In a true democratic republic (USA), shouldn't any one be able to become president, regardless of wealth?

Question

He/she just have great ideas and a great plan to execute them. It should not matter how wealthy he/she is. But realistically speaking, you can only get high office if you are very rich. Doesn't this narrow the field of qualified people unfairly? I have great ideas and a great plan, but since i'm not rich and not connected, I'll not become president of the USA. Wealth and who you know should not have a bearing on whether you can be president.

Wealth is not a requirement per se. But it is a de facto requirement!

Answer 1

Yes, wealth should not be required to run for high office and _in principle_ it isn't. In practice, of course, you could never run for national office unless you had access to millions of dollars. Well, you could RUN, but you wouldn't have a prayer of winning even one state. Public funding of political campaigns would solve this, but it will probably never be permitted because it would upset the status quo.

Answer 2

The is true but unfortunate. Not only do you need to be rich but you also have a much better chance and much more funding if you belong to the two major parties. The major parties are given money from tax dollars to support their campaign where as independents or minor parties are not. Realistically you must be rich, highly educated, and support one of two parties. It does limit our ability to put the best person in office and I think the playing field should be leveled.

Answer 3

Yes, and they can, if otherwise constitutionally eligible.

But if someone has good ideas it shouldn't be a problem to get funding to support them, generally. People vote with their dollars as well as at the ballot box! If 10% of the population all gave a candidate just $5 each, they would be very well financed!

Answer 4

Technically definite. of path there are different united states of america accessible that referred to as themselves Democratic Republics that weren't very democratic. international places of the defunct communist block beloved to place that for the period of the names. North Korea is formally the Democratic people's Republic of Korea, and its between the worst dictatorship in the international. Its not the call that substantial however the type you run the situation.

Answer 5

It's not so much having wealth, but selling yourself to raise the wealth needed to run a lot of worthless sound-bite ads on TV.

The Supreme Court incorrectly ruled in the early 70s (I think) that Democracy means one dollar = one voice (money is speech I think is how they put it).

Until we get genuine finance reform and public financing of elections, democracy will be circumvented in our society.

For those who complain about the billions of dollars (low billions) that might cost, how much more does it cost us in pork paybacks to contributors in the current system (Tens of billions each year)?

Answer 6

True, but you do not have to be born rich or connected. Clinton, Reagan, Carter all self made men. Who worked hard and acquired the wealth and influence to be elected president. Also the vast majority of wealthly poeple do not go into politics.

Answer 7

Well, most candidates raise a lot a money to finance campaigns, including commercials and billboards. So, I guess you have to have some money so people actually know who you are. Im middle class, but Im running for at least Senate one day.

Answer 8

Wealth is not a requirment to become president.

Answer 9

That depends, this is also a capitalistic republic, so the answer here, would be "no".

Of course, you do know that most presidential candidates raise the money they use in their campaign?