U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
Old 11-08-2014, 08:55 AM
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
71,682 posts, read 83,258,368 times
Reputation: 41529



What elections? I can't think of a single one that would produce a candidate ready to run for the top spot in the world that isn't already on the horizon. How many elections do you think take place in odd numbered years?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Old 11-08-2014, 09:35 AM
Location: WY
5,200 posts, read 3,733,318 times
Reputation: 5862
Originally Posted by banjomike View Post
The amount of money spent is not anywhere close in importance as WHERE the money came from.
$100 million dollars contributed to a state campaign meant from the beginning that it didn't come from only feelings of civic duty. That much money only meant there were a lot of people who expected a return on their investment at some time in some fashion, no matter who won or lost.

Who, between Hagan and McConnell, could be considered purer than the driven snow? Political power, apparently, is now something that is only for the wealthy and those who court them. Someone, probably a lot of someones, will get repaid in full for their dough.

The only way out of this is major ironclad reform on spending limits, but now that the foxes have occupied the chicken coop, there are no chickens who are brave enough to go back in the coop to fight the foxes. It will take millions of us chickens to change this situation by public referendum. A million chickens can fight and win against a couple of hundred foxes when the chickens get mad enough to fight the foxes instead of each other.

Capping the amount spent on a dollar per registered voter in each state would be a good start to ending all this. Break the rule, lose the job, period.

Celebrating corruption is a poor celebration.
I always thought that it would be better if WE (the taxpayers) paid for the campaigns. No special interest money, no private donations big or small. Just tax dollars. Set a limit for state and national races, use the money as you see fit, when the money is gone its gone so use it wisely.

Money buys influence and a candidate's ear. I would rather we pay for elections and it is OUR influence that candidates are listening to. It'll never happen of course, just as spending limits will never happen. Every election will be more expensive and every election will mean increasing influence by special interests.

I don't look at the Hagan defeat as celebrating corruption. I look at it as an example of no matter how many dollars thrown at a candidate, the PEOPLE still spoke. Would another million have made a difference? A nother two million or five million? I would like to think that it would not have made any difference and she still would have lost. If I could have selfishly picked a slogan for the campaign it would have been "Throw Them ALL Out". Every single one of them good and bad. A complete unheavel of the system. A complete new start. Regardless of how good or bad a candidate (any candidate) was a "throw them all out" mentality (if it had swept the nation) might have been a good thing. It would have shaken our candidates to the very core. And that would have been OK.

Inexperience and newness to the political machine couldn't have done any worse than the experienced but corrupt losers we have now. Another one of those "it would never happen" things, but hey a girl can dream, can't she?

I like your post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-08-2014, 03:13 PM
Location: Old Mother Idaho
21,230 posts, read 14,256,943 times
Reputation: 15725
Good points, Juneau, but throwing out the baby with the bathwater isn't one I agree with. Not every incumbent is bad, even if they go along with accepting money that's handed to them for campaigning. Experience does count in Washington. A lot- we don't have a system where common institutional experience comes with change of leadership in Congress. There has to be someone, many someones, who show the Freshmen the ropes.

What is more troublesome to me are the dark groups who now butt into a campaign with or without their candidate's approval with advertising. Even if they hate it, the candidate becomes only a figurehead for these outfits; they put thoughts into the mouths of the people they support when the person they supposedly like so much would never say those words. l
…and there is nothing at all to stop them.
What is the candidate going to do? Say "I never said those words! Don't listen to those people because they are supporting me for the wrong purposes!" I don't think so.

I like your idea to use tax dollars. Along with a strict cap on dollars per voter, that's the most fair way of all for all, and a good first step in driving out the money out of politics. Those who are the worst will quickly quit on their own accord once easy unlimited money is no longer available. They'll simply go to work for those who filled their pockets if they can.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-08-2014, 03:57 PM
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
18,977 posts, read 15,430,064 times
Reputation: 3946
Originally Posted by disgruntled la native View Post
Not just Brown. Plenty of Democrats were given better than even chances. Charlie Crist, Greg Orman (sleazy socialist masquerading as independent), Pat Quinn, Kay Hagan. Plus various congressmen who were surprised and lost.

Kay Hagan was the sweetest victory of all. Extremely liberal in a moderate to conservative state but also extremely competent with her campaign. OVer 100 million spent. Yet still defeated.
Crist was a terrible candidate as was Scott. Scott had a huge spending advantage since he dumped tens of millions of his own $$$ into the race and that helped him sneak by in a race that those on both sides thought each candidate was terrible.

As far as Hagan goes, the $100 million was a combined total. Both sides spent an astronomical amount of $$$. In the end while she got the margin she needed in the key counties ( Mecklenburg, Wake, Durham) she didn't get the turnout. A Presidential year she wins. I wouldn't be surprised if she ran against Burr in 2016. If Cooper decides not to run for GOV (he seems almost certainly like he will) she goes for the very unpopular ultra conservative GOV in Mccoy and likely would defeat him
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-08-2014, 05:48 PM
4,212 posts, read 6,685,423 times
Reputation: 2636
McCrory's numbers could change. You all assume presidential years are going to be permanently like 2008 and 2012 now where certain voters turn out in big numbers for Democrats and conservatives stay home. We don't know that for a fact. Remember as recently as 2004 a presidential year was great for Republicans at all levels. Burr hasn't done much wrong so while I'm sure he'll have a race he can't be considered super vulnerable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-08-2014, 07:33 PM
33,046 posts, read 21,948,544 times
Reputation: 8962

Surfaris - Wipe Out - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.

Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:02 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top