Comments on: Could Freedom’s Watch buy our elections?

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 20:31:03 +0000

@ Cameron
That’s already accomplished through indirect means. Social programs and tax breaks mostly…

By: Cameron

Cameron — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 18:30:22 +0000

People will always spend time and money. No way to stop that. But we should change the laws so they could at least bribe voters because, hey, at least then we’d get something from our candidate of choice. The Romans always used to do that, so why not us? Maybe we wouldn’t even need a tax cut then. Ha!

By: Ian

Ian — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 18:15:11 +0000

Face facts: right or left-wing, both sides effectively purchase elections. The Republican party may be the “party of the rich” but that is because the rich vote Republican, not because Republicans themselves are the rich. Democrats are just as wealthy. I actually learned a lot from Colbert’s little experiment with being a presidential candidate. You can’t even get a major party nomination without spending like $10,000 per state to be put on that party’s primary ballot. While thats not a lot of money to most candidates, I personally couldn’t come up with a half million dollars just to try and have a chance. They say Colbert might have broken election laws by letting Doritos cover his registration costs, but Republicans aren’t breaking the law by doing this Freedom Watch crap (or similarly Democrats with MoveOn)? Ignore the whole bit about third (and fourth, 5th, so on…) party candidates, and just look at how they limit the number of candidates allowed to run in each party. Kucinich can’t even get invited to some debates, which while I agree he isn’t really viable, is pretty screwed up in that it takes another voice out of the debate.

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:33:14 +0000

Those people would tell you that they are influencing elections for “the good of the people.” And in some cases that may be true, or they may believe it.

By: Jordan

Jordan — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:46:36 +0000

Ridiculous. It’s not whose doing and their political affiliations for me. It’s the #. $250 million. Why does it take nearly $1 billion dollars and change to elect a president. Instead of putting all this money into their tv ads, they plane tickets and hotels for their leeching staff, why don’t political candidates say “Hey, this money should go to the people that most need it” and put their social action plans IN ACTION instead keeping up the political jabber and not doing a damn thing. $250 million could buy 360,000 Cusato Cottages (http://www.cusatocottages.com/) for victims of Hurricane Katrina (or people in general needing low-cost housing). Or it could go to fund any other plan to try out. The best way to get elected as a Repub candidate right now? Say “Take your $250 mil and spend it on the people, not me.”