3 ms·
>The people who were funding Trump/Hillary were funding them equally. Is doesn't matter who won, they banks, oil companies and large media conglomerates still c
by gozur88 10y ago
>The people who were funding Trump/Hillary were funding them equally. Is doesn't matter who won, they banks, oil companies and large media conglomerates still control the country like they have for the past several decades.
Yep. That's what makes it so hard for third party candidates. The donors fund both sides so they don't get left out in the cold if their guy loses. They have to believe you'll have a chance to win to fund you, and if they don't it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy.
- djsumdog 10y agoeh..that has less to do with funding and more to do with the First Past the Post system. Look at Australia's order of preference with instant run-off (you literally can't throw your vote away; plus voting is mandatory. There's a fine if you don't at least pretend to cast a valid ballot) or New Zealand's MMP. Both are a lot better at representing the public in parliament. The US system was actively designed to not be democratic. That's why we have an electoral college; the vote was (and still is) the peasants suggestion box.
- gozur88 10y agoI agree instant runoff would be better. But the idea the US system wasn't designed to be democratic is a pretty gross exaggeration. You can't win without votes from "the peasants" no matter how much you spend to convince them. Otherwise Jeb Bush would be president-elect today.