Support NeoGAF

[Sobriquet]

In the US do you have anything similar to the UK's electoral commission?

Its basically an independent watchdog which all parties need to report all spending to, the data is then published online for citizens to look at. They don't have to report anything less than £200 though.

Also, we have spending limits. For the general election it tends to be about £30,000 per seat (a seat is basically a constituency) so if they're after every seat it works out at around £19,000,000 as the total legal spend.

That being said, I think the 2015 election had spending of about £37,000,000 ($50m) for all parties.

What was the US election? $6.8 billion?

You also never really see TV ads, we have 'party political broadcasts' on BBC One in the lead-up to elections but they come preceded by 'This is a party political broadcast by the Conservative Party.' What this does mean is that our politicians spend ages walking around various shit towns across the country pointing at things, eating local cuisine (bacon sandwiches, pasties, etc...) and being condescending towards locals.

Its a very different system. I'm not saying there's not corruption but it blows my mind that these people are so brazenly bribing your politicians with 8x the amount of money another Western, First World country spends on their elections.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

 

[Haunted]

the system is broken

I would say something like "fix your shit usa", but it's useless - there's literally no way the citizens could actually fight and win against the oligarchs that rule you.

 

[SaviourMK2]

Parties need to be fucking outlawed.

 

[BladeoftheImmortal]

Literally holding the party ransom. Is there anything that could actually be done about this shit?

 

[eBay Huckster]

Parties need to be fucking outlawed.

yeah, instead of addressing the root causes of political corruption and bribery let's just outlaw organizing

 

[Freeza Under The Shower]

Prosperity for the rich, slavery for everybody else.

Truly making America great again. /s


Also, people who work on Wall Street donate to democrats because they will raise the minimum wage and give people more money to go round. More money goes round, Wall Street gets more variance. Everybody wins. Comparing that to pure evil is really not fathoming the concept of quality.

 

[Steel]

Such a deep, full-bodied flavor this swamp has.

 

[SaviourMK2]

yeah, instead of addressing the root causes of political corruption and bribery let's just outlaw organizing

Oh yeah, lets have rulings parties who have certain stakes in political donations make decisions on how much money they shouldn't be getting.

Yeah, I'm sure a ruling Republican party would toooooootally be on board with barring open bribery of this level.

 

[WhateverItTakes]

Oh yeah, lets have rulings parties who have certain stakes in political donations make decisions on how much money they shouldn't be getting.

Yeah, I'm sure a ruling Republican party would toooooootally be on board with barring open bribery of this level.

If you outlaw parties politicians would just ally with eachother on issues anyway the same as they do now. They're pretty essential to how the system works.

 

[Sobriquet]

Oh yeah, lets have rulings parties who have certain stakes in political donations make decisions on how much money they shouldn't be getting.

Yeah, I'm sure a ruling Republican party would toooooootally be on board with barring open bribery of this level.

The Supreme Court made this possible. Democrats want to end this. But keep both sidesin'

 

[Inuhanyou]

Did you bother to actually read any of the stuff you linked?

Or did you just google "Hillary Superpac" and post the results you found?

Because obviously this is comparable to the 400M in the OP:

Please try harder, you are embarrassing yourself.
Your hate of Democrats and wanting to be superior to them and being "above the fray" is causing you to be unable to make rational comparisons. Or in this case, trying to make a comparison that can't be made.

I'm out for tonight, I'll reply further tomorrow.

One of the reasons, no doubt. Both sides was pushed pretty hard by the media, and people, either out of wanting to feel superior, or out of ignorance bought into the narrative.

I'm not sure what point your trying to prove here. You asked for superpac examples and i gave them, yet you go on with a few examples of contributors. Yes there were progressive priorities that donated to her campaign, but unfortunately, they are not by definition only ones, or the ones with the most sway with people in power.

 

[Intheflorsh]

Quid pro quo

 

[SlipperyFishes]

Quid pro quo

Kill poor crow

 

[Inuhanyou]

The Supreme Court made this possible. Democrats want to end this. But keep both sidesin'

The supreme court over a number of many years has disarmed political regulations in general. Nobody flipped a switch with citizens united and suddenly made it to be so. Bill Clinton deregulated wall street before he left not because he thought it would help spur economic growth, but because the banks lobbied him to push ahead with that. Democrats would sooner push for public financing of elections than they would put out a slogan that isn't embarrassing in 2017.

