well to be honest the RNC and PACS could fill in the gaps IF the people were willing to give. doesn't seem to me like they want to part with their money to back a loser.

Let it never be said that the US presidency is not for sale.

Cog: Let it never be said that the US presidency is not for sale.

You cannot outright purchase it, but you have to be able to throw money at it to get it.

Cog: Let it never be said that the US presidency is not for sale.

Yeah, that was a helluva 8 years under President Perot.

this is just another example of McCain's poor decision making.
He is his own worst enemy. Erratic,prone to stunt campaigning,appealing to the lowest common denominator,compromising his principles to bend to the will of right wing and the racists.

Cog: Let it never be said that the US presidency is not for sale.

Oh, get off it. This is just cool - Obama is getting a ton of money from a ton of people. For most people, giving money is the easiest way to get involved in a campaign. There's nothing remotely wrong about this.

Cog: Let it never be said that the US presidency is not for sale.

It's always been for sale. The question is, who is it going to be sold to this time: to corporate America, or the people.

Hey TF'ers...are we gonna have a Powell endorsement thread go green any time soon?

ravenlore: Hey TF'ers...are we gonna have a Powell endorsement thread go green any time soon?

Main Page.

ravenlore: Hey TF'ers...are we gonna have a Powell endorsement thread go green any time soon?

Look at the main page.

DamnYankees: Cog: Let it never be said that the US presidency is not for sale.

Oh, get off it. This is just cool - Obama is getting a ton of money from a ton of people. For most people, giving money is the easiest way to get involved in a campaign. There's nothing remotely wrong about this.

If the situation were reversed, Fark Independents would be out in droves gloating about McCain's fund raising prowess...

DamnYankees: Cog: Let it never be said that the US presidency is not for sale.

Oh, get off it. This is just cool - Obama is getting a ton of money from a ton of people. For most people, giving money is the easiest way to get involved in a campaign. There's nothing remotely wrong about this.

And the fact that it comes from such a spectacular number of small-donation contributors is heartening... every one of those people is a guaranteed voter now that they own a piece of the campaign. This isn't "big money" winning out... this is a huge number of Americans donating whatever they can to make a difference, and witnessing the cumulative power of it all.

T-Servo: ravenlore: Hey TF'ers...are we gonna have a Powell endorsement thread go green any time soon?

Look at the main page.

Yeah, i'm on it now.

Never thought it would hit Main.

I'm probably not too far off from a lot of people that donated to Obama. It's was my first political contribution. I will continue to monetarily support Democrats as long as they post good candidates.


I think the GOP has really screwed the pooch this last 8 years. Reagan squandered American unity for his policies; since then the GOP has squandered even that marginal majority.


I hope this marks a change in future fund raising. Democrats have long been short on cash compared to Republicans.

DarnoKonrad: I'm probably not too far off from a lot of people that donated to Obama. It's was my first political contribution. I will continue to monetarily support Democrats any party as long as they post good candidates.

FTFY, and I agree.

It's been reported that Obama raised more than $150 million in September. $605 million total in fundraising.

ravenlore: Never thought it would hit Main.

Sunday mornings are often slow. Perhaps not enough discussion going on in the breast-shrinking coffee thread.

DamnYankees: Oh, get off it. This is just cool - Obama is getting a ton of money from a ton of people. For most people, giving money is the easiest way to get involved in a campaign. There's nothing remotely wrong about this.

Exactly, if you want to get right down to it, yes, the election was bought: By US.

/Gave $15 to Obama

The only problem I have is that Obama said he would forgo private financing and go the public financing route repeatedly during the long primary season ....and then when he saw that he could raise more by going the private route he did so. Not saying that it wasn't smart...just saying that he should have never said he was going to go with the public financing.

All politicians are the same. Liars, the bunch of them. McCain with his "kick out the lobbyists", while he hires lobbyists to run his campaign to Obama with his financing, to Barr with his "I was against gay marriage before I was for it" to McKinney......well, to be fair she's so batshiat crazy that I'll give her a pass on the lying.

