> Why should two voters have so much more influence than 310 million others? Our political funding system is broken, I agree. So is our general electoral syst

> Why should two voters have so much more influence than 310 million others? Our political funding system is broken, I agree. So is our general electoral system: elections are _way_ too long, which makes them more expensive, of course. > I also think this the parent post presents an overly-moderated depiction of their views By no means am I saying that everything, or most of, or a large part of, what the Koch brothers do or think is good. I'm just saying that the claim that all their political activity is guided by the basic principle "let's see how much we can screw poor people" is a caricature, and not a terribly accurate one, and providing one simple counterexample. I'm not asking you, or anyone else, to like them personally, the sum total of their activities, or any particular activities. All I'm asking for is that we don't jump from "these people are doing a bunch of stuff I disagree with" to "these people are pure evil, so anything they do must be evil, hence anything they are involved in is evil by association and must be fought against". Unfortunately, this last bit of reasoning is far too common in politics recently, all across the political spectrum. Just like the related "This organization is good, so whatever it does must be good" line of reasoning that seems to be so common... and usually indicates that the organization should be terminated before it does some serious harm. :(