3 ms·

> Whenever a US politician makes a statement, I look Why they made that statement - and the why is often that they get paid in campaign contributions to say pre

> Whenever a US politician makes a statement, I look Why they made that statement - and the why is often that they get paid in campaign contributions to say precisely what their donors want them to say. I think this is a gross simplification - companies find politicians that are sympathetic to their positions to begin with, and then help finance those campaigns. I don't know about John Culberson specifically, but I'm quite sure that if you spoke to him or to numerous other politicians receiving the contributions you are complaining about - they would staunchly defend the positions they have adapted as being independent of donations. It's really not black and white.

petemill 10y ago
But isn't that the same thing? Left just to the votes of the people and equal opportunity campaign investments, those candidates and those policies wouldn't get the power. You are describing that, instead, candidates are essentially put in power by companies, who are therefore still in effect buying policy. Then, the representatives are no longer representing the people but the money.
- forgotpwtomain 10y ago
  > But isn't that the same thing? Sure, it is the same thing in practice - but it's not what OP is suggesting: >> Who would want to admit they are guilty of being essentially corrupt?Of cooooourse they would find excuses. But it's incredibly naïve to say US politicians aren't influenced by money. They are all bought. > Then, the representatives are no longer representing the people but the money. The representatives are probably accurately representing the balance of power in US society, which is weighted towards economic/financial interests.
  - dragonbonheur 10y ago
    > The representatives are probably accurately representing the balance of power in US society, which is weighted towards economic/financial interests. Obviously you are assuming that I'm pulling my statements out of thin air (or some other place where the sun don't shine :D ). Here's a paper from Princeton University that essentially says that public opinion as almost ZERO effect on US policy: https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/fi...
    - varjag 10y ago
      Oh. If there's a paper, that settles it.
    - forgotpwtomain 10y ago
      If they have almost no effect than they have almost no power - isn't that tautological? Also it should be noted the paper contrasts public opinion to 'organized interest groups': > Our third and fourth theoretical traditions posit that public policy generally reflects the outcome of struggle among organized interest groups and business firms. But in a number of cases organized interest groups are representative of a significant sector of public opinion (the NRA being one such example, or the ACLU is another).
    - Hondor 10y ago
      Not having read the paper, I'd bet it has something to do with the fact that most American voters don't vote for any of the issues that concern them. Instead they just vote for the same party they've always voted for or the one their friends vote for. If most people consistently disregard their own interests when voting, they're bound to get something they don't want. Even those people who aren't so consistent in their voting just vote for whoever the advertising tells them to, which favors the most well funded and thus most corrupt candidates.
dragonbonheur 10y ago
Who would want to admit they are guilty of being essentially corrupt?Of cooooourse they would find excuses. But it's incredibly naïve to say US politicians aren't influenced by money. They are all bought. Do you, in all honesty, think that public schools getting closed, Wall Street getting bailed out instead of jailed for ruining an entire economy, medication being kept expensive, social security getting cut, pay day lenders getting more influence, having the shittiest labor laws in the world, or even Tesla being prevented from selling cars on the web has nothing to do with corrupt US politics? In all honesty, sometimes I think that Americans DESERVE to be in all the troubles they are in today - they REFUSE to see the truths that are in plain sight. Americans, despite being on the fast track to hitting an economic and societal brick wall will always find excuses to defend the elite who are the obvious and very overt source of their troubles.
- gallonofmilk 10y ago
  I'm still trying to figure out how you got to "America deserves to suffer..." from an article about nasa missions to Europa...

petemill 10y ago

But isn't that the same thing? Left just to the votes of the people and equal opportunity campaign investments, those candidates and those policies wouldn't get the power. You are describing that, instead, candidates are essentially put in power by companies, who are therefore still in effect buying policy. Then, the representatives are no longer representing the people but the money.

forgotpwtomain 10y ago
> But isn't that the same thing? Sure, it is the same thing in practice - but it's not what OP is suggesting: >> Who would want to admit they are guilty of being essentially corrupt?Of cooooourse they would find excuses. But it's incredibly naïve to say US politicians aren't influenced by money. They are all bought. > Then, the representatives are no longer representing the people but the money. The representatives are probably accurately representing the balance of power in US society, which is weighted towards economic/financial interests.
- dragonbonheur 10y ago
  > The representatives are probably accurately representing the balance of power in US society, which is weighted towards economic/financial interests. Obviously you are assuming that I'm pulling my statements out of thin air (or some other place where the sun don't shine :D ). Here's a paper from Princeton University that essentially says that public opinion as almost ZERO effect on US policy: https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/fi...
  - varjag 10y ago
    Oh. If there's a paper, that settles it.
  - forgotpwtomain 10y ago
    If they have almost no effect than they have almost no power - isn't that tautological? Also it should be noted the paper contrasts public opinion to 'organized interest groups': > Our third and fourth theoretical traditions posit that public policy generally reflects the outcome of struggle among organized interest groups and business firms. But in a number of cases organized interest groups are representative of a significant sector of public opinion (the NRA being one such example, or the ACLU is another).
  - Hondor 10y ago
    Not having read the paper, I'd bet it has something to do with the fact that most American voters don't vote for any of the issues that concern them. Instead they just vote for the same party they've always voted for or the one their friends vote for. If most people consistently disregard their own interests when voting, they're bound to get something they don't want. Even those people who aren't so consistent in their voting just vote for whoever the advertising tells them to, which favors the most well funded and thus most corrupt candidates.

dragonbonheur 10y ago

Who would want to admit they are guilty of being essentially corrupt?Of cooooourse they would find excuses. But it's incredibly naïve to say US politicians aren't influenced by money. They are all bought. Do you, in all honesty, think that public schools getting closed, Wall Street getting bailed out instead of jailed for ruining an entire economy, medication being kept expensive, social security getting cut, pay day lenders getting more influence, having the shittiest labor laws in the world, or even Tesla being prevented from selling cars on the web has nothing to do with corrupt US politics? In all honesty, sometimes I think that Americans DESERVE to be in all the troubles they are in today - they REFUSE to see the truths that are in plain sight. Americans, despite being on the fast track to hitting an economic and societal brick wall will always find excuses to defend the elite who are the obvious and very overt source of their troubles.

gallonofmilk 10y ago
I'm still trying to figure out how you got to "America deserves to suffer..." from an article about nasa missions to Europa...