In a nation where money decides election wins, you’ve already completely lost. There is no longer a way to make a society here that focuses on the wellbeing of the citizenry as long as the correct framework remade to prohibit it exists. .
The best we can hope for, if literally anyone gave shit one about there being a future here, is painful but necessary collapse, this system is completely corrupted and cannot be repaired. To not see this just makes one blind. The owners use the media they own for exclusive private benefit to divide the populace and maintain perpetual control.
I voted for Harris out of harm reduction to attempt to mitigate some cruelty, but not with hope. Rejecting Reagan was our last chance, and we utterly failed, now the corruption is baked in generationally.
You don’t wrestle a pig in mud because it gets mud all over you and the pig likes it.
It will only drive up donorship to the Republicans and foster more lenient bribery donation policy from the Democrats going forward.
The Democrats need to actually submit themselves to overhauling campaign funding if they want to make any headway. But they want that money. They want it more than they want any of their alleged policy goals.
Republicans spent money and won. So yes it does. I never said spending the most money guarantees a win. That’s a straw man argument you are trying to build.
Because of citizens united, money decides election wins. So how do we win without donors?
You answered your own question.
In a nation where money decides election wins, you’ve already completely lost. There is no longer a way to make a society here that focuses on the wellbeing of the citizenry as long as the correct framework remade to prohibit it exists. .
The best we can hope for, if literally anyone gave shit one about there being a future here, is painful but necessary collapse, this system is completely corrupted and cannot be repaired. To not see this just makes one blind. The owners use the media they own for exclusive private benefit to divide the populace and maintain perpetual control.
I voted for Harris out of harm reduction to attempt to mitigate some cruelty, but not with hope. Rejecting Reagan was our last chance, and we utterly failed, now the corruption is baked in generationally.
They outspent and lost this time.
That doesn’t mean we can win without donors. Republicans had foreign bots and billionaires buying votes.
Ever hear the one about wrestling a pig in the mud?
Why are you avoiding the question?
There isn’t a question in your previous comment.
And apparently you haven’t heard the one.
You don’t wrestle a pig in mud because it gets mud all over you and the pig likes it.
It will only drive up donorship to the Republicans and foster more lenient
briberydonation policy from the Democrats going forward.The Democrats need to actually submit themselves to overhauling campaign funding if they want to make any headway. But they want that money. They want it more than they want any of their alleged policy goals.
This was the question that you are avoiding.
To overhaul campaign funding they need to win. For that to happen they need donors.
Also, just because a saying exists doesn’t make it right.
They didn’t avoid it
Is a refutation of the premise. If, as you say, donation money decides elections then the democrats, having gotten and spent more, should have won.
So, did money decide this election win?
Republicans spent money and won. So yes it does. I never said spending the most money guarantees a win. That’s a straw man argument you are trying to build.