Discuss Presidential Candidates at the Politics & Religion within the Wrestling Talk Forums; I asked this question on the other site and no one responded.
Is it a ...
I asked this question on the other site and no one responded.
Is it a good thing from a voter's point of view when a Presidential Candidate raises a lot of money for his campaign?
The media trumpets that as a very good thing. My thinking, though, is that this Candidate with a lot of dough probably has corporations and businesses lined up waiting to exploit him if he/she wins.
I dont like the fact that it costs so much money to run for the presidency. I really think the congress should pass legislation that puts a cap on the amount of money any candidate can spend on a campaign. I also think that candidates should take advatage of the internet more and that the big TV studios should give free airtime to the candidates in an equal manor and the time given would have some tax benefits. We have to get the lobbyist out of washington.
Ahh, so you have a little bit of socialism in you as well.
The thing is I think the media likes it so much because those Candidates with a lot of money can spend more money for commercials on TV and advertisements in newspapers.
I would say I do have some socialist thoughts and ideas. I think that some socialism would be great if it worked with capitalism side by side. THe point is that politicians spend all of their time in office trying to raise money to get re-elected, instead of focusing on the issues. We need to set a level playing feild for all candidates anremove the influence the lobbyist have over politicians. If we did this our congressman and state officials could focus on important things, like actualy reading a bill before they vote on it.
Trying to remove money from politics is like trying to remove money from life. It's impossible to do, and you might as well not worry too much about it.
i agree flop. I believe that when mccain and feingold had the legislation going for a cap on campaign money they added a bunch of tack-ons to further ensure that it would not pass. Then they turned around and said they worked on campaign finance reforms and would continue to fight for it
Wow you came to that conclusion all by yourself, Capt. Obvious?!
Originally Posted by Big
Sometimes even an obvious idea doesn't register until someone puts it on paper, or posts it in this case.
I agree with this post, but I don't think it is socialist. It just creates a more level playing field for elections. Ideally, elections should be decided by which candiate's platform is more appealing to the voters, and not by how many voters he or she can afford to reach, and certainly not by how poorly he can portray his opponent. I admit that the days of such idealism are long dead (or never even lived), but the reforms outlined by Ugly are a step in the right direction.
Originally Posted by UGLY
things presidential candidates should spend money on
Tags for this Thread