In Trump’s concluding statement he said something very significant about Hillary Clinton and, in a broader sense, political theory. He stated “She’s raising the money from the people she wants to control. Doesn’t work that way.” (I encourage you to read the transcript of the debate here.)

This has been a concern since the ancients. The thought process behind an aristocracy is actually based around this idea. The people with the most money have the most free time to educate themselves and hence would be the most prepared to lead the city-state. So it’s not necessarily that you get money because of your qualifications for politics but it’s because you have money that you are able to be qualified.

It is true that when money gets involved, it complicates things. This is why there is fear of the major media conglomerates taking over so many media outlets: if the conglomerates are paying the salaries of the reporters, the reporters are unlikely to report unbiasedly on issues that involve their business owners. It is why kids feel obligated to oblige even their least favorite of their parents’ rules when they know their parents are paying for college.

In politics, it means that you’re less likely to legislate against the people whose money you took. You feel an allegiance to them, a responsibility to them. The fact that the more money you give, the more influence you have is one of the major complaints of career politicians.

This is one reason why people will praise Trump, and he’ll praise himself: because he doesn’t take donations from people, he’s not reliant on anyone else’s money. I believe he means that this is a solid reason why he’s not “crooked” like Hillary. The flaw in this argument is that instead of legislating to make sure his supporters are not negatively affected by his policies, he would be a step closer: he may be tempted to legislate to make sure he himself is not negatively affected by his policies.

It seems that in our current system, we can’t avoid money or fundraising so we must be vigilant, then, to make sure that our nation’s policies are not going to be unduly influenced by money when assessing both candidates.