It may be all from the same source, but it gives more people a broader platform.
It gives them the same platform.
It may also not be diverse in speaker, but diverse in message, as opposed to simply coming from the campaigns who have one speaker with one message.
Nope, it's the same message.
Not to mention that my point is that, without the Super PACs, we wouldn't be hearing from Newt or Santorum much anymore, if at all. 4 is more than 1 or 2.
So clearly unelectable hacks are getting more airtime because of Super PACs? I'm not seeing the positive here.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 13/3/12 19:06 (UTC)It gives them the same platform.
It may also not be diverse in speaker, but diverse in message, as opposed to simply coming from the campaigns who have one speaker with one message.
Nope, it's the same message.
Not to mention that my point is that, without the Super PACs, we wouldn't be hearing from Newt or Santorum much anymore, if at all. 4 is more than 1 or 2.
So clearly unelectable hacks are getting more airtime because of Super PACs? I'm not seeing the positive here.