Duke Lubriderm wrote:
None of them can actually relate. On either side, that's part of the problem. Our election system is currently only allows people with money enough to not work while campaigning to even have a chance. I don't know the solution, but to me, it's a problem.
I don't know the current state of it, but NJ was seriously considering a system that would cap campaign funds according to donations, possibly working in state financing relative to private donations as well, and require a bottom-up campaign strategy in which candidates would have to start at a local level and work up from there.
Or something like that. I honestly can't remember the specifics right now, and I'm too busy to look into it right now. But the idea was to open up campaigns to lower classes by evening the playing field. There was some kind of system that limited funds relative to donations or something, and required donations to be within the district.
...
I think I'm making this more confusing, and I'm ultimately going to fail at explaining it anyway, since I don't really understand how it worked in the first place. I just know that the concept was that they had to start small and there was a proposed system in place to keep the playing field sorta equal. I remember thinking it sounded a little like a tournament system (but not anywhere near as simplistic).