issue.

citizen's united allows dark money & super pacs to steer any politician willing to take it.

The law did NOT stop people or corporations from donating to politicians or the parties. Learn what it was before commenting on it.

bernie has been trying from day one to get it overturned, & was always a main focus within his platform. is it the only answer? of course not ... but a damn good way to help correct the wrong.

Politicians sadly want to cut those not a part of the parties from having a say outside of the party. The law stopped NO ONE from donating to politicians or the parties.

dude - citizen's united ALLOWS MORE weight to those who can afford it.

The question was how to get money out of politics. Not how do we keep those outside of politics from having a say.

i never said it STOPPED the money. quite the opposite in fact AND nobody has to account for that cash being funneled in; thereby circumventing the whole 'limit' on how much cash can go to any pol willing to take it.

are we clear yet?

All the money being "funneled in" must be accounted for.

& overturning citizen's united is

a

start.

you can't account for any cash if it's not declared because no individual is donating; but rather from sources not regulated & obligated to do so... per the decion by the SC to allow CI to be the norm.

we are on the same side here.

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You have no idea what you are even saying. Politicians and the parties are required to report every single penny they take in. There is no such thing as unregulated sources they do not have to report.

alrighty then - seems like you flunked reading comp. i am not talking out both sides of my mouth. i answered the OP BY SAYING A GOOD WAY TO GET CASH OUTA POLITICS WAS TO OVERTURN CI.

i NEVER said politicians & parties aren't required to report donations.
i am talking about dark money; which CI was designed for.

Dark Money Basics
Dark Money Basics

next time make sure YOU know what you're attacking b4 you fly off the handle, m'k?

"Dark Money" Money that the politicians and parties don't control.

they don't 'control' it ... but sure benefit from & is influenced by it.
which ... that cash ... is basically what the OP was wondering how to stop.

Why would you want to stop the money from citizens while allowing the politicians to be bought off freely?

corporations aren't people, my friend.

You can avoid my question if you wish.

i am not. individuals have been able to donate to campaigns b4 AND after CI.

god damn, what's wrong with you? you didn't even vote did you? if you did, who was yer write in?

 

[pknopp]

get rid of citizen's united.

lol ... good luck.

That did NOT stop anyone from donating to politics. It only stopped certain groups from speaking out on their own. You really should understand the law and ruling before commenting on it.

Either that or you are simply intentionally misrepresenting the issue.

citizen's united allows dark money & super pacs to steer any politician willing to take it.

The law did NOT stop people or corporations from donating to politicians or the parties. Learn what it was before commenting on it.

bernie has been trying from day one to get it overturned, & was always a main focus within his platform. is it the only answer? of course not ... but a damn good way to help correct the wrong.

Politicians sadly want to cut those not a part of the parties from having a say outside of the party. The law stopped NO ONE from donating to politicians or the parties.

dude - citizen's united ALLOWS MORE weight to those who can afford it.

The question was how to get money out of politics. Not how do we keep those outside of politics from having a say.

i never said it STOPPED the money. quite the opposite in fact AND nobody has to account for that cash being funneled in; thereby circumventing the whole 'limit' on how much cash can go to any pol willing to take it.

are we clear yet?

All the money being "funneled in" must be accounted for.

& overturning citizen's united is

a

start.

you can't account for any cash if it's not declared because no individual is donating; but rather from sources not regulated & obligated to do so... per the decion by the SC to allow CI to be the norm.

we are on the same side here.

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You have no idea what you are even saying. Politicians and the parties are required to report every single penny they take in. There is no such thing as unregulated sources they do not have to report.

alrighty then - seems like you flunked reading comp. i am not talking out both sides of my mouth. i answered the OP BY SAYING A GOOD WAY TO GET CASH OUTA POLITICS WAS TO OVERTURN CI.

i NEVER said politicians & parties aren't required to report donations.
i am talking about dark money; which CI was designed for.

Dark Money Basics
Dark Money Basics

next time make sure YOU know what you're attacking b4 you fly off the handle, m'k?

"Dark Money" Money that the politicians and parties don't control.

they don't 'control' it ... but sure benefit from & is influenced by it.
which ... that cash ... is basically what the OP was wondering how to stop.

