3 ms·
They can still exist and advertise their causes, they just can't run positive/negative ads towards a political campaign. My goal w/ this idea is more for campai
by gremlinsinc 8y ago
They can still exist and advertise their causes, they just can't run positive/negative ads towards a political campaign. My goal w/ this idea is more for campaign purity rather than 'silencing' voices.
run ads about climate change all you want, just don't mention any politician by name in a positive or negative light... Only that campaign/politician can mention themselves and/or their opponent - though part of me would like negative opponent-based ads done away with too..I hate those.. but w/e...that's probably too much to ask for.
I'd like to see a time come when the only ads you see for a poltician are the ones that end w/ 'My name is ___ and I approve this message' and the ONLY person they talk about is themselves and/or their family and people they work with in a positive light. Instead of degrading their opponent. Some of Bernie's ads were perfect examples -- his America ad was amazing and just awesome and it didn't degrade Clinton or attack her, it instead elicited strong emotions of hope.
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago> run ads about climate change all you want, just don't mention any politician by name France has a similar system. Tight restrictions on mentioning a party or candidate within a certain window before an election. We'd have trouble with that in America, though, because of the First Amendment. It would also shift power to those who can go on TV, attract attention to their blogs and otherwise organically inculcate attention through the press. > the ONLY person they talk about is themselves and/or their family and people they work with in a positive light. Instead of degrading their opponent Sometimes opponents need to be called out on their shit. In any case, I become immediately uncomfortable with restricting pure political speech in this manner.