Obama opts out of public campaign finance system

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,133
38
91
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Since Obama has changed his stance on Public Campaign Financing, can any of his other campaign promises be trusted?

Obama has shifted positions on NAFTA, Iraq, Iran, public financing of campaigns, Israel, Palestine, Wright, his church, his VP vetter, Cuba, illegal immigration, and a host of other issues.

Obama is a politician just like any other.
Right or wrong, shifting your position isn't necessarily a bad thing. To stick with the same position no matter what is the epitome of stupidity. You must like that in your Presidents because Bush stubborn as fuck.
Changing your mind makes sense if you have a good reason to change it.

But as you can see via every Op-Ed on the subject Obama is being hammered because his reason for changing his mind is essentially BS.

Meanwhile, Obama sticks to his position on Iraq despite the fact that nearly everything about Iraq has changed since he first stated his view.

So he changes his mind, but for all the wrong reasons? Hmmm, coming from you, I'm not inclined to believe that unless you have something to back it up.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,808
83
91
Originally posted by: Dari

So he changes his mind, but for all the wrong reasons? Hmmm, coming from you, I'm not inclined to believe that unless you have something to back it up.

Obama stated his "reasons" and pretty much everyone in the media has called his stated reasons BS, like he's trying to pretend his decision isn't just about the money.

everyone expected this decision, I just don't think people were expecting Obama to try so hard to make this seem like something it isn't.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: Craig234
-snip-
McCain had his chance to renounce the 527 funding and use public financing and force Obama's hand, but did not and now Obama can freely raise the money.

Against the law. McCain can't mess with any 527.

Besides, the whole 527 thing's a non-issue; the Dems' have 527's too.

Fern

An agreement between Obama and McCain on 527's was part of the deal Obama discussed.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,133
38
91
Originally posted by: loki8481
Originally posted by: Dari

So he changes his mind, but for all the wrong reasons? Hmmm, coming from you, I'm not inclined to believe that unless you have something to back it up.

Obama stated his "reasons" and pretty much everyone in the media has called his stated reasons BS, like he's trying to pretend his decision isn't just about the money.

everyone expected this decision, I just don't think people were expecting Obama to try so hard to make this seem like something it isn't.

So there was a gap between the "obvious" reason and his "official" reason? Color me surprised. When it comes to money, nobody likes to be direct. Nobody. So spare me the fake outrage when his political opponents cry foul of him changing his mind. Again, his reasoning wasn't wrong, as ProJo implied.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: naddicott
MoveOn Dismantles its 527 organization. Presumably as a reaction to Obama's announcement.

That leaves their PAC funding mechanism, which can accept a maximum of $5,000 from any individual (527s do not have contribution limits) and can't accept money from Corporations or Unions.

I'll remove the presumably, they sent me an e-mail saying that's why.

I'll wait for the big yawn and silence from the right on Moveon's action.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: loki8481
Originally posted by: Dari

So he changes his mind, but for all the wrong reasons? Hmmm, coming from you, I'm not inclined to believe that unless you have something to back it up.

Obama stated his "reasons" and pretty much everyone in the media has called his stated reasons BS, like he's trying to pretend his decision isn't just about the money.

everyone expected this decision, I just don't think people were expecting Obama to try so hard to make this seem like something it isn't.

So there was a gap between the "obvious" reason and his "official" reason? Color me surprised. When it comes to money, nobody likes to be direct. Nobody. So spare me the fake outrage when his political opponents cry foul of him changing his mind. Again, his reasoning wasn't wrong, as ProJo implied.

Who says he changed his mind? He was and is for increasing the public financing of campaigns. He was and consistent with his position that if McCain agreed to public financing and reaching an agreement on 527's that he would have done so; McCain did not. So, the benefits of his not using public financing greatly increased and he isn't feeling bad that McCain didn't take him up on the offer. So?
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: Craig234
-snip-
McCain had his chance to renounce the 527 funding and use public financing and force Obama's hand, but did not and now Obama can freely raise the money.

Against the law. McCain can't mess with any 527.

