Opinion of people who think that they’d get everything they want if it wasn’t for campaign donors

[darklordoftech]

?

[thumb21]

Someone who thinks there's one fix that will get them everything they want isn't realistic because even in a system where big interests don't have a completely oversized influence, people will still disagree on plenty of things. And its not like wealthy people don't have ways of exerting huge influence over the political process even in countries with strong campaign finance laws.

None of that changes the importance of campaign finance reform, FFs.

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

The way you're phrasing it is obviously exaggerated, but the underlying sentiment is true. The donor class, corporatist interests, and (most) lobbying efforts do inhibit real change in this country. I mean, how could you explain it any other way? Polls have shown repeatedly that a majority of Americans support policies that would harm the health insurance industry, big pharma, oil interests, the gun lobby, the military industrial complex, and other industries that are literally profiting off of human suffering. And yet legislation that would reflect public support fails time and time again. Why? It's not because our representatives just coincidentally disagree with people and think they know better--it's because the monied interests behind them don't want to take the hit financially to stop killing the planet and leaving behind human wreckage. It's as simple as that.

[darklordoftech]

The way you're phrasing it is obviously exaggerated, but the underlying sentiment is true. The donor class, corporatist interests, and (most) lobbying efforts do inhibit real change in this country. I mean, how could you explain it any other way? Polls have shown repeatedly that a majority of Americans support policies that would harm the health insurance industry, big pharma, oil interests, the gun lobby, the military industrial complex, and other industries that are literally profiting off of human suffering. And yet legislation that would reflect public support fails time and time again. Why? It's not because our representatives just coincidentally disagree with people and think they know better--it's because the monied interests behind them don't want to take the hit financially to stop killing the planet and leaving behind human wreckage. It's as simple as that.

Hasn’t prevented legislation that hurts the tobacco and alcohol industries from passing. This hasn’t prevented child labor laws from getting stricter since the 1980s, either.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

It's just the donors who get in the way of being able to greatly restrict fossil fuels and still have low gas and energy prices.

It's just the donors who get in the way of tightly regulating the health insurance industry while still letting me keep my policy exactly the way it is if I like it.

It's just the donors who get in the way of cutting the military budget while keeping all those jobs at the base and the aviation plant.

It's just the donors who get in the way of having strict gun control while not bothering law abiding gun owners in any way.

It's just the donors who get in the way of the fact we can't have low taxes, high spending and a balanced budget.

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

The way you're phrasing it is obviously exaggerated, but the underlying sentiment is true. The donor class, corporatist interests, and (most) lobbying efforts do inhibit real change in this country. I mean, how could you explain it any other way? Polls have shown repeatedly that a majority of Americans support policies that would harm the health insurance industry, big pharma, oil interests, the gun lobby, the military industrial complex, and other industries that are literally profiting off of human suffering. And yet legislation that would reflect public support fails time and time again. Why? It's not because our representatives just coincidentally disagree with people and think they know better--it's because the monied interests behind them don't want to take the hit financially to stop killing the planet and leaving behind human wreckage. It's as simple as that.

Hasn’t prevented legislation that hurts the tobacco and alcohol industries from passing. This hasn’t prevented child labor laws from getting stricter since the 1980s, either.

I'm not saying it's impossible to pass bills that have overwhelming public support, I'm saying that the reason that not everything with overwhelming public support passes easily is due to the influence of the donor class. You can't be like "well, children aren't still working in mines and cigarette packs have warnings on them" as a counter argument to why we don't have, like, extremely high taxes on top earners and universal background checks. There's a little bit of nuance between those two things.

[darklordoftech]

Which donors do you blame for opposition to mask mandates? Which donors do you blame for abortion restrictions? Which donors do you blame for resistance to the Equality Act?

[Karpatsky]

The way you're phrasing it is obviously exaggerated, but the underlying sentiment is true. The donor class, corporatist interests, and (most) lobbying efforts do inhibit real change in this country. I mean, how could you explain it any other way? Polls have shown repeatedly that a majority of Americans support policies that would harm the health insurance industry, big pharma, oil interests, the gun lobby, the military industrial complex, and other industries that are literally profiting off of human suffering. And yet legislation that would reflect public support fails time and time again. Why? It's not because our representatives just coincidentally disagree with people and think they know better--it's because the monied interests behind them don't want to take the hit financially to stop killing the planet and leaving behind human wreckage. It's as simple as that.

Hasn’t prevented legislation that hurts the tobacco and alcohol industries from passing. This hasn’t prevented child labor laws from getting stricter since the 1980s, either.

I'm not saying it's impossible to pass bills that have overwhelming public support, I'm saying that the reason that not everything with overwhelming public support passes easily is due to the influence of the donor class. You can't be like "well, children aren't still working in mines and cigarette packs have warnings on them" as a counter argument to why we don't have, like, extremely high taxes on top earners and universal background checks. There's a little bit of nuance between those two things.

It depends on the issue - there are some other reasonable explanations for issues with high public support not making progress:

1. The public could have a poor or contradictory understanding of what it supports. Universal healthcare might be an example of this; polls say it has widespread support, but people have a wide range of definitions of what it means, so despite the polling no single policy actually has widespread support.

2. The issue could be less important to the public than other issues, meaning they vote for representatives who oppose the thing despite supporting it. I don't think this is true anymore, but flag-burning used to be an example - large majorities supported a desecration amendment, but it was such a low-priority issue that it never picked up steam as actual policy.

3. The public support could be counteracted by technocratic (rather than commercial) interests within the bureaucracy who successfully use their expertise to convince representatives that their voters' preferences are based on bad information or misunderstanding. Foreign aid might be a good example of this - afaik cutting foreign aid is widely popular based on an wild overestimation of how much the state spends on it and underestimation of its value to U.S. interests.

[Mechavada]

FFs just for triggering the type of people who post on this website.

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

FFs just for triggering the type of people who post on this website.

HAS THE LEGEND RETURNED?!

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Shorpill is that Democratic campaign donors are significantly to the left of the median Democratic voter, especially on culture but also economics.

Republican donors are significantly to the right of the median Republican voter on economics but IIRC largely similar on cultural issues.

[Mechavada]

FFs just for triggering the type of people who post on this website.

HAS THE LEGEND RETURNED?!

I had to pay the post bail today for the impounding fee on me flat today.  Goddamn housing authorities!  They make a good wee racket on the waste disposal and utility fees.

Your patience and faith have been rewarded, my son.

[Ferguson97]

I wouldn't call them horrible people but they're very stupid.