"Clearly they don't--or they wouldn't be having so much trouble getting their bills passed in the Senate."

This is simplistic, defeatist--and for some posters on Mudcat, a fairly typical attitude.

1) The Senate has in fact passed its own health care bill. So it involves compromise--and horsetrading (if only among Democrats.)   This is not new--ever heard of "logrolling"?   The poster's attitude sounds like a wonderful example of the problem cited in the "Friends Like This" thread. Compromise may well be necessary--it's called politics--and accomplishing something.   Doesn't seem to be a main goal here below the line.

2) Also, the parallel of curbs on large corporate contributions on one hand with the health care problem on the other is a false one.   Various factors in the health care bill, in addition to "Tea Party" sentiment, include unions against taxation of their benefits, women's groups opposing curbs on abortion financing and liberals who insist on a "public option" to support the bill.

In addition, the opposition to the health care bill has claimed the "populist" mantle--(though it should be obvious this is a hijacking.) But in the case of corporate financing the populist label clearly fits the proponents of restricting such financing.