GOP surges in campaign money race

[MaineDem]

By Michael Kranish and Anne E. Kornblut, Globe Staff, 8/31/2003

WASHINGTON -- When Congress passed a campaign finance bill 18 months ago, it was hailed as a historic measure that would change the face of American politics. It was supposed to take special interest money out of campaigns. It was supposed to prevent a handful of wealthy people from dominating the election.

Today, at least one consequence is clear: The bill has been a bonanza for President Bush. And, some Democrats fear, there may be another result: a disaster for the Democratic Party in 2004.

Bush is on course to have $200 million to spend for the primaries; by comparison a Democratic nominee who accepts public financing can spend no more than $45 million.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/08/31/gop_surges_in_campaign_money_race/

[Magleetis]

1. It's a good

thing that we have campaign finance reform. What a total waste of time and energy, just like our government. I am preparing myself for another fair and balanced election.

[prolesunited]

2. I guess what they're saying here

is that money buys elections and the person with the most money wins. If we allow that to happen, that is a sad indictment of our democracy.

[w4rma]

3. Raising the cap to $2,000 was downright antidemocratic.

…
The Hagel proposal, co-sponsored by Democratic Sens. Bob Kerrey (Neb.) and Mary Landrieu (La.) as well as several Republicans, would cap soft money contributions to parties at $60,000 a year and raise the limit for individual contributions to candidates from $1,000 to $3,000.
…
http://www.uwsa.com/pipermail/cfr/1999/000556.html

I would bet that many true conservative Republicans agree that raising the contribution cap is bad for our democratic-republic.

[Philosophy]

4. Do you get the feeling the GOP is concentrating way too much on money?

They are so proud of having a $2000 a plate fundraising dinner with a few hundred guests that raises a million dollars, but then Howard Dean raises a million from tens of thousands of donors. It's like they are totally ignoring the fact that each person still gets only one vote. They are totally ignoring populism and grass-roots. They aren't even bothering to try to portray * as being able to relate to regular people at all any more. They are way too overconfident in their ability to buy votes from the gullible masses. If they lose big in the 2004 election it will probably cause the implosion of the whole Republican party.

[JaneQPublic]

5. Good point. Plus, isn't there a limit to how much money can do?

Steve Forbes had more money, but it didn't help him. He didn't have the message or the votes.

So for fun, let's just say Chimpy raises $50 billion for his 2004 campaign. What's he going to do -- turn every TV and radio channel into `round the clock Chimpy ads? All that will do is piss people off.

[Fovea]

6. I think they will sponsor new shows

America's funniest jihads.
All My Terrorists.
The Anthrax Hour.
and
The H.S.A. (In Color)

[cliss]

7. Good point.

How much of his face can we take? Has anybody else noticed, bush's face just looks more hardened, his eyes are more calloused with time. Plus, if you take a mirror and hold it over half of his face (so you get a double image of half) he looks really sinister.

Anyway, about campaign financing: yes, I do believe the media is making too big a deal about all the money going to Bush. I personally think it's funny if he were to lose, then all their money went down the drain...!

As far as votes: there is nothing that can replace a hard-hitting grass-roots approach. I plan to find 10 or 20 teenagers and convince each of them to vote democratic. We don't need $$billions$$$ to do that. History has shown that a small, motivated minority can do amazing things (the democrats are not small, nor are they a minority, but you get the picture). Much more efficiently than a bunch of fat, bloated cronies chewing on their filet mignon dinner.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

8. The kind of Corps. & people funding Bush with that kind of cash

are going to expect a return on their investments. They are investing in Bush because he has proven that he DOES pay his investors well...

[drscm]

9. Do you remember how Clinton was hammered for his fundraising?

While Chimpie is being praised?

The fact is Chimpie has been a blessing to his wealthy benefactors. He doesn't let little things like laws or regulations get in the way of what they want. With just a simple executive order, he can erase bothersome legislation just like that.

Rove and crowd must be worried to think that $200M is needed to keep this "popular" pResisdent in office.

Enjoy "Unemployment Day" tomorrow.