Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: When I see people arguing that we have to accept.... [View all]MineralMan
(146,308 posts)83. Hmm...there is no way to change campaign financing before
the 2016 elections. In the first place, Congress would have to do it, and the Republicans have no interest whatever in doing so. As a matter of fact, any such changes will have to come at a later time, and will require Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress and a Democratic President.
Indeed, those should be the goals of every Democratic voter going forward. Internal bickering isn't going to get anything done. That much is certain.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
101 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
"We need the most billionaire-friendly candidate, with ideas repubs will vote "yes" on"
arcane1
Jun 2015
#2
This line of thinking makes me feel like my brain is in a blender. Totally Crazytown.
TheKentuckian
Jun 2015
#63
"Change comes just from wanting it" sounds like that "law of attraction" horseshit
arcane1
Jun 2015
#10
Of course, because losing the election is totally the way to bring about reform.
DanTex
Jun 2015
#12
It's bad if we get out-raised 10-1 by the Republicans. Which is what would happen.
DanTex
Jun 2015
#21
That's a poor analogy. It's like the RW argument that if liberals think taxes should be
DanTex
Jun 2015
#33
It's not a matter of arguing against it, it's a matter of changing it. That requires
DanTex
Jun 2015
#42
The only way to change it is to win elections and nominate SC justices. Saying "start now"
DanTex
Jun 2015
#54
Citizens United is far from the beginning or the core of the campaign finance swamp
TheKentuckian
Jul 2015
#75
That "fix" requires a constitutional amendment so with that kind of effort and odds we better
TheKentuckian
Jul 2015
#101
I'm talking about the GE. If we nominate someone who can't win the GE, that's bad.
DanTex
Jul 2015
#82
That's the excuse we used for why it was okay for POTUS to use a super PAC.
onecaliberal
Jun 2015
#26
Well, that's an odd way to put it - I'm hoping for a Clinton victory so, to put it in your terms....
George II
Jun 2015
#43
I didn't say that, and raising campaign funds isn't playing by "rigged rules".
George II
Jun 2015
#49
So apparently any statement not lauding your candidate is considered by you to be....
George II
Jun 2015
#69
It wasn't stupid and Clinton isn't a corrupt "republican lite" or bought and paid for by anyone.
George II
Jun 2015
#71
Back when they were trying to kill off the IWW, some of the folks said they would
jtuck004
Jun 2015
#35
I could not agree more. Before this campaign is over, that money is going to become poison
sabrina 1
Jul 2015
#84