re: #435 Obdicut

No, in this case I think that it means Democrats are afraid of pissing of their money sources, more than their actual constituents.

That’s the problem with money being treated as speech. Politicians are just as, or perhaps more, answerable to those who will fund their campaigns as those who will cast votes.

I agree that current campaign financing laws are highly problematic. I wonder, though, what money sources are or would be against pro-pot-legalization candidates. Or do you think it’s rather a proxy issue against “liberals”?

I don’t know what that sentence means.

It means: not enough voter turnout, not enough challenge in primaries, not enough direct communication from constituents to elected official about issues, etc. Yknow, actual democratic pressure about real issues instead of money and bullshit circus.