4 ms·
Your point is intriguing (addressing only your first two lines). I would say that special interest groups are not defined by how broadly the general population
by mikeknoop 15y ago
Your point is intriguing (addressing only your first two lines). I would say that special interest groups are not defined by how broadly the general population agrees their opinion (therefore, both entertainment conglomerate and internet conglomerate would count). Special interest groups have stereotypically obtained their goals by lobbying, donations, guaranteed positions, etc.
On the other hand, this week, you had a special interest group achieving its goal by overwhelming support (more representative of a democracy). When someone talks negatively about special interest groups, it is because typically special interest groups have achieves their goals by disingenuous methods.
- anamax 15y ago> Special interest groups have stereotypically obtained their goals by lobbying, donations, guaranteed positions, etc. You mean like AARP? > When someone talks negatively about special interest groups, it is because typically special interest groups have achieves their goals by disingenuous methods. Some supporting evidence would be nice. Here's a question - which side of the obamacare debate was "special interests"?