arcos
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jul-15-03 11:53 PM
Original message |
"... you can have too much money in a political campaign." Bill Bradley |
|
"I discovered that you can have too much money in a political campaign." Bill Bradley, 1999
In the NJ 1990 Senate race, Bradley spent $12 million in the race, while Christine Todd Whitman spent $3 million. It may seem small now, especially after Sen. Corzine spent hell of a lot more in his race, but it is nonetheless important. Bradley had a very close race, even though Whitman was underfunded.
Bush's $250 million war chest is very big. But once the amount of money reaches certain point, it becomes useless... it really doesn't matter if Bush raises $100 million or $250 million, especially after the latest events. They have to be very careful. If they don't have a positive record, the economy is still in bad shape, spending so much money will certainly backfire.
:kick:
|
nadinbrzezinski
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-16-03 12:02 AM
Response to Original message |
|
According to the good folks at the Guardian oh two weeks ago, before the mess started (officially), they said that Bush was set to raise 130-170 million dollars.
In other words, smile... they are slowly loosing traction even with their corporate funders... now I expect them to raise even less.
|
arcos
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-16-03 05:17 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
My point is not that the amount of money Bush raises is irrelevant. Of course it is a problem for democracy and transparency. If Bush floods the media with propaganda, it will probably backfire. They will look like complete liars.
|
JackSwift
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-16-03 12:52 AM
Response to Original message |
|
if he thinks this. Every democrat should have problem of having too much money to campaign with. If you don't have an issue, then it doesn't matter how much money you have.
In 04 we have two issues: peace and prosperity, both of which Bush has presided over the ruin of.
|
w4rma
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-16-03 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
Of course, the problem with money is it nearly always comes with strings if you want to go back to that source later for more.
|
ChadCoffman
(68 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-16-03 02:10 AM
Response to Original message |
4. Okay, think about this... |
|
After a point, the RNC will likely allocate some of that campaign money to defeating democratic congressmen.
|
Pallas180
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jul-16-03 04:23 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. no, better yet. Think about Nixon's extra money that went into slush |
|
funds....think of what the bushistas can do with the extra millions...run small wars in south america... fund pentagon things the congress has refused to fund-- you know - just like his daddy did.
ahem - 3 billion missing from the pentagon - and they dont know where it is? try the border of Syrria - look in the student protesters pockets in Iran.....get the picture?
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon May 13th 2024, 05:57 PM
Response to Original message |