Were fucking owned
- Thread starter evince
- Start date
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
It is not a strawman you twit. She asked if unions could spend as much. They can.... and they do. Their influence was highlighted by the remaining points.
So please... do tell me which part of that you think was the strawman....
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
Unions have something that corporations aren't able to draw on.
Unions have HUGE voting blocks that usually follow what the Union leaders say; whereas workers in corporations don't usually follow what the GM says.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
we are only owned by corporate campaign money IF the american people continue to bury their heads in the sand. Maybe this is the wakeup call people need to get out of the straight party line mindset and actually LEARN what's going on around you to vote correctly.
She talked about spending and you talked about influence. The two are not interchangeable.
Frankly, the idea that unions have the financial ability to spend as much as corporations in a completely unregulated spending environment is laughable. The only reason unions could keep pace with corporations in spending is the regulatory restrictions on what could be spent.
Frankly, I'm not certain how much this changes things. I believe that corporations have always been free to contribute to PACs and other avocacy groups to run election ads.
Recenlty, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has taken on the role of being basically a laundering service for corporate speech. Corporation X pays the Chamber to run an ad against candidate X and the ad says that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce paid for the content of the ad, leaving Corporation X behind the scenes. The court's ruling upheld disclosure requirements on corporate ad buys such that many corporations will still use the Chamber of Commerce model to avoid the disclosure requirements.
Recenlty, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has taken on the role of being basically a laundering service for corporate speech. Corporation X pays the Chamber to run an ad against candidate X and the ad says that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce paid for the content of the ad, leaving Corporation X behind the scenes. The court's ruling upheld disclosure requirements on corporate ad buys such that many corporations will still use the Chamber of Commerce model to avoid the disclosure requirements.
Tops. you have to separate the 2 ideas. I am very pro-corporation and pro-profit. I work for a big corp, and they make a good profit, and I support profit on every level.
However, when it comes to corporations having "extra" influence in our government - the gov't for and by the people - I draw the line. Corporations already write plenty of legislation in Washington. They already spend a ton influencing votes & campaigns. They don't need more influence.....
Topspin
Verified User
so do the anti education union members
Topspin
Verified User
they are anti education people and didn't have the same limits the pro education corp people had.
que progressive's head explodingh
The comish "smoke weed talk shit like Lane Kiffin"
Topspin
Verified User
corportations are people and WE PAY THE BILLS
Crashk
Unite or Die
With transnational corporations running this country we've handed over our rights and have put democracy at risk.
5 conservatives on the supreme court have handed our govt over to corporations. Today we are a fascist state and I believe the end of this country. Founding Fathers have rolled over in their graves.
5 conservatives on the supreme court have handed our govt over to corporations. Today we are a fascist state and I believe the end of this country. Founding Fathers have rolled over in their graves.
Freddy Figbottom
Was it me?
Corporations are not people, you fool.