People stick their fingers in their ears and suddenly become insufferable about merely pointing out a flaw that our political system in general has.

 

[AmayaPapaya]

I wonder if this will affect Murkowski, and Collins. Nonetheless, they are completely bluffing about leaving and I hope they see that. No way they give up any power.

 

[Sobriquet]

The supreme court over a number of many years has disarmed political regulations in general. Nobody flipped a switch with citizens united and suddenly made it to be so. Bill Clinton deregulated wall street before he left not because he thought it would help spur economic growth, but because the banks lobbied him to push ahead with that. Democrats would sooner push for public financing of elections than they would put out a slogan that isn't embarrassing in 2017.

People stick their fingers in their ears and suddenly become insufferable about merely pointing out a flaw that our political system in general has.

You might want to read about Citizen's United? It always blows my mind that the least informed are the most vocal (you).

 

[Lightning_Roller]

It's all about money to those soulless bastards. Fuck the republican party.

 

[ChryZ]

How does the people feel about this?

 

[Condom]

Just boogie men in your imagination so you can play both sides politics?

Oh it's all about the two party system with you? Gotta defend my team!!1

Asking someone for examples of Dems being economically to the right is like asking someone to proof water is wet. US's welfare system should be proof enough, if the Dems were on the level of even Canadian parties they would have had a bigger impact on the welfare system and the US would have looked differently.

 

[Shauni]

Everyone gets paid by their donors in Washington. Democrats, Republicans. Clinton said it herself, everyone gets paid by special interests, that's how the US government is currently run.

The media rubs arms with establishment types like this all the time, hence why the hosts in TV are fine toeing the line their corporate handlers stake out in regards to coverage and topics that they don't attack, and narratives they use. Its a well oiled machine at this point designed to keep people disarmed about what is happening around them.



This was happening long before citizens united, all that did was say you can spend as much money as you want on political ads through any sort of PAC affiliation.

Both sides are the same now? Really? Some of you seriously have no fucking shame

 

[VendettaRed07]

The Supreme Court made this possible. Democrats want to end this. But keep both sidesin'

And yet why are so people unaware that this is something the democrats want.

Why have we had people on this very forum, openly say they don't believe money in politics influences people

Democrats have engaged in similar behaviors and muddied the waters. And partisan people have defended them dismissing pay for play in the process

Maybe going forward democrats could do more to actually make clear to people that stuff like this is something they actually oppose. Because they aren't doing that. Don't expect the mass populous to all know how the justices ideologically split on the matter and have that trump everything else

 

[Chie Satonaka]

How does the people feel about this?

I mean, the republican base, including the poorest ones, hate Obama, hate liberals, hate Clinton, and hate things that will give them more opportunity when provided by Democrats.

So, they fucking LOVE this!

 

[Shauni]

We're in a thread about the GOP basically being bought off to potentially kill healthcare, and some of you just can't help but make this a both sides issue. Shameful as fuck, guys. Shameful as fuck.

 

[Sobriquet]

And yet why are so people unaware that this is something the democrats want.

Why have we had people on this very forum, openly say they don't believe money in politics influences people

Democrats have engaged in similar behaviors and muddied the waters. And partisan people have defended them dismissing pay for play in the process

Maybe going forward democrats could do more to actually make clear to people that stuff like this is something they actually oppose. Because they aren't doing that. Don't expect the mass populous to all know how the justices ideologically split on the matter and have that trump everything else

I'm not sure how people were unaware as it's in the Democrat's platform. It was frequently mentioned by Democratic politicians and in many of Clinton's speeches. Some people just choose not to pay attention.

 

[Shauni]

I'm not sure how people were unaware as it's in the Democrat's platform. It was frequently mentioned by Democratic politicians and in many of Clinton's speeches. Some people just choose not to pay attention.

Some people just don't know shit and can't help to show how much shit they don't know whenever they can.

 

[Altairre]

Gross. This is all kinds of fucked.

 

[Montresor]

*Slams the "BOTH SIDES" alert button*

Is this a joke post? Did you seriously just post that article to make a point? Holy shit. This is why Trump won.

