Call out to Meg Whitman

[cubby1223]

As much as I oppose Meg Whitman, and her trying to buy the office, she's not the problem.

The problem is that it TAKES over $100M to get elected, whether that money is from an ego-driven billionare or someone who raises it from coproations who want a return.

I almost agreed with you, up until you blamed it all on "the rich" and "corporations" while leaving out the other groups who donate

 

[bfdd]

No, he wasn't. He was, IMO, a real 'public servant' - albeit one who had to raise big bucks like the others as I just pointed out.

Most Californians were ignorant about Davis (including me) despite bhis being governor - in fact it seems the attacks on him came from the 'special interests' he opposed mostly.

I learned more about Davis during the campaign, when some info was published with things he had done few had heard of.

It's very ironic for CA to get pissed about Enron, and use that anger to throw out the governor who was anti-Enron and replace him with friend of Enron Arnold.

You're kidding right? The dude straight robbed education to pay off the prison guard union(I believe it's a union) which donated a massive amount to his campaign. Don't give me that shit Craig. If you honestly believe that about Davis you're a fucking joke.

 

[colonel]

Didn't Obama spend like 10 trillion dollars to get elected?

Dam I was waiting for this

 

[Siddhartha]

I read that most of the costs of a modern campaign are TV ads. How do you get your message out directly to the voters? TV.

 

[Craig234]

I read that most of the costs of a modern campaign are TV ads. How do you get your message out directly to the voters? TV.

The thing is, 'the message' is empty calories. There's really very little substance of some 'informing the voters of agenda' in tv ads.

They're focused on one thing, getting votes. That makes the primary ingredient attacks ads that get by far the most votes.

The second largest ingredient are the positive ads, which are filled with love of country, claims of bringing prosperity, and waving flags.

Any other ingredients are about as large as nutrition in cotton candy.

Over the last century, people have complained marketing has turned elections into treating politicians like boxes of soap to be sold, but it's far worse now.

It''s really nothing less than war on democracy - tv ads as the most effective thing to get votes, that are propaganda not a real basis for votes, and which cost big money guaranteeing that those who can give the big bucks can get a lot more say in picking who wins, just how they want it, and where politicians benefit far more from pleasing those donors than any policies for the public.

But keep the name democracy - 'it keeps the public quiet, having their precious democracy with all its flag waving teary-eyed patriotic slogans.'

Actually, IMO, democracy is very important - from the theory that it CAN let the people regain some power, which they took a small step to do in 2006 and 2008.

 

[hal2kilo]

This 100 million dollar idiot never used to vote she had so little respect for politics. Now she wants to buy a new dress and the governor's mansion. Do you think she's spending that 100 million to serve you or to have sex with herself.

I vote for sex with herself.

 

[hal2kilo]

Didn't Obama spend like 10 trillion dollars to get elected?

I'd say you're off by at least a factor of 1000.

 

[hal2kilo]

It's very ironic for CA to get pissed about Enron, and use that anger to throw out the governor who was anti-Enron and replace him with friend of Enron Arnold.

I was living down there when that bullshit came down. Sourgrape losers (the Repugs and the right) knew that if they had a special election, mostly the motivated base would come out to vote. They misused a recall law that was intended to remove public officials for malfeasance not because you disagree with his policies. But, that's the insane politics of California for you.