The more money you can spend in elections, the more kooky candidates you can get elected

Rachel Maddow makes the excellent point that when you are allowed to anonymously spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to whitewash the image of a candidate and control the narrative offered to public perception, by bombarding public media with favorable material, then there really is not limit to how insane a candidate can be and still remain electable. The more insane, the more money you have to spend to shape public perception. But if you spent enough money, theoretically you could totally control the way a person is perceived. And now, thanks to the recent Supreme Court decision, there is no spending cap, and you can donate anonymously through nonprofits. So essentially, elections are now for purchase, and the buyers can remain anonymous.

The video is most relevant at about 8 minutes.

Vodpod videos no longer available.
This entry was posted in Interesting and unlabelled. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s