Do we have a democracy in the US, or a plutocracy? Or somewhere in between? Or something completely different? How much does money really influence American politics?

Views: 1645

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Shows what you know. Yes, Obama raised more money through small donors than anyone else has ever done - but guess hwat? He also raised more money through LARGE donors than anyone else has ever done. The single greatest donor to his campaign was Goldman Sachs, so, do the math and figure out whether he is not also just as bought as anyone else from either of our two parties. So regardless of what news organizations you are watching, you still remain ignorant of the facts.


I have seen Ed schultz be rude to his guests before, and subsequently I stopped watching him. I also agree with you that Chris Matthews is good, but not as good as he had been. I do enjoy Maddow as well, but I think you should give Dylan Ratigan a good look. He speaks to the issues I have been raising whereas most other commentators do not. Certainly noone on Fox is going to point this stuff out, and watching Fox is a humongous waste of time. They are far more biased and ill-informed than my toilet paper is. I also watch BBC, EuroNews, Al Jazeera, and even watched quite a bit of the Iranian news program PressTV, although the constant refrain of Israel and America being the enemies of the world gets tired very quickly. And I did not say you only watch FOX news, but if you are watching it at all then you must have some funny ideas of what constitutes news.


"both parties have the same opportunities for raising money." Sure they do, and they both suck the dicks of big corporations to pony up the dough they need to have a chance at winning an election, which is why we need to get the money out of politics. A third party won't do any good if they can't raise the same kind of money that these two do, because as it has been shown, money wins elections. I agree with you that more parties would be good for the country, and that the "Campaign Finance Reform Laws" would have made things better, but if you think this at all then you must be beginning to see that there is a real problem with corporate money entering American politics and that it is bad both for our "democracy" and for the world as a whole.

Bottom line: small donors are the people who put Obama over the top - this is undeniable.

And PLEASE, why are you watching Iranian-government sponsored terrorism television? :yawn:

George Galloway makes me sick. He is an evil and sick human being. Truly an evil man.

And to add: I never said things were perfect with our country. All I have said is that despite the imperfections, we still have the most free society in the world and greatest constitution. Even Europe doesn't have the free speech protections that we have here in the United States.

I don't think you know what the bottom line is. Certainly you didn't know who donated to Obama's campaign, so in what way are you qualified to speak on what actually happened in that election?


I watched Iranian-government sponsored terrorism television for the same reason you WATCH American-government sponsored terrorism television (FOX): to get an idea of what their angle was. Except that I saw how biased PressTV was, and only ever watched it to see what they were talking about that the Western press weren't. Sometimes they were talking about issues that Western press completely ignored. But I always took it with a healthy dose of skepticism. Fox is so unbelievably biased I couldn't possibly stand to watch it anymore. They take every opportunity to lie, distort the truth, and reshape every message so that you can't get anything but the furthest-right of opinions. It is shameful.


And while you say on one hand that we have such a great country here and so forth, on the other hand you came into this discussion with a terrible attitude (which you later apologized for?), telling us who would dare raise a voice against the country you love that we were "bitching and moaning". Did you really expect me to take that sitting down? You can speak all you want about how great America is, how your father came here and made a better life for himself and his family, how much you feel indebted to the wonder which is America, but what you can't do is tell others who see major problems with our country that we have bad attitudes, that we should just be grateful for what we have and, the implication being, we should just shut up and stop whining. How dare you?

A third party would only further fragment our already ineffective government, unless we had laws that allowed runoff elections between the top 2 finishers in an election. Which is not likely to happen. I will never forget how Ralph Nader, by running as a 3rd party choice, effectively threw the election to GWBush, which was certainly the LAST thing that the people who voted for him or Gore wanted. When people bemoan the damage that Bush did to the country, they shouldn't forget that Nader caused the whole thing in the first place.

@Natalie. Our electoral system is indeed obsolete, and it enshrines our plutocracy. Europe has a better electoral system generally speaking, as does Australia, which has modified the British system and removed "first past the post". Instead they rank their candidates, and recount consecutive vote totals until one candidate has a absolute majority (50%+1).

HOWEVER, what I see happening in those countries through the decades, unfortunately, is not 'that' different from the political happenings in North America. I suspect that no matter what "system" one uses, if society's values stay the same (we are presently in an overall right-wing/conservative/me-me-me phase of socio-political life, this comes through at elections, no matter the system.

This I believe to be entirely due to the importance of cash, which corrupts the what should be an intellectual democratic process.

TNT, thanks for understanding my point. I tend to be pretty pessimistic about any society making "intellectually" good choices, because intellect is not a particular strength for most people. The rule of emotion is far stronger. People who run for office understand that quite thoroughly, which is why we get attack ad and horror story campaigns and anyone who tries to appeal to the intellect comes in dead last. We just saw that in Nevada's special election for the House. I knew it was going to happen, even though I hoped for better. :-(

Sassan K,

US is superior to any pure theocracy or dictatorship. However we do not benefit by being passive agents who cowtow to the power structure and promote patriotism at the expense of freedom and civil rights. Cant you see the drift of things in the US?


Keep in mind that the greatest 1st amendment protection is given to political speech. It is a cherished value -complaining about the stinking government. The more totalitarian the greater the restriction on political speech. And if you think things in US are peechy maybe you aint paying attention.

I never tried to restrict it - I simply stated that people who make such complaints that "America really is not a democracy" and attack America consistently (although their right) tend to never have experienced true terror and oppression; their anti-Americanism is naive when America has done much more good than wrong in the world, and has helped many nations liberate themselves and assists nations and regions when natural disasters and famines strike.
I just love your argument.  Since people have it worse we should try to improve the US.  You do know what happens to people who think like that, right?  They deserve President Bachmann or Perry.
Sassan, you sound like those people on Fox news who go on and on about how great Amrica is, someone who would have read Callista Gingrich's new children's book "Sweet Land of Liberty" and believed every word. You seem to be living in a fantasy land where nobody can say anything bad about the country you love because of how great it was for you. I'll take your answer to my original question as "Democracy" and leave it at that.
I find it funny how he is calling out the rest of us for being "anti-American" for questioning the government but, it's okay for him to rail against the culture like it is somehow separate from the government.




Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service