In the Europe there are much stronger protections for an artist's moral rights. An artist is considered to own persistent "moral rights" in his work that do not transfer with an assignment or sale of copyright, and in many jurisdictions can not be waived by the artist in a contract. The moral rights include attribution (the right to require that the author be named or to publish anonymously) the right to the integrity of the work (it cannot altered or defaced without the author's permission), and a vague but arguable right not to have the work used in such a way that it damages the author's reputation. 
 
Not everyone is aware of the limits of US law in regards to moral rights, and it is natural to assume that if someone has made an artist's work his theme song, that it does in fact represent the support of the artist for the cause. Ill informed people not infrequently will stop supporting an artist because of a false belief that association of his song with a cause they abhor indicates his support. Even the cognoscenti are likely to have an unconscious negative association to hearing a song played behind an advertisement or appearance of a hated figure that can damage their support for the artist, and future sales of his work. 

sharke
I really don't think I'd care if Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton used my music at one of their rallies and I can't stand either of them. I just don't understand the sentiment I guess. I've never heard a song at a political rally and thought "oh, that artist must be a supporter!" I just don't know where that idea comes from. There are some songs which have been used countless times in TV commercials, like "The Final Countdown" by Europe and "We Are The Champions" by Queen, but I never thought for one minute that those bands were personally endorsing the products in the ads. Who thinks that? 
 
Likewise, I've never been bothered by the political content of songs or the political persuasion of artists. It doesn't bother me that Pete Seeger was a communist, I love his music even though I'm probably the polar opposite to him in my political views. I have friends who are the exact opposite of me politically. I don't see my friendship with them as being an endorsement of their political views. 
 
It seems to me that these artists are either just throwing a tantrum or trying to draw attention to themselves. Probably a mixture of both. 

... or free airtime to point their favorite candidates.

bitflipper
Thanks, MandolinPicker, for that link. It explains why it's usually not necessary to get the copyright holder's explicit permission to use a song. That's usually covered under a previously-negotiated blanket license, not unlike that of a radio station. At least, as long as the music is incidental and not synchronized to the action on the stage.
 
That doesn't mean there isn't room for lawsuits, though. But in most cases, when legal action has been pursued, the artist has lost. Most of the time, the artist does not sue, preferring to argue their case in the court of public opinion. (After all, even a wealthy pop star is no match for the bottomless resources of a major political party where the majority of candidates are lawyers.)
 
Interestingly, when the same scenario occurred in France, the political party paid a substantial out-of-court settlement. Different standards in the EU, I suspect. 
 
 

I'm not going to do any research, but it might not be a difference in standards.  It *could* be that the venues used in the French case hadn't paid the bill.
 

The French president offered to pay 1 euro for the song, but only after the band threatened to sue. That does seem unnecessarily insulting. Read the Rolling Stone article I linked to, it's a summary of no less than 35 similar cases.

That's just wrong.  So I take it the venues hadn't paid use fees then?

bitflipper
The French president offered to pay 1 euro for the song, but only after the band threatened to sue. That does seem unnecessarily insulting. Read the Rolling Stone article I linked to, it's a summary of no less than 35 similar cases.

The French being insulting?  No way!!!  

Trump's use of songs seems a little bit clueless anyway, regardless of the artist's feelings.  Seriously, who introduces their VP with "You Can't Always Get What You Want"?  He may as well as said, "Okay, this schmuck's the least lame person who didn't refuse to be on the ticket as me."
 
It also amazes me that Republicans keep on using "Rocking in the Free World", which satirizes a certain former Republican president's speeches.
 
Neil Young used to complain about such things, but seems to have stopped.  Maybe he gave up fighting a losing battle or maybe he just needs the royalties after his Pono thing went nowhere.

I wonder if we could get away with a "Songs We Think Politicians Should Use" thread or if it would be considered "too political" and get locked...
 
I'm thinking the Thompson Twin's Lies Lies Lies would have to be on that list.

Hi,
 
I always had a different take on things.
 
NEVER EVER use a famous song, or from a "known" band.
 
Always use the band that needs the attention and the chance to show their abilities. And I did this many times on many shows I directed, and used Ange, Banco, Colin Townes, Klaus Schulze, AshRa Tempel, Curved Air, Anthony Phillips (even allowed me to use his song on the Ygdrasil Journal of Poetic Arts Aucio issue), Kevin Ayers (who allowed me to use his song for one of my films), and many other folks, ... and pretty much all of them were just glad to see that someone out there loved their work.
 
A "new" experience, needs a new song, not an old song that brings out memories that do not match the current usage. Reminds me of a girlfriend who heard a James Taylor song which we were ... noodling ... and later she remarked how a song could throw one off easily, and she had thought of a boyfriend in high school. I said I could put on Tangerine Dream, or Klaus Schulze ... and she said ... OK ... let's at it!
 
I like new experiences, not "relive" the old ones, at the wrong time and place! And she obviously agreed!

Hi,
 
Specific aside, I agree completely with the idea.  It's almost insulting that Madison Ave. thinks we'll buy anything as long as the presentation has a dose of nostalgia thrown in.
 
I think it's hilarious that GM sells high end SUVs to high end hipsters by playing "Eminence Front".  The irony in that is so thick it can't be cut.