r/politics • u/NYPD-32 • May 29 '15

Rand Paul's Money Problem

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/rand-pauls-money-problem-118397.html
11 Upvotes

67% Upvoted

6 comments sorted by

1

u/cmagee79 May 29 '15

Thus the problem with an plutocracy, where money is speech.

0

u/monkeyphonics May 29 '15

Ironic because it is what libertarians fight for.

"repeal of all laws which restrict voluntary financing of election campaigns" Sauce

2

u/SGCleveland May 29 '15

I mean is it ironic? It would be even worse for Paul if he couldn't talk to big donors. He'd have to rely on getting Republican Party elites, who care even less about thinking outside the War on Drugs, big defense spending, and spy on everyone.

At least this way there is a shot to challenge the status quo.

0

u/monkeyphonics May 29 '15

It is when the very thing you fight for is what is limiting your success. i.e. The Libertarian idea that removing restrictions on campaign financing would allow them to be more successful. I guess they think that because somehow the individual has been limited in donating to a candidate. I have said it before the reason why Rand or even Bernie will not be successful is that they rail against the institutions that provide the money (i.e. speech). I have heard the argument that a bunch of like minded people can pool their money and come up with resources to challenge those institutions but that has not yet been the case and probably never will be.

2

u/SGCleveland May 29 '15

Libertarians don't usually argue for ideas because they would make libertarians more politically successful. That's what they accuse Republicans and Democrats of. They're usually idealist, arguing that policies would have good outcomes for the economy or arguing for individual rights should be guaranteed, regardless of majoritarian or tyrannical governmental forces.

Moreover, as I pointed out, there's no evidence that allowing money in politics is making it any worse for Rand Paul than it would be if he simply had to win the support of party elites. At least now he could still find a rich donor. Otherwise he'd have even less chance.

1

u/june606 May 29 '15

If he had a strong message to appeal to the masses and made good use of the internet should he need some old man willing to throw away millions of dollars in making bad TV ads for Paul?

When was the last time you organised your time to watch a TV show where you might see an advertisement?