So the (R) are mad because the "socialist" candidate won't take public money?
FYI My liberal social studies teachers in high school were wholly in favor of public funding to eliminate the influence of big money. I never discussed it with my liberal professors in college though... Next time I run into one of them I'll ask about it.
Most liberals are 100% for public funded elections. They say it keeps money out of politics. That's also why they loved McCain back in the day because that idiot was for it.
But now that Obama is cleaning house and racking in the dead presidents many Democratics are capitalist fans in this instance.
The public finance system we have right now though is kaput. Too many intentional loopholes.
I'm all about getting the money out of politics. I think it would solve a hell of a lot of problems. The problem is you have to have politicians that are willing to make those changes.
They also have to not be terribly big fans of the 1st Amendment.
FYI My liberal social studies teachers in high school were wholly in favor of public funding to eliminate the influence of big money. I never discussed it with my liberal professors in college though... Next time I run into one of them I'll ask about it.
So the (R) are mad because the "socialist" candidate won't take public money?
Actually Obama's success may end public financing as it is now percieved and redefine it as Obama has created it. He is getting public financing, directly from the public.
All money in politics is unintelligent because it allows the bigger money to dictate to politicians. As it is, the flaw in the concept of democracy is money. Money is a giant gaping hole and he who has the money controls the democracy.
What Obama is doing is already setting precedent even before he takes office.
I think the creation and utilization of 527s was the death knell of the public financing system.
Frankly, as long as there are contribution caps I have no real problem with candidates foregoing public financing. I would prefer to have spending caps, but you cannot have that with 527s (and others like them) throwing lots of cash around.
I'd also add to the mix the fact that Obama has actively sought to limit the power of 527s on the left side. He basically shut down a 527 run by David Brock by telling all of his big donors not to give Brock any money. Given that he has made those efforts, I again have no problem with Obama raising lots of cash and spending lots of cash.
I think the creation and utilization of 527s was the death knell of the public financing system.
Frankly, as long as there are contribution caps I have no real problem with candidates foregoing public financing. I would prefer to have spending caps, but you cannot have that with 527s (and others like them) throwing lots of cash around.
I'd also add to the mix the fact that Obama has actively sought to limit the power of 527s on the left side. He basically shut down a 527 run by David Brock by telling all of his big donors not to give Brock any money. Given that he has made those efforts, I again have no problem with Obama raising lots of cash and spending lots of cash.
David Brock is media matters right? What kind of 527 was it, do you know? Was it doing some nasty stuff or something?
It (Progressive Media USA, the 527) hadn't really done much of anything. It ran a couple of ads that said McCain was the same as Bush, but that's it. They were planning a $40 million ad campaign for the election but have since abandoned it.
I think it is Obama showing that the 527 groups can be controlled if the candidate tries to control them.