Please I want help understanding Obama's use of Super Pacs This campaign season.

[BzaDem]

24. You seem to be basing your rationale on the fact that he raised so much last time.

But what if what he raised last time is clearly insufficient to win the Presidency in the post Citizens United world?

Newt Gingrich's biggest donor said that he might give 100 million. And this is just among the people that disclose this. Given the lack of good disclosure laws and lack of enforcement of existing disclosure laws, we could have some people give hundreds of millions to the Republican without blinking an eye. A few people could easily match the Obama's 2008 total.

Let's assume this is true; that what is required to even compete (let alone win) is far more than Obama (or any Democrat) could raise without Super-pacs.

Would you then be as concerned?

You say you are concerned about the logic that one must use the system to overturn the system. But what if that is literally, objectively true? Citizens United is not going anywhere until Democrats get a majority on the Supreme Court, and that isn't going to happen without Democrats winning the Presidency.

This is a classic case of a zero sum situation, where allowing only one side to break the rules would be massively unfair. Another might be self-defense; one could despise violence and yet realize violence might be necessary if you are being attacked.

In general, we have

Correct rule > no rule > selectively applied rule.