Is it ok for Google to contribute to any politican?

[bigrebnc1775]

Yes or no.

 

[Defiant1]

Federal candidates cannot accept donations from corporations and businesses.

 

[Taz]

They can't donate to the GOP. That would be just plain wrong.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Federal candidates cannot accept donations from corporations and businesses.

ok but one is according to open secrets.

 

[Mac1958]

As long as we're going to allow money to pollute & distort politics, and as long as we refuse to require term limits, this is going to happen.

We can bitch and moan about it all we want, but we're ignoring the bigger picture. We're certainly good at that.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

As long as we're going to allow money to pollute & distort politics, and as long as we refuse to require term limits, this is going to happen.

We can bitch and moan about it all we want, but we're ignoring the bigger picture. We're certainly good at that.

What about Microsoft? or any internet entity that has control of the information on the internet?

 

[Mac1958]

As long as we're going to allow money to pollute & distort politics, and as long as we refuse to require term limits, this is going to happen. We can bitch and moan about it all we want, but we're ignoring the bigger picture. We're certainly good at that.

What about Microsoft? or any internet entity that has control of the information on the internet?

Yes, under current law, of course. Our billionaires and corporations can spread as much money around as they want to get their way politically.

Do I like it? No, of course not.

But that's the way it is, unless and until we stop allowing money to control our politics.
.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

As long as we're going to allow money to pollute & distort politics, and as long as we refuse to require term limits, this is going to happen. We can bitch and moan about it all we want, but we're ignoring the bigger picture. We're certainly good at that.

What about Microsoft? or any internet entity that has control of the information on the internet?

Yes, under current law, of course. Our billionaires and corporations can spread as much money around as they want to get their way politically.

Do I like it? No, of course not.

But that's the way it is, unless and until we stop allowing money to control our politics.
.

Talk about trying to influence an election Russia has nothing on Google Microsoft Amazon
A good start to stopping some of the money is by repealing the 17th amendment.

 

[Tehon]

Corporations are people too.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Corporations are people too.

Actually, I believe no one should be allowed to contribute to any campaign that works for any entity that controls the flow of information.

 

[Norman]

Yes or no.

Google is an international company that operates in Russia among many other places.

 

[Tehon]

Corporations are people too.

Actually, I believe no one should be allowed to contribute to any campaign that works for any entity that controls the flow of information.

That makes no sense to draw that line.

 

[OldLady]

As long as we're going to allow money to pollute & distort politics, and as long as we refuse to require term limits, this is going to happen.

We can bitch and moan about it all we want, but we're ignoring the bigger picture. We're certainly good at that.

What about Microsoft? or any internet entity that has control of the information on the internet?

I didn't realize Microsoft had control of all the information on the internet.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Corporations are people too.

Actually, I believe no one should be allowed to contribute to any campaign that works for any entity that controls the flow of information.

That makes no sense to draw that line.

It makes a lot of sense I have the power to control what you put on the internet If it agrees with my political view I will allow it.

 

[OldLady]

As long as we're going to allow money to pollute & distort politics, and as long as we refuse to require term limits, this is going to happen. We can bitch and moan about it all we want, but we're ignoring the bigger picture. We're certainly good at that.

What about Microsoft? or any internet entity that has control of the information on the internet?

Yes, under current law, of course. Our billionaires and corporations can spread as much money around as they want to get their way politically.

Do I like it? No, of course not.

But that's the way it is, unless and until we stop allowing money to control our politics.
.

I don't know what term limits would solve, but I agree 100% that the best way to get representatives that don't work only for themselves is to take the money out of politics. It would be so simple. Candidates get a certain amount of money to spend from a nonpartisan pool--all get the same--and a certain amount of free media airtime. No more.

I think it's obscene that organizations can go to Washington and buy people's votes, but it happens every day. It's one thing to have people there trying to persuade them and another to be writing them huge checks.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

As long as we're going to allow money to pollute & distort politics, and as long as we refuse to require term limits, this is going to happen.

We can bitch and moan about it all we want, but we're ignoring the bigger picture. We're certainly good at that.

What about Microsoft? or any internet entity that has control of the information on the internet?

I didn't realize Microsoft had control of all the information on the internet.

Bing is maintained by Microsoft.

 

[mudwhistle]

Yes or no.

No.

 

[Mac1958]

As long as we're going to allow money to pollute & distort politics, and as long as we refuse to require term limits, this is going to happen. We can bitch and moan about it all we want, but we're ignoring the bigger picture. We're certainly good at that.

What about Microsoft? or any internet entity that has control of the information on the internet?

Yes, under current law, of course. Our billionaires and corporations can spread as much money around as they want to get their way politically.

Do I like it? No, of course not.

But that's the way it is, unless and until we stop allowing money to control our politics.
.

I don't know what term limits would solve, but I agree 100% that the best way to get representatives that don't work only for themselves is to take the money out of politics. It would be so simple. Candidates get a certain amount of money to spend from a nonpartisan pool--all get the same--and a certain amount of free media airtime. No more.

I think it's obscene that organizations can go to Washington and buy people's votes, but it happens every day. It's one thing to have people there trying to persuade them and another to be writing them huge checks.

Term limits would at least partially solve the "bringing home the bacon" problem -- Incumbents gaining and maintaining and expanding electoral advantage over any challengers by squeezing money out of the government to please their constituents and campaign funding sources. And then those same politicians crow about fiscal responsibility. That, to me, is madness and insulting.
.

 

[mudwhistle]

As long as we're going to allow money to pollute & distort politics, and as long as we refuse to require term limits, this is going to happen.

We can bitch and moan about it all we want, but we're ignoring the bigger picture. We're certainly good at that.

Yup......and congressional members should only be in Washington for a maximum of 6 months.....the rest of the time they need to get real jobs that have nothing to do with government.

 

[Defiant1]

As long as we're going to allow money to pollute & distort politics, and as long as we refuse to require term limits, this is going to happen. We can bitch and moan about it all we want, but we're ignoring the bigger picture. We're certainly good at that.

What about Microsoft? or any internet entity that has control of the information on the internet?

Yes, under current law, of course. Our billionaires and corporations can spread as much money around as they want to get their way politically.

Do I like it? No, of course not.

But that's the way it is, unless and until we stop allowing money to control our politics.
.

I don't know what term limits would solve, but I agree 100% that the best way to get representatives that don't work only for themselves is to take the money out of politics. It would be so simple. Candidates get a certain amount of money to spend from a nonpartisan pool--all get the same--and a certain amount of free media airtime. No more.

I think it's obscene that organizations can go to Washington and buy people's votes, but it happens every day. It's one thing to have people there trying to persuade them and another to be writing them huge checks.

Wow!!!
What happened to free speech?
You would not allow a candidate to spend his/her own money?
You would limit the content of ads?
You want the government to control campaigns?

You know the primary speech acknowledged by the first amendment is political speech.

This is why you leftists need your own country.