It's like you didn't even read the post you're replying to. Not sure what axe you have to grind, but it's clear that you have a lot of presumptions about what everyone here thinks and some unnecessary hostility to people who are engaging with you in a civil manner.
You seem to basically agree with what others are saying about unequal influence and control, which is precisely the point. It might be legal but I don't think it's a controversial view to acknowledge that our laws are rigged in favor of the wealthy against working people.
If Obama had actually meant what he said in his campaign speeches, I think they would have stopped him. But that's obviously total conjecture on my part. His policies certainly showed he was fine playing playing along with the establishment though.
Getting stuck in wedge issues that their propaganda is currently targeting doesn't usually make a difference, in my experience. The person you replied to made a point I find useful which is to get people to talk about the values they have beneath their positions. Often people can be led to contradict themselves if we ask enough curious, open-ended questions about what motivated their opinions.
The majority of people hold fairly progressive views on most issues, but are taught to be real mad about things that don't effect them. They'll try to argue about those things the whole time, and I don't think it's worth taking the bait.