Go back
Party contributions and corruption

Party contributions and corruption

Debates

twhitehead

Cape Town

Joined
14 Apr 05
Moves
52945
Clock
28 Jan 12
Vote Up
Vote Down

In another thread I claimed that contributing to a political party was corrupt. I have been thinking it over since then and I cannot think of a single reason why anyone, individual or corporate, would contribute money to a political party unless they believe it will influence either their chances of getting elected, or their decisions post election.

Has anyone here contributed to a party? Why did you do it?

spruce112358
It's All A Joke

Joined
23 Oct 04
Moves
4402
Clock
28 Jan 12
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by twhitehead
In another thread I claimed that contributing to a political party was corrupt. I have been thinking it over since then and I cannot think of a single reason why anyone, individual or corporate, would contribute money to a political party unless they believe it will influence either their chances of getting elected, or their decisions post election.

Has anyone here contributed to a party? Why did you do it?
McCain 2000. To increase his chance of getting elected.

It is lobbyists like MPAA/Chris Dodd that expect quid pro quo.

TerrierJack

Joined
07 Mar 09
Moves
28916
Clock
29 Jan 12
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by spruce112358
McCain 2000. To increase his chance of getting elected.

It is lobbyists like MPAA/Chris Dodd that expect quid pro quo.
Doesn't getting someone elected scratch your back? The only free back scratchings I give are to those I love.

twhitehead

Cape Town

Joined
14 Apr 05
Moves
52945
Clock
30 Jan 12
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by spruce112358
McCain 2000. To increase his chance of getting elected.
So, if a campaign contribution increases a candidates chance of getting elected (which is clearly undemocratic as a persons election chances should be based entirely on votes), would you classify that as corruption? If not, what name would you give it?

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
30 Jan 12
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by twhitehead
In another thread I claimed that contributing to a political party was corrupt. I have been thinking it over since then and I cannot think of a single reason why anyone, individual or corporate, would contribute money to a political party unless they believe it will influence either their chances of getting elected, or their decisions post election.

Has anyone here contributed to a party? Why did you do it?
I've given money at times to the Green Party hoping it would help them get their positions and the Party itself more well known. That is, of course, hoping it will influence the chances of the Party's candidates getting elected at some point.

Only in your dictionary is doing that "corruption".

twhitehead

Cape Town

Joined
14 Apr 05
Moves
52945
Clock
30 Jan 12
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by no1marauder
Only in your dictionary is doing that "corruption".
What is it in your dictionary? That is what I am asking in this thread.
And is it right or wrong?
Is it unavoidable?
Is there a better system?

sh76
Civis Americanus Sum

New York

Joined
26 Dec 07
Moves
17585
Clock
30 Jan 12
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by twhitehead
In another thread I claimed that contributing to a political party was corrupt. I have been thinking it over since then and I cannot think of a single reason why anyone, individual or corporate, would contribute money to a political party unless they believe it will influence either their chances of getting elected, or their decisions post election.

Has anyone here contributed to a party? Why did you do it?
Just out of curiosity, how long did it take you to arrive at the conclusion that people contribute money to campaigns to increase their chances of getting elected? A minute? An hour? A day?

Next, you may want to contemplate why people look at porn.

(Not trying to be mean, just saying...)

twhitehead

Cape Town

Joined
14 Apr 05
Moves
52945
Clock
30 Jan 12
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by sh76
Just out of curiosity, how long did it take you to arrive at the conclusion that people contribute money to campaigns to increase their chances of getting elected? A minute? An hour? A day?
It took a couple of days to see it that way. Why?

Next, you may want to contemplate why people look at porn.

(Not trying to be mean, just saying...)

Maybe I should. What would be wrong with it, and why is it relevant here? Are you starting to feel guilty about your campaign contributions? Are they a dirty secret too?

sh76
Civis Americanus Sum

New York

Joined
26 Dec 07
Moves
17585
Clock
30 Jan 12
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by twhitehead
It took a couple of days to see it that way. Why?

[b]Next, you may want to contemplate why people look at porn.

(Not trying to be mean, just saying...)

Maybe I should. What would be wrong with it, and why is it relevant here? Are you starting to feel guilty about your campaign contributions? Are they a dirty secret too?[/b]
Actually, I've never made a campaign contribution on the federal level. I gave some money to the campaign of a friend of mine who was running for town council because, well, he's my friend. (And he won, by the way.)

