@MentORPHEUS you're challenging the free speech of third parties that was solidified in the citizens united ruling. I asked you where you draw the line on the free speech front.

You can't even be fussed to use even the correct language, purposefully using propaganda phrases used by the media such as "trump accepted $100 million" even though it's incorrect in fact and spirit, and this very misunderstanding is at the heart of citizens united.

The matter at hand is: if a party unrelated to any candidate wants to say something politically, what is your rationale for telling them they cannot do it or raise money to do it? Keeping in mind the first amendment that settled citizens united.

@redpillschool Yes, that was my idea too. I'm going to watch it

@MentORPHEUS

but start by addressing that one.

I'm not interjecting on this conversation, I was just curious where this $$$ = votes thing was coming from. So far as I'm aware, no one can submit more than one ballot. With that in mind, I don't think regulatory capture helps to answer that specific question.

I'll have to keep my assumption that no one is submitting more than one ballot, and insinuating $$$ buys votes is spurious.

@redpillschool Are you legit stranded on a desert island? Because, this goes beyond stuck in an echo chamber. Even mainstream right leaning sources routinely mention this fact.

Are you flat-out denying that Miriam Adelson and Elon Musk each donated $100MM to Donald Trump? Or are you splitting hairs that "Yes $100MM each did in fact get donated but not directly TO Trump..."

Answer that without sanctimonious language about definitions or Kool-aid consumption by others.

@Stigma

What mechanism is it you're talking about where $$$ = more votes?

Two words: Regulatory capture.

There exist plenty more mechanisms but start by addressing that one.

@Typo-MAGAshiv I have a feeling that the people bombing Tesla dealerships and those funding it are going to regret it, big time.

@MentORPHEUS What mechanism is it you're talking about where $$$ = more votes? Is this literal or figurative (influence)? I've never heard of actually being able to buy votes.

@MentORPHEUS *She not he. I realize Miriam is a woman. Damn TRP needs an edit feature bad!

@MentORPHEUS You're playing fast and loose with words and meanings of words in what should be a nuanced discussion of free speech and a SCOTUS ruling on corporate and non-profit political speech.

Miriam Adelson did not give $100 Million to Trump's campaign, this would be a campaign violation. He did not give it to Trump the person either.

Being precise in what you mean is important- especially when the conversation itself is about PACs and what they are (and are not).

If you don't get this, then you've drank too much MSM Kool-Aid.

@MentORPHEUS

long and hard

I gave your mom something long and hard.