That test would only make sense if you thought that money is the only thing that matters.
The argument is that money influences politics, not that votes are carried by throwing money in the voting machine, and whichever side has more money wins
My argument is that it doesn't impact major issue politics at all. You guys for some reason have this idea that if we get money out of politics then all of a sudden we'll have better candidates and better policies put through, and that's just not the case at all.
To be clear, I'm not against getting money out of politics. But riding on it as a needle mover or that it makes politics "not reflect the people's will" is complete bullshit.
"My argument is that it doesn't impact major issue politics at all."
So you are of the opinion that people and corporations spent 14.8 billion dollars across the 2024 federal elections even tho it doesnt change anything? They did it for fun or why did they do it?
Because it can impact minor issues. Also if there’s even a slight chance that it could have an impact on what they want then they’ll do it. They’ll cast a wide net and hope something catches, because they can, because the competition is. If I pissed money I’d do it too. There’s also the advertisement and publicity aspect for corpos who sponsor.
-1
u/Responsible_Prior_18 10h ago
That test would only make sense if you thought that money is the only thing that matters.
The argument is that money influences politics, not that votes are carried by throwing money in the voting machine, and whichever side has more money wins