Sanders Files Constitutional Amendment to Overturn Supreme Court’s Citizens United Decision

[MFrohike]

77. raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaage

Calm down. The internet is not that serious. For that matter, neither is the point you're making. See, I get your point about the candidate actually needing to get into office to make the decision to support that candidate* worthwhile. I just don't get why you're harping on it. It's a given. It's irrelevant to a discussion of the corrupting influence of money in politics. Nobody cares about the few who money didn't buy a seat, it's the other 100 that did get bought a seat that concerns us.

If you want to get worked up over my pointing out exactly why people donate money to the groups that Citizens United empowered to spend at will on behalf of candidates, be my guest. I don't think it helps your cause, but hey, that's your call. If you want to continually harp on the possibility somebody might not get elected in an environment where over 95% of incumbents are re-elected and the strong correlation of money spent to electoral prospects exists, have at it. It's your choice.

By the way, my previous post was pretty much tongue-in-cheek. I got a little carried away, I admit. I just couldn't understand why you kept harping on such an irrelevant point. After all, if money wasn't extremely useful in getting people elected, why would we ever discuss campaign finance?