The Death of the GOP

Recent Forum Topics Forums The Public House The Death of the GOP

Viewing 4 posts - 31 through 34 (of 34 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #43952
    Ozoneranger
    Participant

    I don’t think there’s any question voter fraud exists. But to the extent that it would throw an election? Probably not on the national level but certainly at the local level and highly likely in off-year elections in which few participate. Hell, I can do fraud this year…I’m still receiving my wife’s voter materials (she was a permanent absentee voter) despite all my efforts to “remove her from the grid” to prevent identity theft.

    Humans will be humans. And some humans have no problem cheating.

    That’s why we need IDs to vote. I know, we’ve been here before, but very few can go through life without some form of ID. I have to show my ID everywhere I go. You can’t fly, drive, get health care, pass checks and mostly can’t charge on a credit card. And you can’t get assistance without ID. (this I know…I work for a tribal social services agency). To claim voter ID laws disenfranchise millions is bullshit and cannot hold water.

    As for the influence of money on elections..Naw. Coporations, unions and PACS (Soros and Koch Brother types) do try, but on the whole, fail miserably. That is borne out this year, more than any other. Jeb was the establishment favorite, had the biggest war chest and got his ass handed to him by the protest candidate on the right. Hillary was anointed eight years ago and is still fighting off the left’s protest candidate. Really, money may be a detriment to getting elected as voters can be frustratingly non-pliable.

    Where money has huge influence is AFTER the elections are over- when the winners take office. That’s when the bribery, er, lobbying truly begins.

    #43955
    wv
    Participant

    As for the influence of money on elections..Naw. Coporations, unions and PACS (Soros and Koch Brother types) do try, but on the whole, fail miserably….

    Where money has huge influence is AFTER the elections are over- when the winners take office. That’s when the bribery, er, lobbying truly begins.

    Well, i disagree on the pre-election money thing. I think money rules American elections. Obama, Clinton, Bush, all had the backing of huge corporations, Banks, etc. Subtract that money and they lose.

    But on the part we agree on “money has a huge influence AFTER the elections” — Do you agree that is the PRIVATE SECTOR bribing (lobbying) the Government politicians?

    PS — We both know (from ye olde political battles on destroyed boards of yore) that we have fundamental differences, Ozone. You are a person of the Right, and I’m a person of the Left. And i dont want to re-argue old stuff. I am interested in somethin different though. I been trying to figure out where the differences between leftists and rightists really start. I bin tryin to trace things back to the roots. Where do things really start to branch away. In that light, let me ask you this fundamental question — Why is it ok to even HAVE terribly-poor people and super-rich people? How do you justify a system that permits/encourages that outcome? Why dont you think a system that allows that is evil ?

    w
    v
    Louis Brandeis: “We can either have democracy in this country or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both.”

    • This reply was modified 8 years, 4 months ago by wv.
    #43958
    Ozoneranger
    Participant

    As for the influence of money on elections..Naw. Coporations, unions and PACS (Soros and Koch Brother types) do try, but on the whole, fail miserably….

    Where money has huge influence is AFTER the elections are over- when the winners take office. That’s when the bribery, er, lobbying truly begins.

    Well, i disagree on the pre-election money thing. I think money rules American elections. Obama, Clinton, Bush, all had the backing of huge corporations, Banks, etc. Subtract that money and they lose.

    But on the part we agree on “money has a huge influence AFTER the elections” — Do you agree that is the PRIVATE SECTOR bribing (lobbying) the Government politicians?

    PS — We both know (from ye olde political battles on destroyed boards of yore) that we have fundamental differences, Ozone. You are a person of the Right, and I’m a person of the Left. And i dont want to re-argue old stuff. I am interested in somethin different though. I been trying to figure out where the differences between leftists and rightists really start. I bin tryin to trace things back to the roots. Where do things really start to branch away. In that light, let me ask you this fundamental question — Why is it ok to even HAVE terribly-poor people and super-rich people? How do you justify a system that permits/encourages that outcome? Why dont you think a system that allows that is evil ?

    w
    v
    Louis Brandeis: “We can either have democracy in this country or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both.”

    Your first question…yes, the private sector does bribe politicians. Absolutely. I’ve seen it (or it was described to me in detail by a real estate mogul I was doing IT work for). But I’ll expand on that…anyone who has ANY political agenda contributes to the gravy train.

    Second question…I need to think about that in order to give you an intelligent answer. But I’ll give you a morsel to start. First off, I don’t see it as evil. It’s amoral. Another way I look at it is to compare the poor in this country to say, the poor in Africa, Central/South America (seen it up close there and it is grinding) and some places in Asia. I mean, the poverty level isn’t even close. I look at things from that perspective and conclude that I just don’t envy the rich or pity the working poor. My pity is reserved to the sick, those destroyed by illness, alcohol and drug abuse. And especially the children who are stuck in those horrid situations.

    I’ll expand on this when I have more time.

    PS You’re a good guy, WV. It would be fun to quaff a few with you.

    #43961
    PA Ram
    Participant

    As for the influence of money on elections..Naw. Coporations, unions and PACS (Soros and Koch Brother types) do try, but on the whole, fail miserably. That is borne out this year, more than any other. Jeb was the establishment favorite, had the biggest war chest and got his ass handed to him by the protest candidate on the right. Hillary was anointed eight years ago and is still fighting off the left’s protest candidate. Really, money may be a detriment to getting elected as voters can be frustratingly non-pliable.

    I disagree with this Ozone.

    They have enormous impact on not just national but local elections. In 2010 these “charitable” foundations cleverly poured money into states races and gained considerable advantage in the state houses. This enabled Republicans to gerrymander districts all over the country giving them a nearly permanent House advantage. You should see the crazy way my district was redrawn.

    Just because Jeb Bush did not win, it is only a small part of what these foundations do. From essentially bribing universities to shaping national discussion, to dumping money into campaigns, their impact as been incredible.

    I do think they were somewhat frustrated by Trump in the presidential race. He’s a wild card for them. They don’t particularly like that. They like to know what they’re buying. Clearly the GOP was caught way off guard by this.

    But you can bet the money will show up all over the country in down ticket races.

    And certainly Clinton has her own money people and they made it tough on Bernie.

    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. " Philip K. Dick

Viewing 4 posts - 31 through 34 (of 34 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.