Active Users:1147 Time:23/11/2024 04:01:48 AM
Indeed, but there's more to it then that in regards to 2008 Variant Send a noteboard - 15/06/2011 11:36:08 PM
He knew he could raise more money than McCain so he decided to turn the matching funds because it would limit his spending. He didn't have to make that choice but the press was giving him a pass on just about anything so he had nothing to lose.


It should be noted that Obama's financial advantage over McCain is offset in part by the resources of the Republican National Committee, which had far more money in the bank than the Democratic National Committee did. Both national parties can spend money on behalf of the presidential candidates. Both the Obama and McCain camps couldn't come to an agreement on how to limit spending by the campaigns and outside groups heading into the late summer party conventions. I'm not here to defend Obama, I'm just stating a simple truth that the current system is broken. To run a national campaign you need a lot of money, and that number is only going to get bigger in every election cycle.
Reply to message
Top Barack Obama donors net government jobs - - 15/06/2011 08:35:39 PM 503 Views
yes but he gives such good speech - 15/06/2011 09:53:59 PM 338 Views
There *is* a reason why people think those ultra-expensive campaigns are bad, you know. - 15/06/2011 10:08:42 PM 346 Views
The problem is it is so hard to limit spending - 15/06/2011 10:55:57 PM 389 Views
I think people here are missing the point. - 15/06/2011 10:14:09 PM 457 Views
yes but Obama was the one who refused the matching federal funds - 15/06/2011 10:47:12 PM 368 Views
Indeed, but there's more to it then that in regards to 2008 - 15/06/2011 11:36:08 PM 506 Views
Go back 8 years, and you can say the exact same thing for GWB. - 16/06/2011 02:22:33 PM 347 Views
So Obama is the same as Bush? - 16/06/2011 02:49:46 PM 363 Views
Ultimately, yes. - 16/06/2011 04:21:51 PM 411 Views

Reply to Message