• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What an incredible waste of money.

GardenLady

Active Member
Agreed. The constitution does not require primaries or lengthy and costly election cycles. The political class and their hangers-on have developed a ridiculous and costly system that makes lots of money for lots of people--except for the American public.

I'd like us to have one month of campaigning/debates for the primaries, all primaries on the same day nationwide, conventions shortly thereafter, a month of campaigning/debates, and the election.

Better yet, get rid of the primaries; let each party put up their candidates for president at their conventions. And the state/local parties can put up their candidates for Senator and representatives.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
It seems the person to blame for starting the practice of fundraising was Andrew Jackson.

Money-in-Politics Timeline

It was unheard-of by the founding fathers of the country.

Of course, the days of the influence of free whiskey has ended.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
We have to end crime families in politics. Otherwise it’s an investment.
Most elections now are won by those who spend the most money. Not on policy, or character of the candidate.

It should be noted that the free whiskey was once directed at the common people themselves. Now it's going to special interest and lobbyists each election.
 

Truth in love

Well-Known Member
Most elections now are won by those who spend the most money. Not on policy, or character of the candidate.

It should be noted that the free whiskey was once directed at the common people themselves. Now it's going to special interest and lobbyists each election.
Yea we are heading for a total collapse. If we actually had SCOTUS kill Darby we would have a fighting chance, but right now we are laundering money in the billions and no one in it is willing to stop it.
 

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
I kind of had it pegged it was essentially the same over the pond
It is. But I don’t know if it’s as much, really.
I think you might outspend us in that regard. But don’t quote me on that since it wouldn’t surprise me if ours spent just as much.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
And it's all bribe money, paid in advance to every candidate regardless of party, so that whomever wins, they will be beholding to their campaign financiers. All big corporations and conglomerates that stand to take in millions and billions thanks to the laws and policies those corrupted politicians will enact ... to keep their cushy seats on the "bilk the people" gravy train.
 
Last edited:

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
I kind of had it pegged it was essentially the same over the pond


Nothing like the same scale, in the U.K. anyway. Corruption, grift, peerages for sale - we have all sorts of problems, but politics here hasn’t quite become the huge show business event it is over there. We do have a Rupert Murdoch problem though, with his media empire gaslighting the prejudices of the public, so the US and the U.K. has that in common.
 

Erebus

Well-Known Member
I kind of had it pegged it was essentially the same over the pond

The UK has spending limits on political campaigns. They're by no means perfect but they mean that the amount political parties spend on campaigning doesn't even come close to the ludicrous sums you cited in your OP.

Spending limits could be a good idea for the US but I don't see it happening any time soon. The people who would support it are generally going to be the people who can't afford to get into power.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Spending limits won't help much, here, as the media has learned that turning every election into a to-the-death 'cage match' gets people's eyes on the ads, and that makes them lots of money. So now every election cycle is being turned into a cult rivalry of life and death proportions. And there's a whole array of lying 'cheerleaders' adjacent to the 'news' that keep that rivalry going incessantly.

It's all money, money, money. Always about the money, and never really about good government. Which is why our government is falling completely apart.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Agreed. The constitution does not require primaries or lengthy and costly election cycles. The political class and their hangers-on have developed a ridiculous and costly system that makes lots of money for lots of people--except for the American public.

I'd like us to have one month of campaigning/debates for the primaries, all primaries on the same day nationwide, conventions shortly thereafter, a month of campaigning/debates, and the election.

Better yet, get rid of the primaries; let each party put up their candidates for president at their conventions. And the state/local parties can put up their candidates for Senator and representatives.
As a non-American, the US's system of primaries seems really strange, and pretty intrusive into political parties' affairs.

In most countries, political parties set their own rules and schedules for how candidates are selected.
 
Top