Besides, the whole 527 thing's a non-issue; the Dems' have 527's too.

Fern

An agreement between Obama and McCain on 527's was part of the deal Obama discussed.

You're ignoring campaign laws. Neither can make any agreement regarding 527's. 527's must remain completely idependant of the candidates. They cannot coordinate or have influence over them. The only legal agreement they can have about 527's is to do nothing about them (i.e., it's a non-issue).

Fern
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: naddicott
MoveOn Dismantles its 527 organization. Presumably as a reaction to Obama's announcement.

That leaves their PAC funding mechanism, which can accept a maximum of $5,000 from any individual (527s do not have contribution limits) and can't accept money from Corporations or Unions.

I'll remove the presumably, they sent me an e-mail saying that's why.

I'll wait for the big yawn and silence from the right on Moveon's action.

Are you saying 527's cannot exist if a candidate forgoes FEC money?

I find that hard to believe; seems like an (further) infringement of 1st Amendment rights regarding elections/candidates/issues.

Fern
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,133
38
91
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: loki8481
Originally posted by: Dari

So he changes his mind, but for all the wrong reasons? Hmmm, coming from you, I'm not inclined to believe that unless you have something to back it up.

Obama stated his "reasons" and pretty much everyone in the media has called his stated reasons BS, like he's trying to pretend his decision isn't just about the money.

everyone expected this decision, I just don't think people were expecting Obama to try so hard to make this seem like something it isn't.

So there was a gap between the "obvious" reason and his "official" reason? Color me surprised. When it comes to money, nobody likes to be direct. Nobody. So spare me the fake outrage when his political opponents cry foul of him changing his mind. Again, his reasoning wasn't wrong, as ProJo implied.

Who says he changed his mind? He was and is for increasing the public financing of campaigns. He was and consistent with his position that if McCain agreed to public financing and reaching an agreement on 527's that he would have done so; McCain did not. So, the benefits of his not using public financing greatly increased and he isn't feeling bad that McCain didn't take him up on the offer. So?

I don't know, man. Some people are just catching the vapors.

The vapors. Oh, the vapors!!
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: naddicott
MoveOn Dismantles its 527 organization. Presumably as a reaction to Obama's announcement.

That leaves their PAC funding mechanism, which can accept a maximum of $5,000 from any individual (527s do not have contribution limits) and can't accept money from Corporations or Unions.

I'll remove the presumably, they sent me an e-mail saying that's why.

I'll wait for the big yawn and silence from the right on Moveon's action.

Are you saying 527's cannot exist if a candidate forgoes FEC money?

I find that hard to believe; seems like an (further) infringement of 1st Amendment rights regarding elections/candidates/issues.

Fern

No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that Obama had mentioned two areas McCain and he had to agree on, accepting public financing and some agreement on the 527's.

I'm not sure exactly what the agreement is he was after on the 527's, we could look back and find out, but the thing now is that McCain didn't agree.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: Craig234
-snip-
McCain had his chance to renounce the 527 funding and use public financing and force Obama's hand, but did not and now Obama can freely raise the money.

Against the law. McCain can't mess with any 527.

Besides, the whole 527 thing's a non-issue; the Dems' have 527's too.

Fern

An agreement between Obama and McCain on 527's was part of the deal Obama discussed.

You're ignoring campaign laws. Neither can make any agreement regarding 527's. 527's must remain completely idependant of the candidates. They cannot coordinate or have influence over them. The only legal agreement they can have about 527's is to do nothing about them (i.e., it's a non-issue).

Fern

They can make an agreement on their position on 527's. Obama has made a strong statement that he does not want his people donating to them, he doesn't want the election to be filled with attack ads from them, and his campaign said if people want to support his campaign donate to it and not to 527's. I think he was looking for a joint statement like that with McCain.

Having said that, I do think Obama has not really met the spirit of his earlier statement to 'aggressively' pursue an agreement.

But as I said, if that's the worst that can be said...
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Let's see...

Option 1: Take $85 million of public funds to last 4.5 months until the election.

