Did you even read the link they posted? This is pretty bloody convincing evidence, researched by an independent and trustworthy body not influenced by fuckos like Palmer:

https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/new-polling-reveals-overwhelming-opposition-to-rushing-through-political-donation-laws/

[–] yeahiknow3@lemmings.world 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I see, I see. But isn’t everyone in agreement that political campaigns should be publicly funded? What is there to be upset about?

[–] spiffmeister@aussie.zone 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Would it be a good bill if donations were banned but only the two major parties get public funding?

[–] yeahiknow3@lemmings.world 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I don’t believe the bill is doing that, but yes. I’d sacrifice my left nut to get money out of politics.

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 8 months ago

Have you not watched any news on American politics? A two-party system is a cancer to freedom and democracy. All we would be doing is trading one problem, for another much larger problem. The major parties are terrified of the rise of minor parties in the last ~15 years. Neither has held a majority in the Senate since Howard, 2004-2007. That is a good thing.

What you're suggesting is to throw the baby out with the bath water.

[–] spiffmeister@aussie.zone 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You're right the bill does not do that. The point I'm making is that the way in which you remove money from politics is important, not just the removal of it. If the bill essentially removed the ability for any other group to run other than the two major parties then it's not a good bill.

Do you think that donations are the only way of biasing a party or candidate? How many have gone to work for consultants afterwards?

[–] yeahiknow3@lemmings.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I’m still trying to figure out why people in this thread are defending much, much higher caps on donations.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 2 points 8 months ago

why people in this thread are defending much, much higher caps on donations

They're not. We—I—have been very clear.

the stated goals of this bill are laudable. We should be trying to minimise how much influence Palmer can have over politics

But that must not come at the expense of transparency and proper procedure, or at the ability for minor parties and independents to be competitive.