/can't believe that my state might possibly be in play this year...woohoo...my vote may count.

It's not a problem when we do it.

"We" as opposed to "big-money donors". "We" in the sense of "the kind of person that would be reading this very thread".

RadiomanATL: The only problem I have is that Obama said he would forgo private financing and go the public financing route repeatedly during the long primary season ....and then when he saw that he could raise more by going the private route he did so. Not saying that it wasn't smart...just saying that he should have never said he was going to go with the public financing.

All politicians are the same. Liars, the bunch of them. McCain with his "kick out the lobbyists", while he hires lobbyists to run his campaign to Obama with his financing, to Barr with his "I was against gay marriage before I was for it" to McKinney......well, to be fair she's so batshiat crazy that I'll give her a pass on the lying.

/can't believe that my state might possibly be in play this year...woohoo...my vote may count.

So you've never changed a decision based on new information before?

greyseal: And the fact that it comes from such a spectacular number of small-donation contributors is heartening... every one of those people is a guaranteed voter now that they own a piece of the campaign. This isn't "big money" winning out... this is a huge number of Americans donating whatever they can to make a difference, and witnessing the cumulative power of it all.

This times a gajillion.

Obama raised 150 million bucks in September from an estimated 3 million donors. You don't have to be a math whiz to realize that this just averages out to about 50 bucks per donor.

If anything, the amount of money that Obama has been able to raise throughout the last year is just a signal of how deep his support runs with the public at large.

moralpanic: RadiomanATL: The only problem I have is that Obama said he would forgo private financing and go the public financing route repeatedly during the long primary season ....and then when he saw that he could raise more by going the private route he did so. Not saying that it wasn't smart...just saying that he should have never said he was going to go with the public financing.

All politicians are the same. Liars, the bunch of them. McCain with his "kick out the lobbyists", while he hires lobbyists to run his campaign to Obama with his financing, to Barr with his "I was against gay marriage before I was for it" to McKinney......well, to be fair she's so batshiat crazy that I'll give her a pass on the lying.

/can't believe that my state might possibly be in play this year...woohoo...my vote may count.

So you've never changed a decision based on new information before?

Information wasn't new. Obama was breaking records since he won Iowa. He should have at least kept his options open when he saw the trend instead of saying he *wouldn't* do it. Big difference.

McCain though, the only new information he had was that he was and is getting his ass handed to him. *Shrug*. No reason to turn to lobbyists and attack ads. Two things that he's always said he's against.

Barr? Well, that one actually fits your mold. He helped push DOMA through congress and then after 10+ years of seeing it action he decided that its probably best to let the states decide. So OK, I'll give him a pass on that one since it does fall under the "new information" clause.

McKinney? Hell, I think the fact that she resides on planet earth might be new information for her. She probably doesn't realize that she's running for the Green party and not the "little green men from mars" party. I'm embarrassed that that woman is from my state and that we actually named part of I-285 after that loony-bird.

I am hoping that we can maybe can use this election to shed some light on the suck that is the McCain-Feingold. Horrible bill, and has been for a long while. Nice idea, really poor execution, and acts to limit public participation with the huge amount of legalese to parse, and the forms to complete.

RadiomanATL:
Information wasn't new. Obama was breaking records since he won Iowa. He should have at least kept his options open when he saw the trend instead of saying he *wouldn't* do it. Big difference.


What? When he was talking about public financing, that was back in 2007, before the primary started.

I think that's your problem, your timeline is a little off.

RadiomanAtl:

I used to live in Atlanta and you, me, Neal Boortz, and few others refuse to call Memorial Drive anything other than that.

McCain really seemed to playing the 'victim' during the debate. I would be better off if only Obama had done this. It would be different if only Obama had done that.

Nice accountability there McCain.

Remind me again how you're not like Bush?

The amount of money spent on the election is f'ing absurd.

moralpanic: RadiomanATL:
Information wasn't new. Obama was breaking records since he won Iowa. He should have at least kept his options open when he saw the trend instead of saying he *wouldn't* do it. Big difference.


