3 ms·
I didn’t say that a group of people should have different rights than individuals. I think we should view elections as a central component of our democracy. All
by uup 4y ago
I didn’t say that a group of people should have different rights than individuals. I think we should view elections as a central component of our democracy. Allowing entities, either corporations or individuals, to spend exorbitant amounts of money undermines the very principle of democracy by making the votes of a wealthy few worth more than everyone else. “Vote” here being a figurative reference to electoral influence.
- patmcc 4y agoYour claim was literally that corporations can spend unlimited amounts and people can't, which is simply untrue. What's an exorbitant amount? Imagine some people, passionate about their particular political issue, pooling their money together to put up billboards, run radio ads, get a few TV spots, have a spread in the newspaper, buy some instagram ads, whatever. That's speech! Of course it is! Having the government restrict is a terrible precedent. The ability to try and influence other people, to convince them that your position or your candidate is the right one, is also a principle of democracy.
- uup 4y agoThese were my exact words: > The issue at hand is whether or not you can spend unlimited amounts of money on that speech via a corporation. Individuals cannot spend unlimited money donating to political campaigns, for instance. I specifically said individual donations to political campaigns were limited. I think you’re arguing a very pedantic point that I didn’t even make rather than talking about whether or not our society would be better off limiting all forms of political spending.