The Trump Presidency

[Diff-chan]

From what I understand the superPAC problem in America was directly related to the misguided idea of banning direct campaign contributions. All it did was push them through private holdings. Unlikely someone who loves money would reinstitute it. It's essentially a silver bullet for compliance laws. That being said it was pro-government nanny state idealists who initially pushed it—so they really have no one to point fingers at here.

I really enjoy having basic healthcare in my country. I say this as a pretty well-off individual. It's generally just so much more convenient.

I don't think that banning direct campaign contributions is a bad idea.

The problem I have with SuperPACs and all that is not so much their existence but the fact that they are so opaque. I think when Kennedy made the decision on Citizens United he envisioned a world with a lot more disclosure on who is giving who money than actually exists. If a company wants to donate a billion dollars to a politician because they want to start production on Soylent Green, then we should know about that.

At the same time it has not had the effect on voting results that people thought it would. One could make a very reasonable case that 4Chan and The_Donald were more influential last year than all the SuperPAC money out there.

[Drewbacca]

Of course. Power is not exclusively related to money. The actual antics Trump gets attention for are free. He aims to misbehave.

I'm not 100% convinced corp money doesn't belong in politics. The argument never sounded reasoned to me. Too idealistic and not pragmatic - like rose coloured socialism. Prohibition seldom works. In actuality it probably never works. Even in Canada w all the regulation and oversight we still get billions spent on projects that line the pockets of party cronies. Often people don't care so long as they feel productive. So legalize direct contributions and enjoy the audit trail that comes w it. Kibosh PACs and judge businesses based on what they're spending their money on and our own political values. Public companies almost by nature would be policed by scrutiny alone.

[Diff-chan]

I think the simple answer is that companies don't vote.

[Calliander]

I'm not 100% convinced corp money doesn't belong in politics. The argument never sounded reasoned to me. Too idealistic and not pragmatic - like rose coloured socialism. Prohibition seldom works. In actuality it probably never works. Even in Canada w all the regulation and oversight we still get billions spent on projects that line the pockets of party cronies. Often people don't care so long as they feel productive. So legalize direct contributions and enjoy the audit trail that comes w it. Kibosh PACs and judge businesses based on what they're spending their money on and our own political values. Public companies almost by nature would be policed by scrutiny alone.

I would counter the opposite - no money in politics. No ads, no fliers, no campaigns, just face-to-face meetings with the people who are interested in voting. It removes the power from both the financial interests and "swing" voters who are swayed by television and print ads. I want to think that would help voter turnout in a way (e.g. uninformed jerk shows up, realizes they were wrong, gets invested) but chances are dummies would just be bored and leave. Regardless, that's all fantasy world. So just open the flood gates. America is doomed no matter what.

Anyway, I was discussing the 45 tweet acknowledging the hacking last night with some buddies and Stone brought up a good point: It seems like 44 let some of his natural tendencies - a desire to unite people, a belief in people's intrinsic goodness, wanting to limit drama - fuck things over. It happened a few times in his presidency, where he chose the high route and it ended up in a worse result for everyone. 44 could easily have declassified anything related to the hacking and dragged it all out into the public square but because that is the "low road" he didn't.

I have similar tendencies, so that seems to make sense. Dragging everything down into the mud - the wrestling aspect - is the way you appeal to the aforementioned ignoramuses. There's no easy reversal of our ship's course. Conservatives who think moral decay is the problem and Jesus is the solution are simply taking a different manufacturer's LSD from liberals who think we can educate all of our problems away.

[Fe 26]

You can educate most of them away if you get buy in from kids and parents and tax payers. We have been unable to do that and really have no idea how to do it.

-note: I'm including skilled trades in my idea of education.

[Diff-chan]

I would counter the opposite - no money in politics. No ads, no fliers, no campaigns, just face-to-face meetings with the people who are interested in voting.

Sounds great, shame about that pesky First Amendment.

[Doc Holliday]

Ok then no money. No donations. Just voluntary work.

Also do you have to pay income tax on this?

[Yoshi]

That is a lawsuit waiting to happen, where real money will be awarded.

I'm sorry I gave a click to boobs who would type "the economy isn’t working for 99% of us" on a computer connected to the internet.

[Doc Holliday]

I'm never sorry when I give clicks to boobs on the internet.

[Yoshi]

lol Touché