What? When he was talking about public financing, that was back in 2007, before the primary started.

I think that's your problem, your timeline is a little off.

No, he said he would take the public route until February, then at that time he said that he would go the public route if his eventual Republican challenger did, then backed off more in April when he said he was coming up with a "parallel" public financing option and then in June he backed out completely.

Like I said, it was the smart move, but still a typical weaselly politician-type move. Not as bad as McCain's weaselly political moves, but still.

It's a relatively small beef that I have with Obama. But it was the "neener-neener" tone of subby's headline that prompted me to say it.

McCain, reacting to Obama's announcement, raised the potential for fundraising abuses. He said Obama is "completely breaking whatever idea we had after Watergate to keep the costs and spending on campaigns under control. ... That has unleashed now in presidential campaigns a new flood of spending that will then cause a scandal, and then we will fix it again"

While McCain said he was not suggesting the Obama campaign had done anything illegal or improper, he said "history shows us where unlimited amounts of money are in political campaigns, it leads to scandal."


Next campaign theme for McCain? Obama raised so much cash he must be dirty? I expect to see this in his stump speeches the next week or so.

waiting4godot: The amount of money spent on the election is f'ing absurd.

Why? Obama has raised something like 600 million dollars - that's 2 dollars per person. That's too much?

5_second_rule: RadiomanAtl:

I used to live in Atlanta and you, me, Neal Boortz, and few others refuse to call Memorial Drive anything other than that.

I think I've been on that side of town only 2 or 3 times since I've lived here. I live and work on the west side. Of course, we have the stretch of 285 named after her father (J-E-W-S...obscure?) that I have to travel on once a week.

waiting4godot: The amount of money spent on the election is f'ing absurd.

And the problem? The money is being spent within the US at least. All those signs, banners, videos, commercials, phonebanks, etc are putting Americans to work.

Harryhausen: McCain, reacting to Obama's announcement, raised the potential for fundraising abuses. He said Obama is "completely breaking whatever idea we had after Watergate to keep the costs and spending on campaigns under control. ... That has unleashed now in presidential campaigns a new flood of spending that will then cause a scandal, and then we will fix it again"

While McCain said he was not suggesting the Obama campaign had done anything illegal or improper, he said "history shows us where unlimited amounts of money are in political campaigns, it leads to scandal."


Next campaign theme for McCain? Obama raised so much cash he must be dirty? I expect to see this in his stump speeches the next week or so.

McCain is out after this election. Too old and tired to run again (even for senate) IMO. 'Course, look at Strom, so I may be wrong.

So does that mean we will soon see Obama adds projected onto the moon with lasers?

Cog: Let it never be said that the US presidency is not for sale.

and 3.1 million donors are now the proud owners of a successful (so far) campaign. Obama didn't buy the spot he's at now. We did.

I love the new line about how Obama is somehow unAmerican for raising so much money. I didn't hear the Republicans complaining when they were burying the Democrats in cash in 2002 and 2004.

Harryhausen: McCain, reacting to Obama's announcement, raised the potential for fundraising abuses. He said Obama is "completely breaking whatever idea we had after Watergate to keep the costs and spending on campaigns under control. ... That has unleashed now in presidential campaigns a new flood of spending that will then cause a scandal, and then we will fix it again"

While McCain said he was not suggesting the Obama campaign had done anything illegal or improper, he said "history shows us where unlimited amounts of money are in political campaigns, it leads to scandal."


Next campaign theme for McCain? Obama raised so much cash he must be dirty? I expect to see this in his stump speeches the next week or so.

There's nothing republican (or democrat, for that matter) partisans hate more than the success of someone from the other side.
Republicans like to squawk about how Democrats hate on successful people, but they're right up there biatching as soon as someone does it without playing by their absurd rules.

Hobodeluxe: well to be honest the RNC and PACS could fill in the gaps IF the people were willing to give. doesn't seem to me like they want to part with their money to back a loser.

And there's no need to give money to a guy who's already going to win. So why should anybody ever bother donating to any candidate?

lerry: So does that mean we will soon see Obama adds projected onto the moon with lasers?

