Back in January the Supreme Court reversed some earlier decisions and decided to allow corporations (and unions) to hand out unlimited campaign money as a form of free 'speech'. I personally think this was an extremely wise thing to do as companies like BP (that's British Petroleum) don't seem to exert enough influence on the American political process.
This November will be the first election cycle we really get to see some of the effects of this decision played out. We caught an early glimpse when Target and Best Buy donated money to anti-gay candidates/organizations in Minnesota and found itself facing calls for a boycott. The nation's second largest retailer has been scrambling ever since to do p.r. damage control. This brings up a question - will we be seeing similar consumer reactions to campaign contributions in the future?
Would it grind you to learn that companies are spending the same dollars you gave them for purchasing goods and services from them are turning around and doling it out to support some candidate whose views represent the opposite side of the aisle from your own? Seems like it's going to get pretty complicated figuring out where you can or can't shop without pulling the rug out from under your own feet. Voters may end up needing 'scorecards' to keep track.
Is it also possible that corporate donors, being painfully aware of pissing off potenitally half their customers, will tend to support the most moderate candidates possible?