Thanks for an incorrect non-answer. The definition of public financing does not by itself preclude corporate financing.
Even if you adopted additional restrictions on corporate financing I'm pretty sure there would be all kinds of ways to shadow-fund a candidate. This creates a situation where honest candidates are unfairly penalized against candidates that still play the money game.
I guess I meant the de facto definition. Literally every attempt at a public financing bill/amendment I've seen in Congress has the express purpose of precluding direct corporate financing[1].
Also, I was not arguing whether or not any of these proposals can be 100% effective (like you clearly deny). This is a straw man, but it is definitely worth debate on a case-by-case basis.
Even if you adopted additional restrictions on corporate financing I'm pretty sure there would be all kinds of ways to shadow-fund a candidate. This creates a situation where honest candidates are unfairly penalized against candidates that still play the money game.