Facts v. regressive fiction, still

So the regressive (un)rationale in McCutcheon is that it equalizes the every day person with the rich, in that the former can now give as much as they want too. Thing is, they don't have nearly the same money.This is even accounting for the fact that we're comparing the 1% to the 99%.

Let's look at some fact-based reality to frame the discussion.
Checking with this accurate source on the last Presidential election, Obama received just over twice as much from large individual donors compared to small donors. For Romney it was over 4 times as much. Also consider that the small individual contributions came from a lot of different people, whereas large donations come from a much smaller pool of the same select rich folks, thereby putting a name and face to that money, along with specific agendas attached to said contributions.

So once again we see that the worldview behind such regressive nonsense originates from a purely ideological realm divorced from grounded fact in reality. Hence their incapacity to accept established science like evolution and climate change. Their view is not an equal and complementary view to be considered along with the progressive and fact-based view.