Posted on 12/04/2008 9:32:02 AM PST by lewisglad
If money talks, we'll likely soon hear the real reason why Barack Obama beat John McCain. Both men and the national parties will report to the Federal Election Commission today how much money they raised in October and November. And what the numbers will probably show is that Mr. Obama outspent Mr. McCain by the biggest margin in history, perhaps a quarter of a billion dollars.
It's been reported that the Obama campaign accepted donations from untraceable, pre-paid debit cards used by Daffy Duck, Bart Simpson, Family Guy, King Kong and other questionable characters. If the FEC follows up with a report on this, it should make for interesting reading.
Mr. Obama's victory marks the death of the campaign finance system. When it was created after Watergate in 1974, the campaign finance system had two goals: reduce the influence of money in politics and level the playing field for candidates.
This year it failed at both. OpenSecrets.org tells us a record $2.4 billion was spent on this presidential election. And with Mr. Obama's wide financial advantage, it's clear that money is playing a bigger role than ever and candidates are not competing on equal footing.
No presidential candidate will ever take public financing in the general election again and risk being outspent as badly as Mr. McCain was this year. And even liberals, who have long denied that money is political speech that should be protected by First Amendment, may now be forced to admit that their donations to Mr. Obama were a form of political expression.
Rather than showing the success of post-partisan politics, Mr. Obama's victory may show the enduring truth of the old Chicago Golden Rule: He who has the gold rules.
Mr. Rove is former deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
McCain was not a bad candidate. McCain is, in fact, much more in line with the sentiments of mainstream America than Obama ever was, or will be. McCain had the burden of defeating an "historic candidate" solidly backed by the media, and no money to push a message beyond his voting base.
mclame would have lost if obambi hadn’t spent a dime.
“Obama outspent Mr. McCain by the biggest margin in history, perhaps a quarter of a billion dollars.”
And a change of only 350,000 votes among a few battleground states would have meant a mclame victory. Some mandate....
The whole system sucks to be candid here.
McCain?... I never want to hear his name again, thanks.
Just wait until this strategy trickles down to the Senate races, and then all heck will break loose.
At least the presidential race is one race every four years. The Senate has 33 races every two years. Can you imagine what will happen with a Senate that is only two seats away from a Democrat super-majority?
-PJ
Not surprised to see Rove make the case that money was the difference. However, to get money, you have the run a candidate that excites those with money to give (in a legal context of giving). McCain wasn’t it because he lacked the ability to make a positive case for himself and his candidacy.
Karl Rove: McCain Couldn’t Compete
I would have stopped there. McCain was the worst candidate since Bob Dole. What’s worse is there wasn’t much difference between McCainez and the Big Zero so voters simply voted for the more authentic liberal.
Huge, huge miscalculation by the RNC thinking with McCainez the press would still love him. Talk about a Lucy and the football analogy.
Either that, or cheap, illegally picked lettuce wasn’t all that important to the voter.
Anyone who thinks that is delusional. McCain lost precisely because he was a lousy candidate. He was relieved when he lost.
“mclame would have lost if obambi hadn’t spent a dime.”
I beg to differ. Zero spent millions and suckered in voters will all kinds of “perks” some of which were free beer and body piercings. The Pied Piper of Chicago really snookered his following.
RE :McCain was not a bad candidate
Are you nuts? McCain’s/democrats campaign finance bill sounded great when it hurt fellow republicans, and got him McC the MSM praise for re-writing first amendment(MSM got more power). But it hurts him against BoB and now McC is a victim?? (He our General disarms his republicans in war and whines that he was personally shot unarmed??)
Rove who? Rove had a two election strategy, 2002+2004, at expense of 2006+2008 disasters, now this crap!
Oh sure, it was the money, it couldn’t have been McCain’s hostility to conservatives that was a problem. Or his pandering to illegal aliens, in the fashion of La Raza Man of the Year Karl Rove. Or Dubya’s Big Government “Compassionate Conservatism” and the collapse of the housing bubble. Rove is a fool to think that more money would have solved the problems plaguing the GOP last time around.
Bad sentance: Of course the true reason of the credit collapse was ignored by the MSM who were favoring the Democrats.
McCain lost for three reasons:
1) Pro-Obama media bias on an unprecedented scale
2) An outgoing REPUBLICAN President with sub-30% approval ratings
3) Obama’s massive spending advantage, both in advertisements and GOTV expenditures
RE McCain was the worst candidate since Bob Dole.
Good comparision 1996 vs 2008 but I personally liked Dole, he led successful destruction of 1993 democrats rule (16 years ago) by blocking and bringing down Clinton bills. And held senate opposition together 100% , did McCain ever lead the opposition to rats, helll, he wants to make BoB a success.
More “change”! Good work Hussein.
You think Barack Obama reflects the values of the average American voter?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.