Elderly dementia patients are unwittingly fueling political campaigns

Elderly Vulnerability and Dementia

  • Many discuss how cognitive decline “sneaks up” and is masked by coping mechanisms and family denial.
  • Dementia creates a long, layered grieving process where personality and capabilities erode unevenly.
  • Elderly people are seen as prime “prey” for scams, including political fundraising framed as human contact.
  • Exploitation does not require wealth; loneliness and physical distance from family can be enough.

Protective Measures for Families

  • Suggestions include:
    • Network-wide ad blocking and talking explicitly about scams and “too good to be true” offers.
    • Setting up financial and medical powers of attorney and advance directives early.
    • Adding trusted relatives to bank accounts and titles to prevent fraud or coerced transfers.
    • Using password managers with emergency access and transaction alerts to monitor accounts.

Loneliness and Human Contact

  • Some elderly knowingly flirt with scams because the interaction itself is meaningful; loneliness can feel worse than poverty.
  • Commenters urge people to befriend nearby seniors; casual social contact may be a powerful anti-scam measure.

Scams, Subscriptions, and Financial Apathy

  • Concerns that a large slice of the economy depends on “set-and-forget” subscriptions and uncanceled services, not just among the elderly.
  • Several note that many people do not reconcile accounts or scrutinize statements, enabling both scams and corporate “nibbling.”

Campaign Finance and Electoral Reform

  • Anger at political operations that algorithmically target vulnerable seniors for recurring donations.
  • Proposals: fully publicly funded elections, banning or capping private donations, or funding only parties.
  • Pushback: public funding may entrench incumbents, misuse taxpayer money, and raise First Amendment issues.
  • Broader reforms debated: proportional representation, ranked-choice voting, sortition, abolishing formal parties, or restricting campaign ads to a public platform.
  • Germany’s proportional system is cited both as a positive model and as unstable or error-prone, so its relevance is contested.

Supreme Court, Money as Speech, and Trust

  • Deep disagreement over campaign-finance jurisprudence (e.g., money as protected speech, bans on matching schemes).
  • One camp sees the Court as correctly defending the First Amendment; another sees it as captured, partisan, and enabling plutocracy.
  • Similar splits over overturning precedents (Roe, Chevron deference) and over whether corporate political spending and recent presidential immunity decisions are legitimate or democratically harmful.
  • Allegations of unethical ties between justices and wealthy benefactors are raised; others insist there is “no evidence” of bribery and defend lifetime tenure as essential to independence.

Political Parties, Primaries, and Ballot Access

  • Some argue for abolishing parties in law and treating them as private associations with no special ballot status.
  • Others prefer leaning into parties but object to state-run primaries and unequal ballot-access rules favoring “established” parties.
  • Concerns that both regulation and public funding schemes often end up protecting insiders over challengers.

Voting Mechanics and Absentee Ballots

  • A side thread compares political mail-processing to absentee ballot handling:
    • Significant rejection rates for absentee ballots (e.g., signature mismatches) raise fairness concerns.
    • Errors like sending incorrect ballots occur and can disenfranchise voters.

Digital Political Advertising, Text Spam, and Fundraising ROI

  • Meta/Google dominate modern political ad spend; campaigns often use ads primarily to raise more donations, not to persuade.
  • Some say modern campaigns “court donors, not voters,” using $1 in ads to raise slightly more than $1 back.
  • Political SMS spam is widely loathed; “STOP” usually works but legal exemptions for political messages are noted.
  • Removing phone numbers from public voter records can reduce spam but not eliminate it.