Why would you want to stop the money from citizens while allowing the politicians to be bought off freely?

corporations aren't people, my friend.

You can avoid my question if you wish.

i am not. individuals have been able to donate to campaigns b4 AND after CI.

god damn, what's wrong with you? you didn't even vote did you? if you did, who was yer write in?

Worthless rant. The problem is not people outside of the system being able to participate.

 

[playtime]

get rid of citizen's united.

lol ... good luck.

That did NOT stop anyone from donating to politics. It only stopped certain groups from speaking out on their own. You really should understand the law and ruling before commenting on it.

Either that or you are simply intentionally misrepresenting the issue.

citizen's united allows dark money & super pacs to steer any politician willing to take it.

The law did NOT stop people or corporations from donating to politicians or the parties. Learn what it was before commenting on it.

bernie has been trying from day one to get it overturned, & was always a main focus within his platform. is it the only answer? of course not ... but a damn good way to help correct the wrong.

Politicians sadly want to cut those not a part of the parties from having a say outside of the party. The law stopped NO ONE from donating to politicians or the parties.

dude - citizen's united ALLOWS MORE weight to those who can afford it.

The question was how to get money out of politics. Not how do we keep those outside of politics from having a say.

i never said it STOPPED the money. quite the opposite in fact AND nobody has to account for that cash being funneled in; thereby circumventing the whole 'limit' on how much cash can go to any pol willing to take it.

are we clear yet?

All the money being "funneled in" must be accounted for.

& overturning citizen's united is

a

start.

you can't account for any cash if it's not declared because no individual is donating; but rather from sources not regulated & obligated to do so... per the decion by the SC to allow CI to be the norm.

we are on the same side here.

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You have no idea what you are even saying. Politicians and the parties are required to report every single penny they take in. There is no such thing as unregulated sources they do not have to report.

alrighty then - seems like you flunked reading comp. i am not talking out both sides of my mouth. i answered the OP BY SAYING A GOOD WAY TO GET CASH OUTA POLITICS WAS TO OVERTURN CI.

i NEVER said politicians & parties aren't required to report donations.
i am talking about dark money; which CI was designed for.

Dark Money Basics
Dark Money Basics

next time make sure YOU know what you're attacking b4 you fly off the handle, m'k?

"Dark Money" Money that the politicians and parties don't control.

they don't 'control' it ... but sure benefit from & is influenced by it.
which ... that cash ... is basically what the OP was wondering how to stop.

Why would you want to stop the money from citizens while allowing the politicians to be bought off freely?

corporations aren't people, my friend.

You can avoid my question if you wish.

i am not. individuals have been able to donate to campaigns b4 AND after CI.

god damn, what's wrong with you? you didn't even vote did you? if you did, who was yer write in?

Worthless rant. The problem is not people outside of the system being able to participate.

this b/f is what is useless. did you vote? write in someone?

if you didn't vote - then you don't really get to complain about who's in office & what is done or not done with cash in politics... or anybody who replies to this kinda thread.

 

[pknopp]

get rid of citizen's united.

lol ... good luck.

That did NOT stop anyone from donating to politics. It only stopped certain groups from speaking out on their own. You really should understand the law and ruling before commenting on it.

Either that or you are simply intentionally misrepresenting the issue.

citizen's united allows dark money & super pacs to steer any politician willing to take it.

The law did NOT stop people or corporations from donating to politicians or the parties. Learn what it was before commenting on it.

bernie has been trying from day one to get it overturned, & was always a main focus within his platform. is it the only answer? of course not ... but a damn good way to help correct the wrong.

Politicians sadly want to cut those not a part of the parties from having a say outside of the party. The law stopped NO ONE from donating to politicians or the parties.

dude - citizen's united ALLOWS MORE weight to those who can afford it.

The question was how to get money out of politics. Not how do we keep those outside of politics from having a say.

i never said it STOPPED the money. quite the opposite in fact AND nobody has to account for that cash being funneled in; thereby circumventing the whole 'limit' on how much cash can go to any pol willing to take it.

are we clear yet?

All the money being "funneled in" must be accounted for.

& overturning citizen's united is

a

start.

you can't account for any cash if it's not declared because no individual is donating; but rather from sources not regulated & obligated to do so... per the decion by the SC to allow CI to be the norm.

we are on the same side here.

