_____ believe that the interests and the voices of the American people should determine our elections. Money is not speech, and corporations are not people. _____ will fight to pass a Constitutional amendment that will go beyond merely overturning Citizens United and related decisions like Buckley v. Valeo by eliminating all private financing from federal elections.
In the meantime, _____ will work with Congress on legislation to strengthen the public funding system by matching small-dollar donations for all federal candidates, crack down on foreign nationals who try to influence elections, and ensure that super PACs are wholly independent of campaigns and political parties. We will bring an end to “dark money” by requiring full disclosure of contributors to any group that advocates for or against candidates, and bar 501(c)(4) organizations from spending money on elections. _____ will ban corporate PACs from donating to candidates and bar lobbyists from donating, fundraising, or bundling for anyone they lobby.
Guess which party. You may say they don't mean it. But there is no symmetry in the parties in this issue.
Most of those people would say that the party they vote for represents them "enough", which is at the end of the day what matters electorally.
For example, Biden. A lot of people voted for Biden not because they think of themselves as Democrats but because they don’t want republicans in power (this includes former republicans)
I can imagine Americans of both sides don't see the parties as representing them. This seems to be a theme these days, no matter if the party in power is left/right/center, and it's not only contained to democracies either (it's pretty clear by now that turkish and russian folks aren't happy w/ their dictatorships either, for instance). It somewhat feels _distrusting centralized forms of government_ is the (new?) trend?
I think it is more that people recognize that many parties and politicians exist to serve those with power, and act to enforce plutocracy over those without power.
I think, the real answer is that both parties rule for the oligarchs, just different ones, and they also take on opposing sides in certain culture wars that Americans care about to win votes.
>> The other side believes government cannot be improved because government itself is per se bad.
> I know this is usually how americans explain democrats vs republicans, but is it really how the parties function? As an outsider (not american) looking in, and judging by the policies of the last couple decades, it seems republicans always increase government spending (therefore they don't actually believe in "small government"), and democrats pretty much rule for the oligarchs (therefore they don't really believe in the better of the "collective")?
IIRC. Republicans pretty much always try to cut or reduce social spending, regulation, and programs meant to help poor and middle class Americans; and their stated reasons are basically "government itself is per se bad." They don't mind military spending, and tend to increase the deficit through tax cuts (despite making a big deal about how deficits are bad whenever Democrats are in power).
The Democrats generally believe the government can perform useful social functions, so they pursue social spending, regulation, and government programs. However, they're often milquetoast about it and tend to preemptively cave to anticipated Republican objections.