Option 2: Raise another $200 million from the largest grass-roots donor network in campaign history.

Obama made the smart, and correct, choice. The people want to put him in office, and are willing to open their wallets to see it happen. Who is he to refuse?

Besides, the fund-raising advantage he'll have over McCain will make sure Johnny gets slaughtered like he deserves in November.

I bet if roles were reversed you would be making a post trashing McCain.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,133
38
91
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Let's see...

Option 1: Take $85 million of public funds to last 4.5 months until the election.

Option 2: Raise another $200 million from the largest grass-roots donor network in campaign history.

Obama made the smart, and correct, choice. The people want to put him in office, and are willing to open their wallets to see it happen. Who is he to refuse?

Besides, the fund-raising advantage he'll have over McCain will make sure Johnny gets slaughtered like he deserves in November.

I bet if roles were reversed you would be making a post trashing McCain.

I like the fact that a lot of people are supporting his campaign. The little folks that most tend to overlook. It is what kept him afloat for over a year now.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Let's see...

Option 1: Take $85 million of public funds to last 4.5 months until the election.

Option 2: Raise another $200 million from the largest grass-roots donor network in campaign history.

Obama made the smart, and correct, choice. The people want to put him in office, and are willing to open their wallets to see it happen. Who is he to refuse?

Besides, the fund-raising advantage he'll have over McCain will make sure Johnny gets slaughtered like he deserves in November.

I bet if roles were reversed you would be making a post trashing McCain.

I bet that when you have jack excrement for an argument, you will make things up in posts starting with "I bet if".
 

Duwelon

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2004
1,058
0
0
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Let's see...

Option 1: Take $85 million of public funds to last 4.5 months until the election.

Option 2: Raise another $200 million from the largest grass-roots donor network in campaign history.

Obama made the smart, and correct, choice. The people want to put him in office, and are willing to open their wallets to see it happen. Who is he to refuse?

Besides, the fund-raising advantage he'll have over McCain will make sure Johnny gets slaughtered like he deserves in November.

I bet if roles were reversed you would be making a post trashing McCain.

I bet that when you have jack excrement for an argument, you will make things up in posts starting with "I bet if".

Obama lied. Not a Bush "we think he lied" but a real lie, by saying one thing and doing another.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,333
136
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Let's see...

Option 1: Take $85 million of public funds to last 4.5 months until the election.

Option 2: Raise another $200 million from the largest grass-roots donor network in campaign history.

Obama made the smart, and correct, choice. The people want to put him in office, and are willing to open their wallets to see it happen. Who is he to refuse?

Besides, the fund-raising advantage he'll have over McCain will make sure Johnny gets slaughtered like he deserves in November.

I bet if roles were reversed you would be making a post trashing McCain.

I bet that when you have jack excrement for an argument, you will make things up in posts starting with "I bet if".

Obama lied. Not a Bush "we think he lied" but a real lie, by saying one thing and doing another.

And how many died? :roll:
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,333
136
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Let's see...

Option 1: Take $85 million of public funds to last 4.5 months until the election.

Option 2: Raise another $200 million from the largest grass-roots donor network in campaign history.

Obama made the smart, and correct, choice. The people want to put him in office, and are willing to open their wallets to see it happen. Who is he to refuse?

Besides, the fund-raising advantage he'll have over McCain will make sure Johnny gets slaughtered like he deserves in November.

I bet if roles were reversed you would be making a post trashing McCain.

I guarantee you I wouldn't. I applaud any candidate that doesn't take public election funds.

This whole issue is the most pathetic anti-Obama spin yet. He said he'd tried to reach a compromise with McCain on the issue. That's the whole 'promise.' That didn't work, and he has the fundraising advantage, so why should he hobble himself? To please you hacks? Just because you're stupid doesn't mean everyone else is, eh? There's still an election to win...
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Let's see...

Option 1: Take $85 million of public funds to last 4.5 months until the election.

Option 2: Raise another $200 million from the largest grass-roots donor network in campaign history.