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You have no idea what you are even saying. Politicians and the parties are required to report every single penny they take in. There is no such thing as unregulated sources they do not have to report.

alrighty then - seems like you flunked reading comp. i am not talking out both sides of my mouth. i answered the OP BY SAYING A GOOD WAY TO GET CASH OUTA POLITICS WAS TO OVERTURN CI.

i NEVER said politicians & parties aren't required to report donations.
i am talking about dark money; which CI was designed for.

Dark Money Basics
Dark Money Basics

next time make sure YOU know what you're attacking b4 you fly off the handle, m'k?

"Dark Money" Money that the politicians and parties don't control.

they don't 'control' it ... but sure benefit from & is influenced by it.
which ... that cash ... is basically what the OP was wondering how to stop.

Why would you want to stop the money from citizens while allowing the politicians to be bought off freely?

corporations aren't people, my friend.

You can avoid my question if you wish.

i am not. individuals have been able to donate to campaigns b4 AND after CI.

god damn, what's wrong with you? you didn't even vote did you? if you did, who was yer write in?

Worthless rant. The problem is not people outside of the system being able to participate.

this b/f is what is useless. did you vote? write in someone?

if you didn't vote - then you don't really get to complain about who's in office & what is done or not done with cash in politics... or anybody who replies to this kinda thread.

Of course I voted. I have every election since 1980. It's NOT about me.

 

[playtime]

get rid of citizen's united.

lol ... good luck.

That did NOT stop anyone from donating to politics. It only stopped certain groups from speaking out on their own. You really should understand the law and ruling before commenting on it.

Either that or you are simply intentionally misrepresenting the issue.

citizen's united allows dark money & super pacs to steer any politician willing to take it.

The law did NOT stop people or corporations from donating to politicians or the parties. Learn what it was before commenting on it.

bernie has been trying from day one to get it overturned, & was always a main focus within his platform. is it the only answer? of course not ... but a damn good way to help correct the wrong.

Politicians sadly want to cut those not a part of the parties from having a say outside of the party. The law stopped NO ONE from donating to politicians or the parties.

dude - citizen's united ALLOWS MORE weight to those who can afford it.

The question was how to get money out of politics. Not how do we keep those outside of politics from having a say.

i never said it STOPPED the money. quite the opposite in fact AND nobody has to account for that cash being funneled in; thereby circumventing the whole 'limit' on how much cash can go to any pol willing to take it.

are we clear yet?

All the money being "funneled in" must be accounted for.

& overturning citizen's united is

a

start.

you can't account for any cash if it's not declared because no individual is donating; but rather from sources not regulated & obligated to do so... per the decion by the SC to allow CI to be the norm.

we are on the same side here.

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You have no idea what you are even saying. Politicians and the parties are required to report every single penny they take in. There is no such thing as unregulated sources they do not have to report.

alrighty then - seems like you flunked reading comp. i am not talking out both sides of my mouth. i answered the OP BY SAYING A GOOD WAY TO GET CASH OUTA POLITICS WAS TO OVERTURN CI.

i NEVER said politicians & parties aren't required to report donations.
i am talking about dark money; which CI was designed for.

Dark Money Basics
Dark Money Basics

next time make sure YOU know what you're attacking b4 you fly off the handle, m'k?

"Dark Money" Money that the politicians and parties don't control.

they don't 'control' it ... but sure benefit from & is influenced by it.
which ... that cash ... is basically what the OP was wondering how to stop.

Why would you want to stop the money from citizens while allowing the politicians to be bought off freely?

corporations aren't people, my friend.

You can avoid my question if you wish.

i am not. individuals have been able to donate to campaigns b4 AND after CI.

god damn, what's wrong with you? you didn't even vote did you? if you did, who was yer write in?

Worthless rant. The problem is not people outside of the system being able to participate.

this b/f is what is useless. did you vote? write in someone?

if you didn't vote - then you don't really get to complain about who's in office & what is done or not done with cash in politics... or anybody who replies to this kinda thread.

Of course I voted. I have every election since 1980. It's NOT about me.

well good. i could have sworn i read that you wouldn't vote if bernie got outa the race. 3rd party then?

