28 Jan 12
In another thread I claimed that contributing to a political party was corrupt. I have been thinking it over since then and I cannot think of a single reason why anyone, individual or corporate, would contribute money to a political party unless they believe it will influence either their chances of getting elected, or their decisions post election.
Has anyone here contributed to a party? Why did you do it?
28 Jan 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadMcCain 2000. To increase his chance of getting elected.
In another thread I claimed that contributing to a political party was corrupt. I have been thinking it over since then and I cannot think of a single reason why anyone, individual or corporate, would contribute money to a political party unless they believe it will influence either their chances of getting elected, or their decisions post election.
Has anyone here contributed to a party? Why did you do it?
It is lobbyists like MPAA/Chris Dodd that expect quid pro quo.
30 Jan 12
Originally posted by spruce112358So, if a campaign contribution increases a candidates chance of getting elected (which is clearly undemocratic as a persons election chances should be based entirely on votes), would you classify that as corruption? If not, what name would you give it?
McCain 2000. To increase his chance of getting elected.
30 Jan 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadI've given money at times to the Green Party hoping it would help them get their positions and the Party itself more well known. That is, of course, hoping it will influence the chances of the Party's candidates getting elected at some point.
In another thread I claimed that contributing to a political party was corrupt. I have been thinking it over since then and I cannot think of a single reason why anyone, individual or corporate, would contribute money to a political party unless they believe it will influence either their chances of getting elected, or their decisions post election.
Has anyone here contributed to a party? Why did you do it?
Only in your dictionary is doing that "corruption".
30 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadJust out of curiosity, how long did it take you to arrive at the conclusion that people contribute money to campaigns to increase their chances of getting elected? A minute? An hour? A day?
In another thread I claimed that contributing to a political party was corrupt. I have been thinking it over since then and I cannot think of a single reason why anyone, individual or corporate, would contribute money to a political party unless they believe it will influence either their chances of getting elected, or their decisions post election.
Has anyone here contributed to a party? Why did you do it?
Next, you may want to contemplate why people look at porn.
(Not trying to be mean, just saying...)
30 Jan 12
Originally posted by sh76It took a couple of days to see it that way. Why?
Just out of curiosity, how long did it take you to arrive at the conclusion that people contribute money to campaigns to increase their chances of getting elected? A minute? An hour? A day?
Next, you may want to contemplate why people look at porn.
(Not trying to be mean, just saying...)
Maybe I should. What would be wrong with it, and why is it relevant here? Are you starting to feel guilty about your campaign contributions? Are they a dirty secret too?
30 Jan 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadActually, I've never made a campaign contribution on the federal level. I gave some money to the campaign of a friend of mine who was running for town council because, well, he's my friend. (And he won, by the way.)
It took a couple of days to see it that way. Why?
[b]Next, you may want to contemplate why people look at porn.
(Not trying to be mean, just saying...)
Maybe I should. What would be wrong with it, and why is it relevant here? Are you starting to feel guilty about your campaign contributions? Are they a dirty secret too?[/b]
I'd like to see Mitt Romney win the GOP nomination, but I don't care enough to actually give money. Perhaps I would give some $$ if I thought that I could really make the difference, but since I can't, I'm certainly not giving away my hard earned money to make a symbolic point.
30 Jan 12
Originally posted by sh76So how do you describe the fact that campaign contributions affect the outcome of the election? If its not corruption, what is it, and are there better systems that avoid this problem? Could campaigns be funded using public money for example?
I'd like to see Mitt Romney win the GOP nomination, but I don't care enough to actually give money. Perhaps I would give some $$ if I thought that I could really make the difference, but since I can't, I'm certainly not giving away my hard earned money to make a symbolic point.
30 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadYou have chosen a non-standard, almost unique, definition of the word "corruption". It is up to you to logically defend it (you haven't).
What is it in your dictionary? That is what I am asking in this thread.
And is it right or wrong?
Is it unavoidable?
Is there a better system?
Is it "right" that I can give my own money to a political party if I so choose? Yes IMO. Why is just giving money "corrupt"? I volunteered for the McGovern campaign when I was a teenager and gave my time up stuffing envelopes and copying addresses to add to a database. Was this "corrupt" also? After all, my time has value just as my money does.
Is it unavoidable? No. But I've yet to hear a solution that doesn't drastically reduce freedom.
30 Jan 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadI donated to Obama's campaign a couple times in 2008. I don't remember the amounts, but it wasn't very much.
In another thread I claimed that contributing to a political party was corrupt. I have been thinking it over since then and I cannot think of a single reason why anyone, individual or corporate, would contribute money to a political party unless they believe it will influence either their chances of getting elected, or their decisions post election.
Has anyone here contributed to a party? Why did you do it?
I don't see it as corruption because Obama doesn't know me and there were no strings attached.
30 Jan 12
Originally posted by no1marauderI don't believe in arguing about definitions. A word does not imbue properties on its subject. If you feel the word doesn't fit, I respect your right not to use it. I do want to know why however, and I do want to know what word you think is better.
You have chosen a non-standard, almost unique, definition of the word "corruption". It is up to you to logically defend it (you haven't).
Is it "right" that I can give my own money to a political party if I so choose? Yes IMO. Why is just giving money "corrupt"?
My opinion, is that it influences the outcome of the election. This is clearly not democratic. I believe that when money is used to influence something that is not meant to be influenced with money, then corruption is an appropriate word, but maybe I am wrong, maybe there is a better word.
But are you disputing the influence it has, or are you just disputing the label?
I volunteered for the McGovern campaign when I was a teenager and gave my time up stuffing envelopes and copying addresses to add to a database. Was this "corrupt" also? After all, my time has value just as my money does.
It has the same impact, yes.
Is it unavoidable? No. But I've yet to hear a solution that doesn't drastically reduce freedom.
The current method drastically reduces democracy. I know it does here in Africa, where the ruling party typically funds its campaign from government coffers. For this reason it is quite difficult to get a ruling party out of power.
30 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by USArmyParatrooperI am not talking specifically about 'strings attached' as in Obama making decisions that he thinks you like in return for your money, I am talking about the fact that Obama was elected partly because of campaign contributions. This essentially means that if you have someone wanting to run for president who represents the poorest 50% of the country, his chances are pretty slim before he ever gets to the vote.
I don't see it as corruption because Obama doesn't know me and there were no strings attached.
In Zambia we have a law that foreigners, or even children of foreigners, or even people whose parents have been in Zambia as long as Zambia existed but who were born elsewhere, cannot stand for presidency. The reason many people support this ridiculous undemocratic law is they are afraid that some rich foreigner will come and bankroll his campaign and essentially buy himself a presidency.