SHHHH. That is supposed to be a surprise. And it wasn't the moon, it was Uranus.

RadiomanATL: The only problem I have is that Obama said he would forgo private financing and go the public financing route repeatedly during the long primary season

Not even remotely true. Obama said he'd try to negotiate a deal that would restrict the money spent by the campaigns, the parties, and 527 groups. Upon winning the nomination, he correctly discerned that McCain didn't have the sort of standing in his own party to restrain the other groups, so Obama went with public financing (by which I mean financing by the public. More people have contributed to Obama than any politician in history, and it's not a close race.)

Frankly, you are either ill-informed or just plain lying.

Neeek: RadiomanATL: The only problem I have is that Obama said he would forgo private financing and go the public financing route repeatedly during the long primary season

Not even remotely true. Obama said he'd try to negotiate a deal that would restrict the money spent by the campaigns, the parties, and 527 groups.

In April. Before then he was saying that he would go for public financing.

/your troll-fu is weak.

Barack Obama: I can haz some more money? (new window)

By the way...if almost half a billion has been donated, much from common citizens, don't you think people will be pretty pissed off if their money goes to waste on November 4th? If Obama loses, America will collapse into pandemonium of biblical proportions. I mean Old Testament, real wrath of God type stuff- fire and brimstone coming down from the skies, rivers and seas boiling, 40 years of darkness, earthquakes, volcanoes, the dead rising from the grave, human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!

Shrew2u: If the situation were reversed, Fark Independents would be out in droves gloating about McCain's fund raising prowess...

If we had the McCain of 2000, independents would be pouring money on him, not Obama. McCain's selection of Palin is partly to blame for Obama's fund raising prowess.

hej: And there's no need to give money to a guy who's already going to win. So why should anybody ever bother donating to any candidate?

Because we don't want to see what happened to Gore and Kerry be repeated. We want the campaign to obliterate McCain's chances, so that even when polling locations get fubarred and there is systematic voting machine failures, there is never a question about who won, the only question will be about how much he won by.

I hope Obama's first action will be to completely change our voting system at a federal level by encouraging more states to join the popular vote pact.

FarKnight: Barack Obama: I can haz some more money? (new window)

By the way...if almost half a billion has been donated, much from common citizens, don't you think people will be pretty pissed off if their money goes to waste on November 4th? If Obama loses, America will collapse into pandemonium of biblical proportions. I mean Old Testament, real wrath of God type stuff- fire and brimstone coming down from the skies, rivers and seas boiling, 40 years of darkness, earthquakes, volcanoes, the dead rising from the grave, human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!

The only way Obama can lose is if Diebold steps in.

RadiomanATL: In April. Before then he was saying that he would go for public financing.

Only if you ignore what he was actually saying. Which was, from February of 2007, that he'd try to make a deal to restrain the amount of money in the campaign. McCain doesn't have the standing to stop the rest of his party from thrusting themselves into the mix, so Obama couldn't make a deal.

/Your reality-fu is weak.

Good for ObamaDamnYankees: Oh, get off it. This is just cool - Obama is getting a ton of money from a ton of people. For most people, giving money is the easiest way to get involved in a campaign. There's nothing remotely wrong about this.

I wonder how cool it will be when the next Congress gives all these idealistic Obama donors the brush-off so that the big boys can wet their beaks. All that individual-donor money is cute, but the big unions et al. did not cultivate decades' worth of lucrative relationships with Democratic legislators just to meekly step aside for you and your 25 bucks.

Mind you, the Republicans deserve every stomping they get this year. They show no signs of having learned from 2006, and if there isn't a serious party leadership enema next year they'll get clobbered in 2010 also even if Obama rubber-stamps every bit of foolishness that's been on the left wing's wish list since 1994.

Neeek:

Only if you ignore what he was actually saying.



So when he said he was going to use public financing he really meant he wasn't? Where can I get this secret decoder ring?

The moral of submitter's logic: If you're going to lie and flip flop, make sure you do it right.