By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
badgenome said:
Rath said:

@Badgenome. With public funding campaigns would mostly have to flourish on the candidate and the candidates positions. Currently elections are mostly decided by how many millions of dollars you can spend on ads attacking your rivals.

I suppose you could do a lot of good things by abridging freedom, but it's rarely worth it.

I don't think that's accurate, though. Money tends to follow popularity rather than the other way around, and uber rich candidates like Meg Whitman and Steve Forbes have had no luck buying their way to electoral victory.


That is because they still view the people as mega rich and not the job creators (gotta use the politically correct term).  Hell, you still have fools that believe Bush Jr. ran decent businesses when he actually only turned a profit on the Rangers deal.  All his other ventures were complete failures.  Pretty amazing that you can do basically jack shit and be elected.  Oh wait didn't we just do that again (I actually voted for him because I didn't like McCain nor his bitch (I mean Palin)).  Might as well elect the most unqualified person.  How about a person in a coma or a newborn baby?