Mon Sep 7, 2015, 04:41 PM
Juicy_Bellows (2,427 posts)
A Citizens United Conundrum.
In order to get rid of money in politics you must gather as much cash as you can to win.
In order to get nicotine out of your system you must smoke as many cigarettes as you can. Someone help me out here.
|
13 replies, 1160 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
Juicy_Bellows | Sep 2015 | OP |
SonderWoman | Sep 2015 | #1 | |
Juicy_Bellows | Sep 2015 | #2 | |
Capn Sunshine | Sep 2015 | #3 | |
HappyPlace | Sep 2015 | #6 | |
SonderWoman | Sep 2015 | #7 | |
unblock | Sep 2015 | #4 | |
Juicy_Bellows | Sep 2015 | #5 | |
SonderWoman | Sep 2015 | #8 | |
Juicy_Bellows | Sep 2015 | #9 | |
aidbo | Sep 2015 | #10 | |
Juicy_Bellows | Sep 2015 | #11 | |
aidbo | Sep 2015 | #12 | |
Juicy_Bellows | Sep 2015 | #13 |
Response to Juicy_Bellows (Original post)
Mon Sep 7, 2015, 04:46 PM
SonderWoman (1,169 posts)
1. Really hard to change the rules by losing.
Response to SonderWoman (Reply #1)
Mon Sep 7, 2015, 04:49 PM
Juicy_Bellows (2,427 posts)
2. True enough but there is a principle that needs to be met, no?
"I'm the last president that is going to run a campaign with billions of dollars, trust me."
I dunno, doesn't sound too convincing. |
Response to SonderWoman (Reply #1)
Mon Sep 7, 2015, 04:49 PM
Capn Sunshine (14,373 posts)
3. +1000 ^
You can't effect change unless you win.
Better take all the money you can get from everywhere. Even though they won't like you at DU. Fortunately DU is so small by comparison to the electorate they don't even register a 1/1000 of a percent. Do the math some time. Basically post here because no one will see it. ![]() |
Response to SonderWoman (Reply #1)
Mon Sep 7, 2015, 05:11 PM
HappyPlace (568 posts)
6. They are MAKING HER DO IT! She has no choice.
Hillary has to play like the Republicans if she wants to beat them, is that it?
Wow, she is so going to lose. ![]() |
Response to HappyPlace (Reply #6)
Mon Sep 7, 2015, 05:22 PM
SonderWoman (1,169 posts)
7. Yes. You have to beat them at their own game.
Or are you content with a Repub president?
|
Response to Juicy_Bellows (Original post)
Mon Sep 7, 2015, 05:03 PM
unblock (48,412 posts)
4. if there's any hope, it's in the supreme court.
not *this* supreme court, of course, but some future court with more reasonable legal minds.
yes, they too would owe their cushy life-tenured job to that same corrupt system, but we only need 5 votes, and they are less beholden to the corruption than congress, the presidency, or the state legislatures. |
Response to unblock (Reply #4)
Mon Sep 7, 2015, 05:08 PM
Juicy_Bellows (2,427 posts)
5. Yes, very true.
I like that Sanders has said numerous times that any supreme court nominee during his administration must be on board to overturn it. Someone can correct me if I am mistaken, but I have not heard that specifically from Hillary.
|
Response to Juicy_Bellows (Reply #5)
Mon Sep 7, 2015, 05:25 PM
SonderWoman (1,169 posts)
8. You are mistaken:
Response to SonderWoman (Reply #8)
Mon Sep 7, 2015, 05:32 PM
Juicy_Bellows (2,427 posts)
9. Thank you!
That is good news.
|
Response to Juicy_Bellows (Original post)
Mon Sep 7, 2015, 05:38 PM
aidbo (2,301 posts)
10. Wolf-Pac.com
Last edited Mon Sep 7, 2015, 08:50 PM - Edit history (1) Wolf-Pac.com is a PAC that is set up to get the states to call for a constitutional convention to put an amendment in the constitution to do away with corporate person-hood etc. Their website does a much better job explaining it than I do, but the part I like is that they are completely by-passing congress to do it. That way, you don't have to try to get the corrupted to vote against their own corruption.
? |
Response to aidbo (Reply #10)
Mon Sep 7, 2015, 05:39 PM
Juicy_Bellows (2,427 posts)
11. Yes, I am on board with Wolf-Pac!
Thank you for posting and reminding folks!
|
Response to Juicy_Bellows (Reply #11)
Mon Sep 7, 2015, 08:47 PM
aidbo (2,301 posts)
12. As Cenk likes to say:
"They're not comin' for us, we're comin' for them!"
|
Response to aidbo (Reply #12)
Tue Sep 8, 2015, 12:43 AM
Juicy_Bellows (2,427 posts)