|
Kickle
Wanderer



Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 18,032
Last seen: 3 hours, 42 minutes
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: Enlil]
#28173165 - 02/05/23 09:40 AM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I think that's a good point with recognition that the value of capital is not separate from the use of capital.
-------------------- Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction? Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain
|
sudly
Quasar Praiser

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 11,594
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: Kickle]
#28173234 - 02/05/23 10:23 AM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
There are different ways in which advertising, regulations, and market forces can impact the value of capital.
Regulations and market forces impact the value of capital by acting as constraints or enablers, while advertising actively shapes public opinion and influences consumer behavior to impact the value of capital.
The effectiveness of advertising in shaping public opinion and consumer behavior can be seen through the billions of dollars invested in it by corporations and wealthy individuals, suggesting that they see it as having a significant impact on the value of capital.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis



Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,782
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 1 day, 3 hours
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: sudly]
#28173248 - 02/05/23 10:38 AM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
If there is a market for wants, advertising while oblige, hell, it will even create a want. Same goes for a need (not in the same scale though)
Would you limit advertising dollars the same as PAC dollars?
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
Edited by SirTripAlot (02/05/23 10:42 AM)
|
sudly
Quasar Praiser

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 11,594
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: SirTripAlot]
#28175686 - 02/07/23 02:34 AM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
It's a limit for PACS to spend on advertising for a political campaign specifically, not a limit on general, commercial advertising.
A limit on corporate advertising through a PAC for a political campaign.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,514
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: sudly] 1
#28176045 - 02/07/23 10:15 AM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
So, you're fine with spending unlimited money on marketing for a product, but you have a problem with spending unlimited money on marketing for an idea.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis



Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,782
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 1 day, 3 hours
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: sudly]
#28176323 - 02/07/23 02:05 PM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
A product started as an idea.
PAC money making Shitty Trump hats = undue influence; Shitty Trump hats made by a hatter = ok influence. How is the message any more or less meaningful? Because the quanity of funds behind it?
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,847
Last seen: 1 hour, 24 minutes
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: SirTripAlot]
#28176617 - 02/07/23 06:48 PM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Much as I am enjoying watching sudly flail about for an argument that is not self-defeating, I think there is a point to be made that a democracy, which depends on the idea of one person one vote, cannot remain unmolested by capital, which uses money to advance ideas.
Another factor that I haven't seen mentioned, at least during my skim, was the concept of spectacle politics. In the US, and only the US, politics is a giant spectacle. There's two years worth of rallies, speeches, and campaigning. At least, there was before Trump, who filed re-election paperwork the day he was sworn in, instead of waiting the customary two years. Now, politics is a 24/7 entertainment channel for people that are white and straight enough to not be terrorized into being the entertainment.
I mean, hell, just look at the "politics" section of an international website...it's ALL US politics. Occasionally, there will be a non-US thread. Maybe.
There is something to be recognized in the value of having politics not be defined by spectacle. A politics defined entirely by, one person, one vote. But this requires some effort on the part of the individual, at least being informed enough to vote...and actually voting. Now, you can't really control the former, that's an illegal as fuck literacy test right there, (so we'll probably be seeing it in Florida next year), but you can definitely control the latter. And that there is a whole big ball of wax. Voting rights, mail in voting, hell, just being able to log into a website with your SSN or DL# and vote from there is an obvious solution...unless you want to limit voting to the Very Motivated. The kind of people that get Really Really Riled and have a lot of spare time.
Politics as a spectacle means politics is money. Politics as a spectacle also distracts from policy. Making politics a spectacle and voting more difficult means that only a certain group of people will participate in politics. It becomes a thing, instead of one of the many background things that we are all vaguely aware of.
|
sudly
Quasar Praiser

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 11,594
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: Enlil]
#28177064 - 02/08/23 03:54 AM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Companies shouldn't be able to buy ads for political campaigns with unlimited expenditure. They can still buy the ads, but not with an unlimited slushfund.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 107,128
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 3 minutes, 22 seconds
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: sudly]
#28177076 - 02/08/23 04:37 AM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
But since they can, I hope they’re doing it for my side too
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,455
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 5 hours, 47 minutes
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: koods]
#28177123 - 02/08/23 05:52 AM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Thank you George Soros.
On the other side, Charles Koch without mentioning Trump by name, said he will be throwing money at making sure somebody else gets the GOP nomination.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,514
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: sudly]
#28177327 - 02/08/23 09:04 AM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
sudly said: Companies shouldn't be able to buy ads for political campaigns with unlimited expenditure. They can still buy the ads, but not with an unlimited slushfund.
Does that include ads promoting an issue, such as anti-abortion ads? Does that include ads attacking the character of a candidate?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 107,128
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 3 minutes, 22 seconds
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: Enlil]
#28177348 - 02/08/23 09:16 AM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I’ve asked him before where the line should be drawn, because that’s all that were are debating. The Supreme Court has decided that the risk of corruption outweighs unfettered free speech when it comes to direct financial support of a candidate. That is also a very easy line to define.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,514
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: koods]
#28177353 - 02/08/23 09:19 AM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
This is what happens when one doesn't bother to get a nuanced understanding of an issue before forming an opinion. Clearly, dude has dug his heels in, and he can't see beyond black and white slogans.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
sudly
Quasar Praiser