 

[pknopp]

get rid of citizen's united.

lol ... good luck.

That did NOT stop anyone from donating to politics. It only stopped certain groups from speaking out on their own. You really should understand the law and ruling before commenting on it.

Either that or you are simply intentionally misrepresenting the issue.

citizen's united allows dark money & super pacs to steer any politician willing to take it.

The law did NOT stop people or corporations from donating to politicians or the parties. Learn what it was before commenting on it.

bernie has been trying from day one to get it overturned, & was always a main focus within his platform. is it the only answer? of course not ... but a damn good way to help correct the wrong.

Politicians sadly want to cut those not a part of the parties from having a say outside of the party. The law stopped NO ONE from donating to politicians or the parties.

dude - citizen's united ALLOWS MORE weight to those who can afford it.

The question was how to get money out of politics. Not how do we keep those outside of politics from having a say.

i never said it STOPPED the money. quite the opposite in fact AND nobody has to account for that cash being funneled in; thereby circumventing the whole 'limit' on how much cash can go to any pol willing to take it.

are we clear yet?

All the money being "funneled in" must be accounted for.

& overturning citizen's united is

a

start.

you can't account for any cash if it's not declared because no individual is donating; but rather from sources not regulated & obligated to do so... per the decion by the SC to allow CI to be the norm.

we are on the same side here.

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You have no idea what you are even saying. Politicians and the parties are required to report every single penny they take in. There is no such thing as unregulated sources they do not have to report.

alrighty then - seems like you flunked reading comp. i am not talking out both sides of my mouth. i answered the OP BY SAYING A GOOD WAY TO GET CASH OUTA POLITICS WAS TO OVERTURN CI.

i NEVER said politicians & parties aren't required to report donations.
i am talking about dark money; which CI was designed for.

Dark Money Basics
Dark Money Basics

next time make sure YOU know what you're attacking b4 you fly off the handle, m'k?

"Dark Money" Money that the politicians and parties don't control.

they don't 'control' it ... but sure benefit from & is influenced by it.
which ... that cash ... is basically what the OP was wondering how to stop.

Why would you want to stop the money from citizens while allowing the politicians to be bought off freely?

corporations aren't people, my friend.

You can avoid my question if you wish.

i am not. individuals have been able to donate to campaigns b4 AND after CI.

god damn, what's wrong with you? you didn't even vote did you? if you did, who was yer write in?

Worthless rant. The problem is not people outside of the system being able to participate.

this b/f is what is useless. did you vote? write in someone?

if you didn't vote - then you don't really get to complain about who's in office & what is done or not done with cash in politics... or anybody who replies to this kinda thread.

Of course I voted. I have every election since 1980. It's NOT about me.

well good. i could have sworn i read that you wouldn't vote if bernie got outa the race. 3rd party then?

It's not about me.

 

[Turtlesoup]

Our entire political system has been corrupted by big money donors and the two major political parties.

And money is the primary problem. We allow a few big money donors to exert control over the parties that decide who will run for president and ultimately who will be elected. This corruption permeates the entire federal government right down to the lowliest congress person.

Foreign money should not be allowed at all but we see foreign interests giving huge dollar amounts to the RNC and DNC we even allow foreign money donations for candidates of Congress and the presidency.

WHat can we do to get rid of at least foreign contributions and limit the big money donors from exerting control over our political system?

Term limits would limit the time that they would have to set up their systems of funneling money most often through foundations and their family members.
Limits on the money spent on campaigns would help.
Accounting audits and criminal charges for corruption should be enforced. All politicans should have to step down from any voting or running of any program where they or their families profit off it. But this would mean that pelosi her son Paul, Biden and his entire family, Bill, Hilliary, and chelsea, mueller and Comey and several of their family members would all automatically being going to prison among others though...as they all were making money and taking kickbacks via their family members based on their political or government office.

 

[playtime]

get rid of citizen's united.

lol ... good luck.

That did NOT stop anyone from donating to politics. It only stopped certain groups from speaking out on their own. You really should understand the law and ruling before commenting on it.

Either that or you are simply intentionally misrepresenting the issue.

citizen's united allows dark money & super pacs to steer any politician willing to take it.

