So is buying the zoning office speech? How about the board of health? Would we allow McD’s to ”donate” money to these departments with a list of strings they want pulled in exchange for the money.Money in politics is either free speech across the board or it’s not. There is no in between.
You tell me. You are in support of money as free speech. You are either all in or not.So is buying the zoning office speech? How about the board of health? Would we allow McD’s to ”donate” money to these departments with a list of strings they want pulled in exchange for the money.
Are you just being cantankerous because you know I’m right about campaign finance laws and restrictions on them are unconstitutional attacks on free speech?
So in your world the first amendment is limited to what any person can say out of their mouth?You tell me. You are in support of money as free speech. You are either all in or not.
No. You can buy ad space yourself or you can buy tv time yourself To put your message out. Handing money to someone else isn’t free speech. I guess buying a car is protected under the first amendment?So in your world the first amendment is limited to what any person can say out of their mouth?
So the first amendment does not protect my right to use my money to have someone else say what I want said?No. You can buy ad space yourself or you can buy tv time yourself To put your message out. Handing money to someone else isn’t free speech. I guess buying a car is protected under the first amendment?
No because it isn’t your speech at that point. It is theirs.So the first amendment does not protect my right to use my money to have someone else say what I want said?
Super PACs wouldn't exist if money was considered speech in politics.Money in politics is either free speech across the board or its not. There is no in between.
Money wins either way, anyway and in almost every way. They will either buy the candidates on the cheap or buy politicians at a higher rate. I'm in favor of costing them as much as possible so I say get them out of the elections.To those that thought it constitutional for private individuals and corporations to fund public elections has anything changed your mind?
What about foreign money?
What does my question have to do with candidates or politicians? The topic is whether private money should fund the administration of the actual election unless, as the constitution states, directed by the legislature…Money wins either way, anyway and in almost every way. They will either buy the candidates on the cheap or buy politicians at a higher rate. I'm in favor of costing them as much as possible so I say get them out of the elections.
If that is what the legislature directs as the constitution says…I guess it’s ok if it’s public money?
You're looking at this in a vacuum.What does my question have to do with candidates or politicians? The topic is whether private money should fund the administration of the actual election unless, as the constitution states, directed by the legislature…
So you cannot explain what your post has to do with whether private money should fund the administration of the actual election unless, as the constitution states, directed by the legislature? Who do you think should be the neutral administration our elections?You're looking at this in a vacuum.