sometimes I think I should switch gears

@dawnald (85135)
Shingle Springs, California
September 22, 2015 10:27am CST
This battle I'm involved in to get big money out of political campaigns is a long one. It will take many years of fighting, convincing people, mobilizing, to get things changed to where the rich can no longer "bribe" our politicians. It's exhausting. Sometimes I think I should get involved in something else that helps people in the short term, like feeding the homeless or something.
5 people like this
6 responses
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
22 Sep 15
They should ban political parties. Everyone just be an American and everyone state their ideas and everyone vote based on that rather than on party affiliation. And there would be less money involved, because there would be no party "groups" or "committees".
2 people like this
@dawnald (85135)
• Shingle Springs, California
23 Sep 15
Awesome idea, but good luck with getting anybody to agree with it.
1 person likes this
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
23 Sep 15
It is going to take a lot more than laws limiting campaign contributions or laws governing how PACs operate. This effort suffers with the same problems all the other "war ons" suffer from, attacking the supply rather than the demand. The problem is that it is obscenely expensive to run for office. The higher the office, the more expensive. Navigating through the maze of requirements for ballot access, getting media exposure, etc, all costs a lot of money. And forget getting in the debates if you aren't part of one of the 2 big box parties that have a strangle hold on the election process. Law suits to gain debate access have costs candidates hundreds of millions.
1 person likes this
@dawnald (85135)
• Shingle Springs, California
23 Sep 15
Of course it's just one part of a bigger battle, but there are so many battles.
1 person likes this
@GardenGerty (157551)
• United States
22 Sep 15
You must stick to your passion. It is better to be strong for something that takes a long time rather than lukewarm for something immediate.
1 person likes this
@dawnald (85135)
• Shingle Springs, California
23 Sep 15
OH I wouldn't necessarily be lukewarm for either, but I can only spread myself so thin.
1 person likes this
@katsmeow1213 (28717)
• United States
22 Sep 15
Well, you could always do both
1 person likes this
@dawnald (85135)
• Shingle Springs, California
23 Sep 15
In my spare time... :-)
1 person likes this
@vandana7 (98827)
• India
23 Sep 15
Dawny, I think you and Lamby are extremely intelligent folks. Well read too. Therefore, anything you do the results of which will be noticeable only in long term, will be better than short term gratification. One is like using paracetamol, and the other is like curing the ailment from inside. We, who are not so well read, or sharp enough can be roped in for shorter term stuff, while you focus on longer term thing. I say so because I see many orphanages out here, unable to raise monies for the children. I wonder why they start them. Why couldn't they have left those funds alone for better management in well thought out organizations such as SOS Children's village. When so many smaller organizations come up, it becomes difficult to monitor. But if all orphans are under one roof, it is good.
1 person likes this
@sofssu (23662)
23 Sep 15
As long as there is politics our hope and dreams will be caught up in long battles.