Both sides are the same now? Really? Some of you seriously have no fucking shame

We're in a thread about the GOP basically being bought off to potentially kill healthcare, and some of you just can't help but make this a both sides issue. Shameful as fuck, guys. Shameful as fuck.

I feel like people like the above posters jump to "Both sides??? Hah!" as a defence mechanism and immediately and irrationally dismiss legitimate arguments. Instead of making sound arguments against what Inuhanyou is saying you just jump to "Heh both sides huh? I'm now going to ignore everything about your argument."

There is nuance to the political spectrum and Inuhanyou isn't automatically a right wing Trump fan just because he is arguing that all politicians are vulnerable (or complicit in) the bribery described in the OP.

 

[Widdle Puppy]

This is disgusting

 

[Couleurs]

the system is broken

I would say something like "fix your shit usa", but it's useless - there's literally no way the citizens could actually fight and win against the oligarchs that rule you.

Bring back guillotines

 

[Plinko]

They are going to be directly responsible for the deaths and bankruptcies of thousands (and possibly tens or hundreds of thousands) of people.

 

[dbztrk]

This country is so gross.

 

[Carpe Carnim]

We're in a thread about the GOP basically being bought off to potentially kill healthcare, and some of you just can't help but make this a both sides issue. Shameful as fuck, guys. Shameful as fuck.

They're still high off their own farts from 2016. But since these kinds of dopes can't organize their way out of a wet bag, they'll just continue to be Internet forum whiners.

 

[jellies_two]

Ok so one vote is worth about $100
So $400m buys about 4m votes

 

[JustenP88]

We're gonna have to eat them at some point, I think

 

[Crocodile]

I feel like people like the above posters jump to "Both sides??? Hah!" as a defence mechanism and immediately and irrationally dismiss legitimate arguments. Instead of making sound arguments against what Inuhanyou is saying you just jump to "Heh both sides huh? I'm now going to ignore everything about your argument."

There is nuance to the political spectrum and Inuhanyou isn't automatically a right wing Trump fan just because he is arguing that all politicians are vulnerable (or complicit in) the bribery described in the OP.

Stubbing your toe and getting shot in the face both hurt. The gulf in severity between the two make attempts at equivocation or "whataboutism" look ignorant/trolling at best and contemptable and disgusting at worst. "But.....but....the Democrats" in the face of millions suffering and losing healthcare is relevant how? How is it helpful/useful at this point in time? Who has ever argued money in politics doesn't affect how the GOP votes?

Also, most who discuss politics on this board recognize Inuhanyou and his "both sides" from the entirety of last year. There's a difference between criticism (which is good and fair) and right-wing talking points or "who cares nothing matters because both parties/candidates" are the same. This isn't about education, its about self-righteousness.

 

[Chichikov]

You might want to read about Citizen's United? It always blows my mind that the least informed are the most vocal (you).

Citizen United was filed against a law from 2002. The earliest court decision it overruled is from 1990.
The Supreme Court did not create this problem, it made effort to curb it way more difficult.

It of course doesn't make it any less awful, but corruption and quid-pro-quo were rampant in American politics since before this country was founded. And I personally believe this reflect a deep inherent problem in the US political system that campaign finance reform efforts along the ways of what was tried in the 90s and the 00s (which is mostly what Citizen United affected) are never going to be able to solve.

 

[Souldriver]

Pretty incredible how there's no limit to these kind of donations, and how this is apparently so normal and out in the open.

I don't want to sound like reactionary or revolutionary, but parts of the system are definitely broken.

 

[astroturfing]

why the hate?

i don't get it, America should be a civilized free country. you'd think any billionaire living there would enjoy a functioning society where people can live reasonably comfortable lives.. why do the Kochs hate that kind of healthy society and want to ruin large parts of it? very bizarre behavior from unelected billionaires. dont they know that the masses can rise up, and do whatever they want with unelected greedy hateful monsters that are out of control?

 

[Sobriquet]

Citizen United was filed against a law from 2002. The earliest court decision it overruled is from 1990.
The Supreme Court did not create this problem, it made effort to curb it way more difficult.

It of course doesn't make it any less awful, but corruption and quid-pro-quo were rampant in American politics since before this country was founded. And I personally believe this reflect a deep inherent problem in the US political system that campaign finance reform efforts along the ways of what was tried in the 90s and the 00s (which is mostly what Citizen United affected) are never going to be able to solve.