The law did NOT stop people or corporations from donating to politicians or the parties. Learn what it was before commenting on it.

bernie has been trying from day one to get it overturned, & was always a main focus within his platform. is it the only answer? of course not ... but a damn good way to help correct the wrong.

Politicians sadly want to cut those not a part of the parties from having a say outside of the party. The law stopped NO ONE from donating to politicians or the parties.

dude - citizen's united ALLOWS MORE weight to those who can afford it.

The question was how to get money out of politics. Not how do we keep those outside of politics from having a say.

i never said it STOPPED the money. quite the opposite in fact AND nobody has to account for that cash being funneled in; thereby circumventing the whole 'limit' on how much cash can go to any pol willing to take it.

are we clear yet?

All the money being "funneled in" must be accounted for.

& overturning citizen's united is

a

start.

you can't account for any cash if it's not declared because no individual is donating; but rather from sources not regulated & obligated to do so... per the decion by the SC to allow CI to be the norm.

we are on the same side here.

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You have no idea what you are even saying. Politicians and the parties are required to report every single penny they take in. There is no such thing as unregulated sources they do not have to report.

alrighty then - seems like you flunked reading comp. i am not talking out both sides of my mouth. i answered the OP BY SAYING A GOOD WAY TO GET CASH OUTA POLITICS WAS TO OVERTURN CI.

i NEVER said politicians & parties aren't required to report donations.
i am talking about dark money; which CI was designed for.

Dark Money Basics
Dark Money Basics

next time make sure YOU know what you're attacking b4 you fly off the handle, m'k?

"Dark Money" Money that the politicians and parties don't control.

they don't 'control' it ... but sure benefit from & is influenced by it.
which ... that cash ... is basically what the OP was wondering how to stop.

Why would you want to stop the money from citizens while allowing the politicians to be bought off freely?

corporations aren't people, my friend.

You can avoid my question if you wish.

i am not. individuals have been able to donate to campaigns b4 AND after CI.

god damn, what's wrong with you? you didn't even vote did you? if you did, who was yer write in?

Worthless rant. The problem is not people outside of the system being able to participate.

this b/f is what is useless. did you vote? write in someone?

if you didn't vote - then you don't really get to complain about who's in office & what is done or not done with cash in politics... or anybody who replies to this kinda thread.

Of course I voted. I have every election since 1980. It's NOT about me.

well good. i could have sworn i read that you wouldn't vote if bernie got outa the race. 3rd party then?

It's not about me.

see? there's that reading comp problem you got going on.

i never said it was....

i was curious is all. don't answer then. still doesn't change the fact that i answered the OP & you had a hissy fit when nothing, nor i - prompted it.

 

[pknopp]

get rid of citizen's united.

lol ... good luck.

That did NOT stop anyone from donating to politics. It only stopped certain groups from speaking out on their own. You really should understand the law and ruling before commenting on it.

Either that or you are simply intentionally misrepresenting the issue.

citizen's united allows dark money & super pacs to steer any politician willing to take it.

The law did NOT stop people or corporations from donating to politicians or the parties. Learn what it was before commenting on it.

bernie has been trying from day one to get it overturned, & was always a main focus within his platform. is it the only answer? of course not ... but a damn good way to help correct the wrong.

Politicians sadly want to cut those not a part of the parties from having a say outside of the party. The law stopped NO ONE from donating to politicians or the parties.

dude - citizen's united ALLOWS MORE weight to those who can afford it.

The question was how to get money out of politics. Not how do we keep those outside of politics from having a say.

i never said it STOPPED the money. quite the opposite in fact AND nobody has to account for that cash being funneled in; thereby circumventing the whole 'limit' on how much cash can go to any pol willing to take it.

are we clear yet?

All the money being "funneled in" must be accounted for.

& overturning citizen's united is

a

start.

you can't account for any cash if it's not declared because no individual is donating; but rather from sources not regulated & obligated to do so... per the decion by the SC to allow CI to be the norm.

we are on the same side here.

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You have no idea what you are even saying. Politicians and the parties are required to report every single penny they take in. There is no such thing as unregulated sources they do not have to report.

alrighty then - seems like you flunked reading comp. i am not talking out both sides of my mouth. i answered the OP BY SAYING A GOOD WAY TO GET CASH OUTA POLITICS WAS TO OVERTURN CI.

i NEVER said politicians & parties aren't required to report donations.
i am talking about dark money; which CI was designed for.

