Corporations And Elections: The Funky Future

Corporations And ElectionsThe Supreme Court recently ruled that there should be no limits on the amount of money that corporations are allowed to donate to political campaigns. How will the Supreme Court’s ruling affect campaigns in the future? I take a look at some potential disaster scenarios:

Ron Paul

Ladies and Gentlemen, Your American President

Sure, corporations could spend millions of dollars promoting one candidate, but why limit themselves? Just trot up 100 or so of America’s young, aspiring politicians in front of Simon Cowell, Rod Blagojevich and a drunk Sarah Palin and let America’s phone lines do the work. No one wants to vote for the candidate who doesn’t sell it in the Coke promo segment. This would also be great at improving voter turnout, even if it does make our electoral process slightly more vulnerable to the charge that it is a pandering TV popularity contest.

John Pepsi

Pepsi for America 2012

At the heart of the Supreme Court’s decision is the assertion that Corporations should be treated legally as persons, so for the purposes of this example I will assume the thought process of John Pepsi.

“Hey,” thinks Johnny Pepsi, “I spend a ton of money on advertising, and these fat cats in Washington still want to tell me how much sugar I can put in my soda pops, and what kind of sugar it can be, and what planet it has to be from, and how much of it can be formaldehyde. Why not kill two birds with one stone? I’ll be the politician. I’ll make Coke illegal! Why not? MY MONEY MAKES ME MORE POWERFUL THAN GOD.” Later, John Pepsi will be found to have several secret wives, a history of writing ferociously racist statements in a small, self-published newsletter, and an unhealthy obsession with the eating and drinking habits of teenaged boys. And, in a stunning turn, he will turn up dead in a hotel room with a gallon of crude petroleum in his gut just weeks before the election, allowing incumbent Federico Exxon to walk away with an easy victory over Pepsi’s running mate, Colonel Sanders.

Robopublicans Vs Dinocrats

Robopublicans versus Dinocrats

Now that candidates are tacitly mouthpieces of their corporate sponsors, why settle for mere humans to wage their campaigns? With the handcuffs off the corporations, no longer will they have to settle for giving piddly contributions to expertly-coiffed delusional idiot megalomaniacs who can’t be trusted to follow any agenda but their own. Instead they’ll be able to fund the creation of super-candidates made of science, and magic, and money. The Republican Party and her corporate sponsors will sponsor the creation of a Robopublican – a cold-blooded cyborg who doesn’t blink when slashing social welfare programs, crushing unions, or electro-gerrymandering in the name of his steely robot god. In response, the left’s corporate benefactors – the Hollywood elite – will create the Dinocrat, a homosexual triceratops from Yellowstone who represents the Sierra Club and the ACLU, and who will devour money and spend time asking black people if they’re sad about how poor they are. Elections will be moot – for gladiators such as this, the only satisfactory resolution would be a fight to the death. The winner? The network that gets the broadcast rights to the fight. Which is fitting, as they’re the ones who probably bribed the Supreme Court to make their nutty decision in the first place.

The System Works

Increased Accountability by Politicians to their Constituents

Just kidding.

No Comments

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Discuss on Facebook