I'm aware. But the fact is the case went to the Supreme Court due to a conservative organization wanting to air an anti-Hillary video. And what did we get? SuperPACs.

 

[Chichikov]

I'm aware. But the fact is the case went to the Supreme Court due to a conservative organization wanting to air an anti-Hillary video. And what did we get? SuperPACs.

Sure, and it's also true that Democrats are way better on this issue than the GOP right now, but at the same time, I think it's important to not overplay the importance of Citizen United.
I mean yeah, it's a brazen decision ignoring precedence and written specifically in a way to create maximum political effect. And if you want to use it as an example of the corruption of the Supreme Court then I'm fine with that.
But at the same time it's important to understand that if Citizen United is overturned tomorrow, the levels of corruption in American politics will not drop in any significant way. That money will still seek influence, and it will find ways to get it. I'm it's not like those SuperPACs are the most important way money influence the US government.

 

[astroturfing]

Pretty incredible how there's no limit to these kind of donations, and how this is apparently so normal and out in the open.

I don't want to sound like reactionary or revolutionary, but parts of the system are definitely broken.

why wouldn't you want to sound like a revolutionary against a blatantly anti-democratic system like this? because it's impolite? it's been shaped for decades to be like this, actively helped by people who dont want to seem rude (manufactured consent you could say). i think it's time to get pretty fucking rude when millions of people's lives are at stake, and the perpetrators are basically openly mocking the general public.

Spoiler

i'm gonna go listen to RATM

 

[Sobriquet]

Sure, and it's also true that Democrats are way better on this issue than the GOP right now, but at the same time, I think it's important to not overplay the importance of Citizen United.
I mean yeah, it's a brazen decision ignoring precedence and written specifically in a way to create maximum political effect. And if you want to use it as an example of the corruption of the Supreme Court then I'm fine with that.
But at the same time it's important to understand that if Citizen United is overturned tomorrow, the levels of corruption in American politics will not drop in any significant way. That money will still seek influence, and it will find ways to get it. I'm it's not like those SuperPACs are the most important way money influence the US government.

I'm just saying (poorly) that it was the final nail in the coffin for ethical elections. But I do think SuperPACs are a huge problem. I've voted in 7 presidential elections. SuperPACs have been around for two. It's been noticeably different, to say the least. This article is a pretty great example of why. I think the main issue is that there aren't any limits anymore. And sure, money finds a way. But not to this extent. Directly influencing politicians aka bribes is just one concern. It's also the ability to widely spread propaganda with no ostensible limits or oversight.

 

[Lime]

We're in a thread about the GOP basically being bought off to potentially kill healthcare, and some of you just can't help but make this a both sides issue. Shameful as fuck, guys. Shameful as fuck.

They're still high off their own farts from 2016. But since these kinds of dopes can't organize their way out of a wet bag, they'll just continue to be Internet forum whiners.

It's important to mention, because the fault is with the system that allows and motivates this. The problem does not solely stop with the GOP, it also includes other political actors and groups who are influenced and determined by money aka corruption.

 

[RoadHazard]

How the fuck is this legal? This isn't just lobbying, it's literally bribing.

 

[Kill3r7]

How the fuck is this legal? This isn't just lobbying, it's literally bribing.

Citizens United and a very nuanced approach not to run afoul of the law.

 

[kyser73]

If the USA was a developing nation, Republicans would be trying to cut any aid sent on the grounds of corruption.

 

[xfactor99]

You know that research that suggests that millennials are souring on democracy?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ally-are-surprisingly-approving-of-dictators/

or those polls suggesting millennials are more favorable to socialism than capitalism?
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.n...ent/467z1ta5ys/tabs_OP_Socialism_20160127.pdf

or this?

Stories like these are why. And if 'normal' democratic processes fail to correct for how the American political system seems to nowadays only be responsive to the influence of the top 1%, then young people are only going to shift further and further left and embrace more radical politics in order to effect change.

 

[airjoca]

Well, whats new?

George Carlin on the subject:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsL6mKxtOlQ

 

[Marvie_3]

Fucking disgusting.

 

[Vicetrailia]

They need to hurry up and pass away, holy fuck. Such blatant bribery. These are ugly times.