progressive "527" groups in the fight to oust George

[G_j]

http://www.alternet.org/election04/19351/

The top 12 VIPs in the fight to oust George W. Bush aren't on the Fleet Center stage at the Democratic Covention. They're the wealthy funders of progressive "527" groups.

One year ago, conventional political wisdom held that the Democratic presidential nominee would be in trouble right now. After spending all his cash in a tough primary battle, the thinking went, the candidate would have to spend April through June scrambling to raise money for the general campaign. In the meantime, Bush's team would be free to use that three-month window to define the Democrats' front-runner through attack ads the latter couldn't afford to counter.

Things turned out differently: the attack ads flung at Senator John Kerry have not gone unanswered. In fact, in addition to Kerry's own ads, more than $15 million of political advertising has run in the past three months, most of it bashing Bush, most of it in key battleground states–without costing the Kerry campaign a dime. The ads have been created and paid for by organizations known as "527s," named for the tax-code section that defines them. These groups do not fall under Federal Election Commission (FEC) regulations, as long as they limit their activities; most significantly, they cannot support a candidate directly or coordinate their efforts with a candidate's campaign.

They can, however, accept contributions of unlimited size, from anybody. Depending on your perspective, this is either an unsavory back-door maneuver around campaign-finance reform, or an exciting new outlet for political discourse.

Either way, it's probably a big reason why John Kerry entered July in a dead heat in the polls despite the tens of millions of dollars spent on negative advertising against him–and one of the reasons why Bush's favorability ratings are at an all-time low.

..more..

[MichiganVote]

1. Actually

I've seen more Bush ads bashing Kerry than the reverse and I have not seen that many 527 ads. Regardless, I am a "swing voter" in a "swing state". What do I object to about George Bush?

The war in Iraq and the deficit. Period. These he created. Not Clinton. I don't believe that either serves the American public. I do believe that both serve the wealthy.

[rogerashton]

2. You don't care that he stole the election of 2000?

Anyway, what the media won't report is that the main issue in this election is George W. Bush.

[NewJeffCT]

3. I care, but most people don't

Yes, Bush & his brother stole the election in 2000... and, the average American doesn't care. He or she thinks that this kind of BS goes on all the time and in 2000, the Democrats just weren't smart enough to counter the Republicans in Florida.

[MichiganVote]

5. I care about many things in the election

The figure "George Bush" in one of them but does not represent the main concerns I have. Its the policies of this administration that affect me, not the man himself.

As Clinton noted in his speech, this is not an election about who is a good man or a bad man. Its about good policies and bad policies.

Regrettably, stolen elections are not something that George Bush has invented. Some historians posit the view that JFK stole the election from Nixon.

[rogerashton]

6. In 1960, the votes were counted.

Yes, some of them were fake -- on both sides. Story I heard is that Nixon stole about as many in southern Illinois as Daley stole in Chicago, and knew that this would come out if there was a recount. Thus his gracious concession. (And not to forget, Jim Crow was still depriving hundreds of thousands of black people of their right to vote in many states.)

In 2000, a riot staged by Republican activists stopped the vote counting in south Florida by intimidating the counters -- at the very least that was escalation. (And not to forget, the felon list wrongly deprived thousands of people, mostly black, of their votes in Florida, and other cheats did the same in many other states).

So -- business as usual? Well, maybe not quite. But I don't really think the "average American" is as cynical as you are or you think s/he is. But, on the other hand, I suspect the "average American" is much more self-decieving. Doesn't want to believe the White House is occupied by a crooked liar with no more legal claim to be president than s/he has, and so s/he finds a way to not believe it.

[MichiganVote]

8. Cynicism on my part?

I think your perceptions are mistaken.

[rogerashton]

9. Sorry --

I had your comment and NewJeffCT's mixed in my mind.

[MichiganVote]

10. No problem, that's what I thought had happened

[NewJeffCT]

4. I've seen very few 527 ads lately

6-8 months ago, I saw a bunch of anti-Bush ads on CNN in the morning, now every ad I see is "Ahm George W Bush, and ah approved this message."

Did Move-on and others 'shoot their loads' too early?

Granted, I live in one of the bluest states, but early this year I was seeing plenty of 527 ads. Nothing now.

[ellie]

7. I live in Ohio

and I have seen more 527 ads lately. I haven't seen any pro * ads.