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 11,594
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: Enlil]
#28177684 - 02/08/23 01:19 PM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
sudly said: Companies shouldn't be able to buy ads for political campaigns with unlimited expenditure. They can still buy the ads, but not with an unlimited slushfund.
Does that include ads promoting an issue, such as anti-abortion ads? Does that include ads attacking the character of a candidate?
It doesnt matter what the political campaign ad is about, it's about the source of the money used to fund it.
If the source is a corporate slushfund, no. If the source is from grass roots activism, yes.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,514
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: sudly]
#28177696 - 02/08/23 01:27 PM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I see, so you just want to silence certain people but not others.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
sudly
Quasar Praiser

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 11,594
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: koods]
#28177807 - 02/08/23 02:55 PM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: I’ve asked him before where the line should be drawn, because that’s all that were are debating. The Supreme Court has decided that the risk of corruption outweighs unfettered free speech when it comes to direct financial support of a candidate. That is also a very easy line to define.
I've told you before, the line is corporate slushfunds vs grassroots activism.
The issue with corporate political spending is not about free speech, but about the unequal power dynamic that it creates between corporations and individuals in our democracy. The unlimited spending by corporations on political campaigns through the Citizen's United decision has resulted in a large influx of money into our political system, which can give certain corporations a disproportionate amount of influence in the political process.
This undermines the principle of one person, one vote and creates an unequal playing field, which is why many people support overturning Citizen's United. Furthermore, corporate political spending is not equivalent to individual free speech, as corporations are not entitled to the same rights and protections as individuals.
They are artificial entities that exist to make profits, and their political spending can be motivated by their financial interests, which may not align with the interests of the wider public. Therefore, it is appropriate for regulations to be put in place to prevent undue influence on the political process by corporations
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis



Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,782
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 1 day, 3 hours
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: sudly]
#28177842 - 02/08/23 03:22 PM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I still believe you are denying the right of the voter to hear speech(in this case PAC ads from high expenditures)they might or might not agree with.....they could agree with the multibillion dollar PAC or disagree with it.
It equates to less viewpoints which furthers less informed choices. Unless you feel the roughly 60% of people that do vote are unable to make up thier own minds.
Per my link, voter participation has increased per Ciizens United....do you feel that is a good thing?
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
Edited by SirTripAlot (02/08/23 03:24 PM)
|
sudly
Quasar Praiser

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 11,594
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: SirTripAlot]
#28177866 - 02/08/23 03:33 PM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
when it comes to political spending by corporations, it's important to recognize that this is not equivalent to individual free speech.
Corporations are not individual citizens with the same rights and protections, and their political spending can result in a disproportionate amount of influence in the political process. This creates an unequal playing field, where the voices of corporations are amplified above those of individuals.
Moreover, allowing unlimited spending by corporations in political campaigns through the Citizen's United decision is not necessarily a guarantee of more viewpoints or a better-informed public.
Instead, it can result in a situation where the voices of those with the most money are the only ones that are heard, while the voices of the rest of the public are drowned out.
This is why many people believe that regulations on political spending by corporations are necessary in order to protect the principle of one person, one vote and ensure that all individuals have an equal opportunity to participate in the political process.
Ultimately, one person, one vote is the most important expression of free speech in a democracy, and it is essential that we work to protect this fundamental principle
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis



Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,782
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 1 day, 3 hours
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: sudly]
#28177907 - 02/08/23 03:58 PM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
So you believe the increased voter turnout since the ruling, is negative because they are duped?
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
sudly
Quasar Praiser

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 11,594
|
Re: Citizens United allows for unlimited independent expenditure. [Re: SirTripAlot]
#28177934 - 02/08/23 04:13 PM (1 year, 3 months ago) |
|
|
No, I do not believe that increased voter turnout is negative. It's important to have a high level of voter engagement and participation in our democracy. However, it's also important to recognize that the influence of unlimited corporate spending in political campaigns can have a negative impact on the political process by distorting the democratic process and amplifying the voices of those with the most money at the expense of the rest of the public.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
|