Peachy. When do we do that? Sounds great in the long term but we may be able to do what I suggested in the mid term, not long after the 2020 election. We just have to win.
Or one could appoint justices who will overturn Citizens United. It was a poorly reasoned decision. There is ample reason to throw it out.
We can also publicly finance campaigns.
Peachy. When do we do that? Sounds great in the long term but we may be able to do what I suggested in the mid term, not long after the 2020 election. We just have to win.
Repealing Citizens United is attacking the problem from the wrong end. Like with the drug war we need to address the demand side rather than the supply - instead put the effort into a Constitutional amendment prohibiting political ads on TV or the internet. If politicians aren't needing to constantly raise money (which gets spent almost exclusively on ads) then those politicians won't need to constantly beg for donations from those corporations or wealthy individuals and there won't be as much value in those folks giving politicians $ for "campaign contributions."
Public financing is a very widespread policy in European countries to combat cronyism. This might take the form of a fixed amount of money given to a candidate after they reach a certain amount of popularity. Or each citizen has a budget of $X to contribute to a candidate.
I think more impressive than the fundraising is the over 1 million volunteers who have already signed up. Sander's campaign is already a juggernaut that will be a real struggle for a primary candidate to overcome. It might have to take someone like an establishment supported Biden to match or beat Sanders.
Sanders had a massive rally in Brooklyn today to kick off his campaign.
I can see the cable news media now... "The size of campaign rally crowds doesn't matter...."
much like reporting other candidates before Bernie's announcement included noting amounts a candidate raised in a matter of fact manner.
Now after Bernie raised more than double anyone else in the first 24 hours and in many cases quadruple The Washington Post now writes "Why Sander's Money Haul doesn't mean much."
Maybe they think (or maybe hope or both) that billionaires will step in and donate hundreds of millions to keep Bernie from being the Democratic nominee.
who knows?
__________
I can see the cable news media now... "The size of campaign rally crowds doesn't matter...."
much like reporting other candidates before Bernie's announcement included noting amounts a candidate raised in a matter of fact manner.
Now after Bernie raised more than double anyone else in the first 24 hours and in many cases quadruple The Washington Post now writes "Why Sander's Money Haul doesn't mean much."
Maybe they think (or maybe hope or both) that billionaires will step in and donate hundreds of millions to keep Bernie from being the Democratic nominee.
who knows?
__________
The media will do there best to simply ignore him like they did last time. Bernie was filling stadiums and he was basically ignored by the talking heads on the magic box.
Yeh, the enemy of the people is always conspiring against somebody.
Bernie is a career politician, he's good at doing one thing; getting reelected. He talks a good game but he doesn't have anything to show for it.
All I know is that if the democrats don't nominate the perfect candidate I'll be voting for a third party or for trump, especially if Bernie is elected.
Thomas Frank documented the anti-Sanders bias in the Op Ed pages of the Washington Post in the critical months of the Democratic primary.
https://harpers.org/archive/2016/11/swat-team-2/
I respectfully disagree.
Hillary lost because she ran a campaign based on fear and lies.
This is not an attack so please don't take it as such.
Is no one concerned that Sanders is a communist?
So if someone speaks their feelings that makes them a racist?
Its an analogy that thoughts and words are only real to those who experience them. If someone thinks of something racist, does that make them a racist? If so, what proof do we have? You do not have to answer those questions.
Words are just vibrations sent through the air. Words themselves are no different than any other sound. What makes words good, bad, racist? Nothing more than our idea of what sound means. Does this mean all sounds can be good, bad, evil.. etc? Or is it just human sounds? All of this is subjective to the person experiencing the sounds.
So words are neither good, nor bad, nor racist... etc, as they are just vibrations our voice box creates. What is important is your interpretation of the word, which is totally subjective to your opinion.
Wait. This is what Trump did, but he won. Can’t have it both ways man.
It will be to their own detriment to ignore his popularity...again.The media will do there best to simply ignore him like they did last time. Bernie was filling stadiums and he was basically ignored by the talking heads on the magic box.
And we’ve reached the I want to marry my toaster part of the thread.
That's not a bullshit scare tactic, it's an established fact. Mike is second in line, Nancy is third.This sounds like the bullshit scare tactics the right likes to use about “but you’ll get Pence if you get rid of Trump”
That's not a bullshit scare tactic, it's an established fact. Mike is second in line, Nancy is third.
Male or female prostitutes? I think he could find the former but would be clueless on the later.Nobody's skeered of Mike Pence. He couldn't lead sailors on shore leave to free whiskey & cheap whores.
That's not a bullshit scare tactic, it's an established fact. Mike is second in line, Nancy is third.