Obama made the smart, and correct, choice. The people want to put him in office, and are willing to open their wallets to see it happen. Who is he to refuse?

Besides, the fund-raising advantage he'll have over McCain will make sure Johnny gets slaughtered like he deserves in November.

I bet if roles were reversed you would be making a post trashing McCain.

I bet that when you have jack excrement for an argument, you will make things up in posts starting with "I bet if".

Obama lied. Not a Bush "we think he lied" but a real lie, by saying one thing and doing another.

What exactly was Obama's lie? Quote him exactly and we'll see.

Bush's lies aren't 'we think he lied', they're saying one thing and doing another.

For example, he *said* the resolution he asked for was *not* a vote for war, it was only to get inspectors back in Iraq and he would only go to war as a last resort.

Instead, after it worked, he kicked the inspectors out and invaded, not letting them complete the inspections.
 

Duwelon

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2004
1,058
0
0
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Let's see...

Option 1: Take $85 million of public funds to last 4.5 months until the election.

Option 2: Raise another $200 million from the largest grass-roots donor network in campaign history.

Obama made the smart, and correct, choice. The people want to put him in office, and are willing to open their wallets to see it happen. Who is he to refuse?

Besides, the fund-raising advantage he'll have over McCain will make sure Johnny gets slaughtered like he deserves in November.

I bet if roles were reversed you would be making a post trashing McCain.

I bet that when you have jack excrement for an argument, you will make things up in posts starting with "I bet if".

Obama lied. Not a Bush "we think he lied" but a real lie, by saying one thing and doing another.

What exactly was Obama's lie? Quote him exactly and we'll see.

Bush's lies aren't 'we think he lied', they're saying one thing and doing another.

For example, he *said* the resolution he asked for was *not* a vote for war, it was only to get inspectors back in Iraq and he would only go to war as a last resort.

Instead, after it worked, he kicked the inspectors out and invaded, not letting them complete the inspections.

It didn't happen like that. you should know that by now.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Let's see...

Option 1: Take $85 million of public funds to last 4.5 months until the election.

Option 2: Raise another $200 million from the largest grass-roots donor network in campaign history.

Obama made the smart, and correct, choice. The people want to put him in office, and are willing to open their wallets to see it happen. Who is he to refuse?

Besides, the fund-raising advantage he'll have over McCain will make sure Johnny gets slaughtered like he deserves in November.

I bet if roles were reversed you would be making a post trashing McCain.

I bet that when you have jack excrement for an argument, you will make things up in posts starting with "I bet if".

Obama lied. Not a Bush "we think he lied" but a real lie, by saying one thing and doing another.

What exactly was Obama's lie? Quote him exactly and we'll see.

Bush's lies aren't 'we think he lied', they're saying one thing and doing another.

For example, he *said* the resolution he asked for was *not* a vote for war, it was only to get inspectors back in Iraq and he would only go to war as a last resort.

Instead, after it worked, he kicked the inspectors out and invaded, not letting them complete the inspections.

It didn't happen like that. you should know that by now.

So you can't back up your statement about Obama.

Yes, it did happen like that.
 

Duwelon

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2004
1,058
0
0
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Let's see...

Option 1: Take $85 million of public funds to last 4.5 months until the election.

Option 2: Raise another $200 million from the largest grass-roots donor network in campaign history.

Obama made the smart, and correct, choice. The people want to put him in office, and are willing to open their wallets to see it happen. Who is he to refuse?

Besides, the fund-raising advantage he'll have over McCain will make sure Johnny gets slaughtered like he deserves in November.

I bet if roles were reversed you would be making a post trashing McCain.

I bet that when you have jack excrement for an argument, you will make things up in posts starting with "I bet if".

Obama lied. Not a Bush "we think he lied" but a real lie, by saying one thing and doing another.

What exactly was Obama's lie? Quote him exactly and we'll see.

Bush's lies aren't 'we think he lied', they're saying one thing and doing another.

For example, he *said* the resolution he asked for was *not* a vote for war, it was only to get inspectors back in Iraq and he would only go to war as a last resort.

