Skip to main content

View Diary: Citizens United is about to Get Much Worse and No One is Talking About It (9 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Yes. The S. Court really messed up (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mannie

    bad with C.U..

    But I keep thinking that Obama got elected anyway.  And the opposition spent so much money.  Was there an amount of money they could have spent that would have given Romney a win?

    Don't get me wrong....I'd like to see that ruling reversed.  But the younger crowd doesn't seem to entirely subscribe to their parents' way of gaining info on candidates.  So how does a corporation go about spending campaign dollars to gain a vote?

      Seems like the younger generation are doing well to think a bit more for themselves and no amount of stroking or chiding is going to have them think differently when they can see and experience for themselves the job outlook, for example.  They seem to have much more skepicism than their parents and grandparents.

    Also seems to me that finding that kid to market to is harder to do.  Romney got out his whiteboard, but kids didn't tune into that for info so much as for a laugh at an out of touch old white man.  And then pubs decided that the internet was the way to go, but still couldn't get it together.  And messaging seemed to be a bit of a problem, as I recall.

    Which makes me think that is why the voter suppression is such a huge deal to them.

    Frankly, if I were a republican strategist, I would talk about paying kids not to vote.  Seriously.  Day after election, if records show they didn't vote, they get paid.  That would probabaly have a bigger payoff than all the other advertising put together.  And they could drop the effort to suppress votes.

    Anyway, nothing says desperate like throwing money at a problem right off the bat.

    •  Re: Obama's election and voter suppression (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      alwaysquestion

      1) I agree with your insinuation that a Romney win, even with increased funding, was unlikely. Republicans realized only afterwards how much the party needed an image overhaul. (Though they don't seem to be doing much about it.)

      I do think, however, that money has an almost tangible effect on smaller elections. In that same election (2012), 89% of Wisconsin's 115 state legislative contests were won by the better-funded candidate. And that's just one state-- there are clear trends nationwide showing that money leads to wins.

      2) I agree; voter suppression is a GOP effort to prevent those least likely to vote Republican from expressing those opinions at the polls. Instead of amending failed policies and unpopular platforms, Republicans now employ a campaign strategy that manipulates IF constituents vote... not "for whom."

      Take a look at this recent Think Progress post about how Republicans are so (apparently admittedly) out of touch that a perceived dip in minority voting is seen as making for a "great year" for Republicans. Unbelievable.  

      •  Yep, saw that earlier, which (0+ / 0-)

        tells me where their real fears lie.  I just wish we could get the youth out there in greater numbers.  Need to start a 'Youth+" campaign where all registered youth grab one unregistered youth and get them registered. Then get them all out the door to vote in all elections.

        I agree with your analysis on money buying smaller elections.  I live in MI and we are completely controlled by repubs.  And we are gerrymandered, so not quite so much hope in future years.  Our only hope at this point is to make Gov. Snyder a one term gov so the new dem gov can start stamping veto on a lot of things, but a lot of damage has already been done.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site