NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.aol.com/elections/president/story/_a/clinton-sets-campaign-fundraising-record/20070401143809990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

WASHINGTON (April 1) - Two Democratic presidential candidates broke previous fundraising records during the first three months of the year, with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton setting a high bar of $26 million in new contributions for the quarter.

Former Sen. John Edwards raised more than $14 million since the beginning of the year. Clinton also transferred $10 million from her Senate campaign account, bringing her total receipts for the quarter to $36 million.


Why must these people summon up such ridiculous amounts of money just to be able to give the illusion that there is actually any difference between the two parties? Too bad all that cash couldn't be used for something, I don't know, actually useful.

Money shouldn't equal speech. If it were possible, and I know there are various reasons that this wouldn't work, candidates should be limited to their websites and debates and that's it.

Yeah, well...

Too bad all that cash couldn't be used for something, I don't know, actually useful.

To them, maintaining the illusion is useful.

To them, maintaining the illusion is useful.

Too bad for the rest of us...

Too bad for the rest of us...

No kidding. :(

http://news.aol.com/elections/president/story/_a/clinton-sets-campaign-fundraising-record/20070401143809990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001



Why must these people summon up such ridiculous amounts of money just to be able to give the illusion that there is actually any difference between the two parties? Too bad all that cash couldn't be used for something, I don't know, actually useful.

Being President requires no qualification except one, how much money can you swindle out of people. It's a curious figure how much of that money comes from John Q. Taxpayer (though they swear up and down they don't do that).

Think about it, raising over 10 million US for a job that pays about 175k per year.

Vic

Too bad all that cash couldn't be used for something, I don't know, actually useful.
It'll be used to buy advertising time on TV stations, which will give those stations more money to put into programming, and, though most of the shows will suck, one or two might not, thus making the whole political process worthwhile.
Or, at least, that's the justification I use to keep myself from going crazy and sending out letter bombs.

It'll be used to buy advertising time on TV stations, which will give those stations more money to put into programming, and, though most of the shows will suck, one or two might not, thus making the whole political process worthwhile.
Or, at least, that's the justification I use to keep myself from going crazy and sending out letter bombs.

I doubt that the candidates will be sending any money to advertise on any shows I'd like, i.e. a few hours of [adult swim], unless they want to reach the male insomniac demographic.

But if I can't watch the pretty pictures on TV, who will I know to vote for? :(

Too bad all that cash couldn't be used for something, I don't know, actually useful.
Using the cash for something that benefits people would be considered socialist and America doesn't stand for that kind of thing.

Why must these people summon up such ridiculous amounts of money just to be able to give the illusion that there is actually any difference between the two parties? Too bad all that cash couldn't be used for something, I don't know, actually useful.
Well, it's because elections are expensive. You remember Tom Vilsack, Governor of Iowa, widely considered as the most liberal and the candidate with the most fully formed policy ideas? He had to pull out because his campaign was already dipping into the red. Anyways, if you look at all of our past presidents, most of them have been pretty affluent.
Think about it, raising over 10 million US for a job that pays about 175k per year.

Vic
The Presidency pays US$400,000 per year plus the benefits, which includes living in the White House, use of Air Force One, full-time bodyguards. That's worth a lot of money.

Well, it's because elections are expensive. You remember Tom Vilsack, Governor of Iowa, widely considered as the most liberal and the candidate with the most fully formed policy ideas? He had to pull out because his campaign was already dipping into the red. Anyways, if you look at all of our past presidents, most of them have been pretty affluent.

But they're just hugely expensive popularity contests, and it's quite frankly ridiculous.

yeh it's pretty disgusting how much money goes into distorting and hoodwinking the democratic process.