Obama not to be trusted - Breaks his promise to America

[HAL 9000 96]

more yawn

More nausea.

about right Nagi.

*Waiting for actual issues*

McCain won't stick to it either ... just wait. The only reason he won't admit it now is because he wants to get some mileage out of this. In the end, McCain's will be the bigger hypocricy too, because he's Mr. Campaign Finance Reform.

As I said... both will seem eerily familiar in that sense. Its a game played but the difference will most likely be the source of the funds on both sides of the game.

If both would agree to a cap, public or 'private' that would be totally awesome.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

If both would agree to a cap, public or 'private' that would be totally awesome.

I disagree.

Not one individual contributor who wishes to contribute should be told their support is not welcome. I have no problem with a cap on individual contributions (which already exists) but to cap the total would be wrong.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

more yawn

More nausea.

about right Nagi.

*Waiting for actual issues*

McCain won't stick to it either ... just wait. The only reason he won't admit it now is because he wants to get some mileage out of this. In the end, McCain's will be the bigger hypocricy too, because he's Mr. Campaign Finance Reform.

Well he has already been criticized by the FEC. Neither of the candidates seem to be playing to the rules - which is why I say there's more to this than "OMG! so-and-so broke a promise! OMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMG!!!!! OMG!!!!!

[Peikko 1,575]

I think they should both give all that election money to charitable trusts and not bother with any advertising campaigns - that would be interesting.

[zqt3344 21]

Now that is productive idea. Think of all the time, money and resources wasted on this stuff, and the false jobs we create for news or media networks it is just disgusting.

I think they should both give all that election money to charitable trusts and not bother with any advertising campaigns - that would be interesting.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think they should both give all that election money to charitable trusts and not bother with any advertising campaigns - that would be interesting.

The ads are garbage anyway - they don't even promote the candidate who has paid for them, as much as tell you why you shouldn't vote for the other guy.

[Cassie 8]

I say limit the election campaign to 2 months. That would save time, money and aggravation.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I say limit the election campaign to 2 months. That would save time, money and aggravation.

Limiting time would be a great idea.

I would oppose limiting money though. Organic support should be encouraged, not contained.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Perhaps I should go to a job interview and instead of telling the interviewer how good I am, I should tell them how bad everyone else is...

Would I get the job?

Doubtful

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Perhaps I should go to a job interview and instead of telling the interviewer how good I am, I should tell them how bad everyone else is...

Would I get the job?

Doubtful

If you knew the competition, yes. That's a big part of executive job interviews - "differentiating" yourself from the competition.

[Cassie 8]

I say limit the election campaign to 2 months. That would save time, money and aggravation.

Limiting time would be a great idea.

I would oppose limiting money though. Organic support should be encouraged, not contained.

Oh, I agree with you on that one -- I don't understand why people are pissed off that he's taking personal money (which is capped) instead of using taxpayer money!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Perhaps I should go to a job interview and instead of telling the interviewer how good I am, I should tell them how bad everyone else is...

Would I get the job?

Doubtful

If you knew the competition, yes. That's a big part of executive job interviews - "differentiating" yourself from the competition.

I could say that so-and-so cheats on his taxes and doesn't keep his promises

[symbiosis 0]

McCain will stick to it because he stands to get more money that way than through actual supporters.

Obama's support is organic, he doesn't need taxpayer funds.

If he sticks to it, he's going to be seriously outspent , because of the limits. But then, I think his campaign strategy will be to make all the horrible racist slurs through the 527s anyway ("we don't know WHO these people are and, unfortunately, we can't do anything to stop them!"). So, maybe it doesn't matter, anyway.

[HAL 9000 96]

If both would agree to a cap, public or 'private' that would be totally awesome.

I disagree.

Not one individual contributor who wishes to contribute should be told their support is not welcome. I have no problem with a cap on individual contributions (which already exists) but to cap the total would be wrong.

Sky's the limit then... At least with a total cap you'd not have to worry about fundraising after a certain point...

I don't know... maybe then we could set up a candidate deathmatch or something like that to fill in the void left by frivolous special-interest groups being left out.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Sky's the limit then... At least with a total cap you'd not have to worry about fundraising after a certain point...

I don't know... maybe then we could set up a candidate deathmatch or something like that to fill in the void left by frivolous special-interest groups being left out.

Yes, if we're talking about individuals expressing their support for a candidate of their choice, the sky should be the limit. This is America.

Note that I'm referring to individuals and not organizations of any kind.