Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sdgla who wrote (703455)	2/10/2020 1:10:38 PM
From: i-node	3 Recommendations Recommended By Katelew LindyBill Thehammer Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793931

We are going to see several tests of dollars in these upcoming elections. AOC has collected the fourth highest amount amongst House members, in the range of five million. Omar was 12th the last time I looked, with close to four million iirc. The 2016 presidential election was a great test of Citizens United, since HRC spewed Citizens United money at Trump to zero effect. It raises the question of whether Citizens United matters, but also the extent to which money is more important than other forms of support (commitment to the message). This will be yet another test of how critical money is to the process. We all know that a certain amount is required to get the message out. But will Bloomberg’s flood of ad dollars matter? Will these incompetent House members be able to ride their fortunes to higher office in state elections? I believe money in politics is a lot as it is in life: A severe shortage is deadly, but at some point the diminishing marginal utility takes over and the excess becomes almost a waste, perhaps, even counterproductive.