Instead, after it worked, he kicked the inspectors out and invaded, not letting them complete the inspections.

It didn't happen like that. you should know that by now.

So you can't back up your statement about Obama.

Yes, it did happen like that.

Last I heard signing a pledge and not following through is still considered a lie.

You totally disfiguring the facts of what lead to the Iraq invasion is also a lie of another kind. Nevermind Saddam kicking out inspectors and breaking the UN resolution that ended the first gulf war. None of that matters because it can't sink through the thick skull of those with BDS.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Let's see...

Option 1: Take $85 million of public funds to last 4.5 months until the election.

Option 2: Raise another $200 million from the largest grass-roots donor network in campaign history.

Obama made the smart, and correct, choice. The people want to put him in office, and are willing to open their wallets to see it happen. Who is he to refuse?

Besides, the fund-raising advantage he'll have over McCain will make sure Johnny gets slaughtered like he deserves in November.

I bet if roles were reversed you would be making a post trashing McCain.

I bet that when you have jack excrement for an argument, you will make things up in posts starting with "I bet if".

Obama lied. Not a Bush "we think he lied" but a real lie, by saying one thing and doing another.

What exactly was Obama's lie? Quote him exactly and we'll see.

Bush's lies aren't 'we think he lied', they're saying one thing and doing another.

For example, he *said* the resolution he asked for was *not* a vote for war, it was only to get inspectors back in Iraq and he would only go to war as a last resort.

Instead, after it worked, he kicked the inspectors out and invaded, not letting them complete the inspections.

It didn't happen like that. you should know that by now.

So you can't back up your statement about Obama.

Yes, it did happen like that.

Last I heard signing a pledge and not following through is still considered a lie.

See bolded above. You did not provide the quote to back up your claim. That's not what he said.

You totally disfiguring the facts of what lead to the Iraq invasion is also a lie of another kind. Nevermind Saddam kicking out inspectors and breaking the UN resolution that ended the first gulf war. None of that matters because it can't sink through the thick skull of those with BDS.

Anyone who say 'BDS' has 'BDS' - pro-Bush Derangement Syndrome. It's an instantly discrediting acronym for anyone who uses it.

What I said is exactly what happened. So, Saddam kicked out the inspectors *under Clinton*. You can criticize Clinton all you like for his not doing more about it.

But by the time of the Bush resolution, the UN had not called for war on Saddam over it; and Bush said what I said he said, that the resolution *wat not* a vote for war, it was a vote to get the inspectors back in to resolve the WMD issue, and he promised war would only be a last resort after the inspection approach was exhausted, if Saddam refused to let them back in. Saddam let them back in, and Bush kicked them out while Hans Blix was saying the cooperation was adequate overall and he was specifically against invading.

You are not dealing with the facts. You are at war with the truth here.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,808
83
91
Originally posted by: UberNeuman
Originally posted by: loki8481

it's going to be amazing to see what he can spend money on... they can buy ads in red, red, red states that he doesn't have a hope of winning just to put McCain on the defensive.

And it's amazing what you can see the Barack Hussein Obama team is going to do with their cash inflow...

amazingly right? ;)

Senator Barack Obama is drawing up plans for extensive advertising and voter-turnout drives across the nation, hoping to capitalize on his expected fund-raising advantage over Senator John McCain to force Republicans to compete in states they have not had to defend in decades.

His aides and advisers said they did not believe Obama necessarily has a serious chance of winning in many of the traditionally Republican states, but rather that he can at least draw Mr. McCain into spending time and money there

Even with the fund-raising dip in May, Mr. Obama?s aides expect to have something his opponent, Mr. McCain, likely will not: enough resources to eliminate the hard choices campaigns have traditionally faced when balancing the competing needs of their various state efforts.

Referring to a state with a long history of leaning Republican, he added, ?If we want to go play in a state like Georgia ? TV advertising, staff, mail ? in the most fulsome way, we?ll be able to do that.?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06.../politics/22obama.html