The system would work if we didn't have two (one?) multi-billion dollar cartels with a stranglehold on it.
Edit: @steross were you saying a broken system caused the duopoly? I just think it’s the other way around.
Last edited:
2024 Presidential Election
- Thread starter PF5
- Start date
The system would work if we didn't have two (one?) multi-billion dollar cartels with a stranglehold on it.
Edit: @steross were you saying a broken system caused the duopoly? I just think it’s the other way around.
PF5
Ranger
buckle up Americans...in the words of Aesop: "Be careful what you wish for, lest it come true."
Live updates: China, Mexico warn against trade war after Donald Trump vows to hike tariffs
Donald Trump says he will impose a 25% tariff on goods coming from Mexico and Canada, plus an extra 10% on Chinese goods.
www.bbc.com
I didn’t take it that way. I read it as a critique of the election process and the duopoly both being systems. We voters as individuals are the ones who are SOL.
The money caused it. The duopoly just made it easier to allocate the money.
My fantasy would be if the voters finally had enough and started telling the politicians that we are going to vote against the ads. The more you have to put out ads, the more untrustworthy you are. If you had to raise all that money then you don't have confidence your ideas will stand on their own. Once the tide turned and we started voting for candidates that didn't spend all that money, maybe we would get change.
Because, depending on the winning spenders to change the spending will never work.
Last edited:
Didn’t that happen?
PF5
Ranger
'It's going to be hard': US firms race to get ahead of Trump tariffs
The US president-elect's import taxes may be just talk until he takes office - but they are having an impact anyway.
www.bbc.com
PF5
Ranger
Canada, Mexico and China respond to Trump tariff threats
Mexico said it would slap tit-for-tat tariffs on the US, while China said Trump's finger-pointing "runs completely counter to facts".
www.bbc.com
'No-one will win'
Officials from Canada, Mexico and China have warned US President-elect Donald Trump's pledge to impose sweeping tariffs on America's three largest trading partners could upend the economies of all four countries."To one tariff will follow another in response and so on, until we put our common businesses at risk," Mexico's President Claudia Sheinbaum said.
...
A spokesman for China's embassy in Washington DC told the BBC: "No-one will win a trade war or a tariff war.”
...
Mexico's President Sheinbaum told reporters on Tuesday that neither threats nor tariffs would solve the "migration phenomenon" or drug consumption in the US.
Reading from a letter that she said she would send to Trump, Sheinbaum also warned that Mexico would retaliate by imposing its own taxes on US imports, which would "put common enterprises at risk".
She said Mexico had taken steps to tackle illegal migration into the US and that “caravans of migrants no longer reach the border”.
The issue of drugs, she added, “is a problem of public health and consumption in your country’s society”.
Sheinbaum, who took office last month, noted that US car manufacturers produce some of their parts in Mexico and Canada.
...
Currently, a majority of what the two countries sell to each other is subject to tariffs - 66.4% of US imports from China and 58.3% of Chinese imports from the US.
...
America's northern neighbour accounted for some $437bn (£347bn) of US imports in 2022, and was the largest market for US exports in the same year, according to US data.
Canada sends about 75% of its total exports to the US.
Doug Ford, the premier of Ontario, Canada's most populous province, said on Monday the proposed tariff would be "devastating to workers and jobs in both Canada and the US".
...
The Canadian dollar, the Loonie, has plunged in value since Trump vowed to impose tariffs on Canadian imports come January.
The Canadian dollar dipped below 71 US cents, the lowest level the Loonie has fallen to since May 2020, when Trump threatened to impose tariffs on Canadian goods during his first stint as US president. The Mexican peso fell to its lowest value this year, around 4.8 cents.
"If tariffs go up, who will it hurt? General Motors,” she said.
Not even close and shows how bad it is that people would even consider that.
2008 was the very first time a candidate raised a billion dollars to run.
16 years later, a candidate raised more than a billion dollars to run but because the other candidate raised even more people like yourself consider that "a candidate not spending money."
Like an alcoholic that used to drink a 1/2 bottle of vodka a day and now drinks 3/4th a bottle but since he knows another alcoholic that drinks a full bottle his brain is thinking he has cut back.
When one candidate outspends the other by 250% and still loses it's a least a step in the direction you speak.
No, it's really not.
One candidate spends insane amounts of money.
The other candidate spends 2.5 times insane amounts of money (which didn't actually happen in this election, but whatever).
The candidate only spending insane amounts of money wins.
Isn't a step in the direction of getting insane amounts of spending out of elections.
That is what @steross was speaking to.
Last edited:
250%?
If that had happened it would be a step. But, Trump was helped by being a well known entity, there is no lesson learned coming out of this that spending less is a good idea.
250% isn't the numbers I'm seeing.
Financial Times: Trump $1.6B and Harris $1.9B
Open Secrets: Trump $1.09B and Harris $1.6B
Everything I have seen says she spent about 30-40% more.
Then trump must have made up some margin with outside money.
Is there any real difference between the campaign's money and outside money? I am not that familiar with the rules, if they exist.
It must have sucked to live in Pennsylvania the weeks before the election.
I saw similar numbers that you posted as all funds for the GOP and DNC this cycle raised by total party and PACs all races. Your post made me look up other numbers what I found on Politico (2016 numbers) and Forbes ( article was day before election so final totals not in). 2016 Clinton 1.2B Trump 600M.....Harris 977M Trump 388M. So in the Pres race by candidate it's 2 to 1 that I can see.
Doesn't change what I took for your message.....even half is an obscene amount of money.
PF5
Ranger
The final price tag on 2024 political advertising: Almost $11 billion
That includes more than $3 billion in ad spending on the presidential race alone, according to AdImpact, an ad tracking firm.
www.nbcnews.com
I bet each of us gave $33 to a candidate we really cared about and there were no large donations from corporations or wealthy individuals.......The final price tag on 2024 political advertising: Almost $11 billion
That includes more than $3 billion in ad spending on the presidential race alone, according to AdImpact, an ad tracking firm.
Trump also got free press from every single news agency. They covered him atleast twice as much over the last 4 years.