I'd like to see Mitt Romney win the GOP nomination, but I don't care enough to actually give money. Perhaps I would give some $$ if I thought that I could really make the difference, but since I can't, I'm certainly not giving away my hard earned money to make a symbolic point.

twhitehead

Cape Town

Joined
14 Apr 05
Moves
52945
Clock
30 Jan 12
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by sh76
I'd like to see Mitt Romney win the GOP nomination, but I don't care enough to actually give money. Perhaps I would give some $$ if I thought that I could really make the difference, but since I can't, I'm certainly not giving away my hard earned money to make a symbolic point.
So how do you describe the fact that campaign contributions affect the outcome of the election? If its not corruption, what is it, and are there better systems that avoid this problem? Could campaigns be funded using public money for example?

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
30 Jan 12
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by twhitehead
What is it in your dictionary? That is what I am asking in this thread.
And is it right or wrong?
Is it unavoidable?
Is there a better system?
You have chosen a non-standard, almost unique, definition of the word "corruption". It is up to you to logically defend it (you haven't).

Is it "right" that I can give my own money to a political party if I so choose? Yes IMO. Why is just giving money "corrupt"? I volunteered for the McGovern campaign when I was a teenager and gave my time up stuffing envelopes and copying addresses to add to a database. Was this "corrupt" also? After all, my time has value just as my money does.

Is it unavoidable? No. But I've yet to hear a solution that doesn't drastically reduce freedom.

U

Joined
10 May 09
Moves
13341
Clock
30 Jan 12
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by twhitehead
In another thread I claimed that contributing to a political party was corrupt. I have been thinking it over since then and I cannot think of a single reason why anyone, individual or corporate, would contribute money to a political party unless they believe it will influence either their chances of getting elected, or their decisions post election.

Has anyone here contributed to a party? Why did you do it?
I donated to Obama's campaign a couple times in 2008. I don't remember the amounts, but it wasn't very much.

I don't see it as corruption because Obama doesn't know me and there were no strings attached.

K

Germany

Joined
27 Oct 08
Moves
3118
Clock
30 Jan 12
Vote Up
Vote Down

I have never donated money to any political party. The benefits I get from party membership are not really relevant for me.

twhitehead

Cape Town

Joined
14 Apr 05
Moves
52945
Clock
30 Jan 12
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by no1marauder
You have chosen a non-standard, almost unique, definition of the word "corruption". It is up to you to logically defend it (you haven't).
I don't believe in arguing about definitions. A word does not imbue properties on its subject. If you feel the word doesn't fit, I respect your right not to use it. I do want to know why however, and I do want to know what word you think is better.

Is it "right" that I can give my own money to a political party if I so choose? Yes IMO. Why is just giving money "corrupt"?
My opinion, is that it influences the outcome of the election. This is clearly not democratic. I believe that when money is used to influence something that is not meant to be influenced with money, then corruption is an appropriate word, but maybe I am wrong, maybe there is a better word.
But are you disputing the influence it has, or are you just disputing the label?

I volunteered for the McGovern campaign when I was a teenager and gave my time up stuffing envelopes and copying addresses to add to a database. Was this "corrupt" also? After all, my time has value just as my money does.
It has the same impact, yes.

Is it unavoidable? No. But I've yet to hear a solution that doesn't drastically reduce freedom.
The current method drastically reduces democracy. I know it does here in Africa, where the ruling party typically funds its campaign from government coffers. For this reason it is quite difficult to get a ruling party out of power.

twhitehead

Cape Town

Joined
14 Apr 05
Moves
52945
Clock
30 Jan 12
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
I don't see it as corruption because Obama doesn't know me and there were no strings attached.
I am not talking specifically about 'strings attached' as in Obama making decisions that he thinks you like in return for your money, I am talking about the fact that Obama was elected partly because of campaign contributions. This essentially means that if you have someone wanting to run for president who represents the poorest 50% of the country, his chances are pretty slim before he ever gets to the vote.

In Zambia we have a law that foreigners, or even children of foreigners, or even people whose parents have been in Zambia as long as Zambia existed but who were born elsewhere, cannot stand for presidency. The reason many people support this ridiculous undemocratic law is they are afraid that some rich foreigner will come and bankroll his campaign and essentially buy himself a presidency.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.