Dark Money Basics
Dark Money Basics

next time make sure YOU know what you're attacking b4 you fly off the handle, m'k?

"Dark Money" Money that the politicians and parties don't control.

they don't 'control' it ... but sure benefit from & is influenced by it.
which ... that cash ... is basically what the OP was wondering how to stop.

Why would you want to stop the money from citizens while allowing the politicians to be bought off freely?

corporations aren't people, my friend.

You can avoid my question if you wish.

i am not. individuals have been able to donate to campaigns b4 AND after CI.

god damn, what's wrong with you? you didn't even vote did you? if you did, who was yer write in?

Worthless rant. The problem is not people outside of the system being able to participate.

this b/f is what is useless. did you vote? write in someone?

if you didn't vote - then you don't really get to complain about who's in office & what is done or not done with cash in politics... or anybody who replies to this kinda thread.

Of course I voted. I have every election since 1980. It's NOT about me.

well good. i could have sworn i read that you wouldn't vote if bernie got outa the race. 3rd party then?

It's not about me.

see? there's that reading comp problem you got going on.

i never said it was....

Then address the issue, not me.

 

[playtime]

get rid of citizen's united.

lol ... good luck.

That did NOT stop anyone from donating to politics. It only stopped certain groups from speaking out on their own. You really should understand the law and ruling before commenting on it.

Either that or you are simply intentionally misrepresenting the issue.

citizen's united allows dark money & super pacs to steer any politician willing to take it.

The law did NOT stop people or corporations from donating to politicians or the parties. Learn what it was before commenting on it.

bernie has been trying from day one to get it overturned, & was always a main focus within his platform. is it the only answer? of course not ... but a damn good way to help correct the wrong.

Politicians sadly want to cut those not a part of the parties from having a say outside of the party. The law stopped NO ONE from donating to politicians or the parties.

dude - citizen's united ALLOWS MORE weight to those who can afford it.

The question was how to get money out of politics. Not how do we keep those outside of politics from having a say.

i never said it STOPPED the money. quite the opposite in fact AND nobody has to account for that cash being funneled in; thereby circumventing the whole 'limit' on how much cash can go to any pol willing to take it.

are we clear yet?

All the money being "funneled in" must be accounted for.

& overturning citizen's united is

a

start.

you can't account for any cash if it's not declared because no individual is donating; but rather from sources not regulated & obligated to do so... per the decion by the SC to allow CI to be the norm.

we are on the same side here.

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You have no idea what you are even saying. Politicians and the parties are required to report every single penny they take in. There is no such thing as unregulated sources they do not have to report.

alrighty then - seems like you flunked reading comp. i am not talking out both sides of my mouth. i answered the OP BY SAYING A GOOD WAY TO GET CASH OUTA POLITICS WAS TO OVERTURN CI.

i NEVER said politicians & parties aren't required to report donations.
i am talking about dark money; which CI was designed for.

Dark Money Basics
Dark Money Basics

next time make sure YOU know what you're attacking b4 you fly off the handle, m'k?

"Dark Money" Money that the politicians and parties don't control.

they don't 'control' it ... but sure benefit from & is influenced by it.
which ... that cash ... is basically what the OP was wondering how to stop.

Why would you want to stop the money from citizens while allowing the politicians to be bought off freely?

corporations aren't people, my friend.

You can avoid my question if you wish.

i am not. individuals have been able to donate to campaigns b4 AND after CI.

god damn, what's wrong with you? you didn't even vote did you? if you did, who was yer write in?

Worthless rant. The problem is not people outside of the system being able to participate.

this b/f is what is useless. did you vote? write in someone?

if you didn't vote - then you don't really get to complain about who's in office & what is done or not done with cash in politics... or anybody who replies to this kinda thread.

Of course I voted. I have every election since 1980. It's NOT about me.

well good. i could have sworn i read that you wouldn't vote if bernie got outa the race. 3rd party then?

It's not about me.

see? there's that reading comp problem you got going on.

i never said it was....

Then address the issue, not me.

lol... i dun did.
but you flipping out, unnecessarily & a little nutty i might add - is your problem, not mine.