|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Let The Debates Begin! Obama v Romney | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
The NY Times figures also suggest it is reasonably even in terms of amount raised so far.
If money spent were the only significant factor we should expect Romney to close the gap as he spends his extra-as-yet-unspent warchest shouldn't we? I guess it remains to be seen who raises the most cash as these things are presumably ongoing up until the last minute.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Not at all. If there was a cap on how much ANY entity can contribute, then maybe, but as it is now there is no regulation. Would it be more accurate to say that the amount of money corporations give to a candidate ... So far as I know (someone stop me if I'm wrong) the Citizens United decision allows corporations to donate as much as they like to "super-PACs", but not to the actual official campaign fund. So the size of the candidates' campaign warchests may indeed reflect how much people like them.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dronestar Member Posts: 1407 From: usa Joined: |
AD writes: So far as I know (someone stop me if I'm wrong) the Citizens United decision allows corporations to donate as much as they like to "super-PACs", but not to the actual official campaign fund. So the size of the candidates' campaign warchests may indeed reflect how much people like them. Perhaps I am mistaken, but, would not one directly effect the other? If Wall Street ran a ten trillion dollar advertising campaign for me, wouldn't my popularity soar. And inversely, if Wall Street ran a ten trillion dollar advertising campaign AGAINST my opponent, wouldn't my popularity soar. (Well, maybe not me, but some one less objectionable)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
Perhaps I am mistaken, but, would not one directly effect the other? If Wall Street ran a ten trillion dollar advertising campaign for me, wouldn't my popularity soar. And inversely, if Wall Street ran a ten trillion dollar advertising campaign AGAINST my opponent, wouldn't my popularity soar. Yeah, sure. My point is that when we're measuring how much money is given to the candidates directly --- to their official campaign funds --- we are measuring donations from ordinary people, not from corporations. Therefore this sum of money will correlate with the popularity of the candidates without necessarily causing it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dronestar Member Posts: 1407 From: usa Joined: |
DA writes: My point is that when we're measuring how much money is given to the candidates directly --- to their official campaign funds --- we are measuring donations from ordinary people, not from corporations. If the donations weren't affected by the corporate world, then yes, I would agree. However, the popularity of a candidate IS greatly manufactured by the corporate media. I thought my post Message 800 was an adequate argument reflecting how corporations and elites choose the candidates for the voters. I should think our world would be vastly more different if big business stayed out of politics. Edited by dronester, : Re-emphasised by changing sentence to: "However, the popularity of a candidate IS greatly manufactured by the corporate media."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
onifre Member (Idle past 2951 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
we are measuring donations from ordinary people, not from corporations. The CEO of Dreamworks Animation donating $2 million to the Obama campaign is not really an ordinary people contribution. The link both Straggler and I provided reflected total campaign contributions, including those of the corporate world. Which I guess are considered "people" too. - Oni
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
The CEO of Dreamworks Animation donating $2 million to the Obama campaign ... Citation needed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
onifre Member (Idle past 2951 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
If money spent were the only significant factor we should expect Romney to close the gap as he spends his extra-as-yet-unspent warchest shouldn't we? And perhaps we will, esp after last nights "debates" where it seems the media feels Romney did better somehow. I watched it. I didn't see a sway in any direction. I don't know if it will be enough to close the gap but it will get closer as Romney gives the final push.
I guess it remains to be seen who raises the most cash as these things are presumably ongoing up until the last minute. Yeah we'll see. - Oni Edited by onifre, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
onifre Member (Idle past 2951 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
Here
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
But that is a list of super-PAC donors.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Dr A writes: But that is a list of super-PAC donors. I think Oni's point is that the candidate who spends most wins. That a large amount of the funds used are via corporate donations doesn't detract from this. In fact it probably adds to his wider point....
Dr A writes: My point is that when we're measuring how much money is given to the candidates directly --- to their official campaign funds --- we are measuring donations from ordinary people, not from corporations. Therefore this sum of money will correlate with the popularity of the candidates without necessarily causing it. Direct donations could indeed account for a correlation between popularity and campaign funds which nullifies the spend-to-win argument. So I guess the question now becomes what portion of each candidates campaign fund is gathered from individuals and what is through these super-pacs? Looking into the bewildering world of US political funding also revealed that even more influential than super pacs (in terms of sheer dollar amounts) are 501(c)(4)s.
quote: Source I can't find the figures but it seems likely that direct donations made by individuals to official campaign funds make up a relatively small amount of the total war-chest.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
onifre Member (Idle past 2951 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
But that is a list of super-PAC donors. It's all the same shit. Super-Pacs, as Colbert has shown us, mean nothing. Let's start an EvC Super-Pac! - Oni Edited by onifre, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Phat writes:
Obamacare has cost my union health insurance more in that they now have to insure a wider pool of people than they did before...Tax replies writes: Hang on a sec. I thought you were a christian. I never said I was against Obamacare. Im just mentioning the impact it is having in the union. Our fund is shrinking quicker than they anticipated, but we just negotiated for the companies to kick in some more loot. A little socialism goes a long way......
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Thats what they say, although their idea of Jesus is One who favors a free market economy in which global labor is used to make US Christians wealthier.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024