Money in US elections 26 replies

Please wait...

Relander

Ambassador

50 XP

8th April 2005

0 Uploads

2,538 Posts

0 Threads

#1 11 years ago

No money, no win in the elections. More than anywhere else, in the United States of America the money plays very significant role in elections, especially in presidential ones. Fundraising is almost every-day activity for ambitious politicians and ability to raise donations is one basic attribute of succesfull politician.

According to National Public Radio, it's expected that the Democratic primary canditates will gather over 100$ million for their campaigns, more than ever before and I doubt the Republicans, at the very least, will lose much for their counterparts in the Democratic Party.

Does the money play too big role in US elections? Isn't it a problem in democratic political system, what do you think?




Dot Com

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

26th June 2000

0 Uploads

6,116 Posts

0 Threads

#2 11 years ago

Money plays a big role in the United States elections, however lobbyists play a bigger role in winning elections...

Lobbying should be banned and/or severely limited.




RadioactiveLobster Forum Admin

Jeff is a mean boss

565,403 XP

28th July 2002

0 Uploads

53,121 Posts

1,330 Threads

#3 11 years ago

We need lots of reform in the way they get money for campaigns....

The should be running on their issues, not how much $$ they can throw around


If there is no image, Mikey broke something...



Greenvalv

Trekkie At Large.....

50 XP

26th April 2004

0 Uploads

4,575 Posts

0 Threads

#4 11 years ago

Funny, I was just thinking about this the other day... but yeah, it is annoying that money plays such a big role in American politics...

Hmm, lately I thought of restricting it to where a certain income range could only be elected (Keep those with big wallets from buying there way into office and get regular Joes in there).




Relander

Ambassador

50 XP

8th April 2005

0 Uploads

2,538 Posts

0 Threads

#5 11 years ago
JeffroLobbying should be banned and/or severely limited.

Indeed, restricting lobbying into minimum is important though I don't think the Democrats nor Republicans are really ready for that: the current actions against lobbying is mostly just cosmetic. Whole US political culture has to change from emphasizing money for emphasizing real issues. I can't see if vast majority of US senators and congressmen are at least lawyers or equivalent by their educational level, how they can truly represent low-income people and lower middle-class in politics which make up majority of the Americans.

Public, non-profit and neutral media company would be needed for giving visibility for those who don't have that much money to toss around and giving the voice for minor parties as well. The current system favours the two biggest parties, disdaining all others.




Jill

Idiot Action-Adventure Girl

50 XP

7th July 2006

0 Uploads

3,415 Posts

0 Threads

#6 11 years ago

Money does have a big play but is not always the winner. In California a few years ago there was a Republican guy that wanted to take the Senate and spent millions of dollars from his own pocket and the rich Republican party. He still lost.

BTW Relander...you look much older than 20 in your avatar picture.




Relander

Ambassador

50 XP

8th April 2005

0 Uploads

2,538 Posts

0 Threads

#7 11 years ago
Jill;3538868Money does have a big play but is not always the winner. In California a few years ago there was a Republican guy that wanted to take the Senate and spent millions of dollars from his own pocket and the rich Republican party. He still lost.

Luckily the money doesn't yet play the decisive role in US politics but still worryingly big one. Though I have to say that I'm more concerned about smearing campaigns and slandering than the power of money: instead of attacking opponent's ideology & way of handling things, many attack against his/her personal life.

BTW Relander...you look much older than 20 in your avatar picture.

Hehe, that's because I'm not that man. He's Ben Zyskowicz, former parliamentary group leader of National Coalition Party. For more information about the party, check out my sig.




Rich19

Italicised no more

50 XP

14th August 2004

0 Uploads

4,058 Posts

0 Threads

#8 11 years ago

In a perfect world, each side would get exactly the same budget to work with. However, enforcing that would be a nightmare. There need to be some restrictions, at least.




Karst

I chose an eternity of this

50 XP

6th January 2005

0 Uploads

4,505 Posts

0 Threads

#9 11 years ago

It's true that it's a problem -and not confined to the US i might add- but i don't think there's any easy solution for that as long as money exists. Unfortunatly for the average citizen how much money is put into an electional campaign is a lot more visible than the actual political skills of a candidate, due to the public's general disinterest in political happenings that don't immediatly affect them.

Oh, and rich, your signature is a huge pain. It hurts my brain.




masked_marsoe VIP Member

Heaven's gonna burn your eyes

50 XP

16th April 2005

0 Uploads

8,063 Posts

0 Threads

#10 11 years ago

Political funding is a huge problem for all democracies, I think. A set of financial caps is the most fair, so long as there are serious penalties for breaking the limits (like being stripped of your seat, and prohibited from standing in the by-election).

Secondly, donations need to be open and transparent. It's fine to have anonymous donations for small amounts, such as $250. But above that, donations should be named. It's always interesting to see who is funding a party.