Author Topic: If donations were capped, would these two scumbags have won their nominations?  (Read 527 times)

Fury

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 21026
  • All aboard the USS Leverage

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
nope, and the whole fucking thing should be reduced down to 6 months or less with all primaries being held at the same time.  I have more opinions but what's the point.

MB_722

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11173
  • RIP Keith
nope, and the whole fucking thing should be reduced down to 6 months or less with all primaries being held at the same time.  I have more opinions but what's the point.

LOL  :D




Elections are a joke.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
LOL  :D




Elections are a joke.
probably not the response fury wanted :D

Fury

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 21026
  • All aboard the USS Leverage
probably not the response fury wanted :D

Sure it is. It cracks me up. Instead of the best candidate winning, it boils down to which douche bag can smooze it up with the most donors. So basically, the most powerful position in the world goes to someone who isn't as qualified as another guy but wins on the basis that he can bombard the idiotic American populace with enough bullshit and throw enough money in to win.

I reckon the USA would be a lot better off if the candidates actually had to prove they were qualified to hold the position and not bank themselves on throwing money around to make up for their shortcomings.