Letters to the Editor
-
democracy!!!
Interesting article if only from the perspective of reinforcing the belief that American politics isn't about democracy, but about power for its own sake, I actually feel sorry for a country that has a political system based on who has the fattest wallet, and this is what you want to export, good luck with that one then.
-
Wretched Excess
Like the candidates, I have spent the past few weeks asking my candidate's supporters to give money. I don't mind doing it because I realize that especially in this 21st century voting is not enough to effect change, to get a candidate elected. If you want the opportunity to vote for your choice, then you have to give your candidate some money and persuade others to cough up a few dollars as well.
But the figures that are posted at the close of the first quarter are mind-boggling to the average voter. It shouldn't cost this much to get elected to an office in public service, not even to the presidency. The money ultimately raised and spent would be equal to the operating budget of a small to mid sized corporation! Are we electing a president or a Dollar Store?
Yes, I'd be interested in learning how it is being used. In poker, the one with the most money has the advantage because he can simply make a hand so costly that it's not worth the risk to the other players; he simply buys the hands. I wonder if a similar strategy can be used on the campaign trail--can a candidate simply buy support and ultimately the office?
In South Carolina, news reports surfaced of Hillary "employing" an African-American state senator Jackson to do "pr work" for $10,000 month. That state senator also tried--unsuccessfully--to get Obama uninvited from an appearance before the South Carolina Black Political Caucus, although Hillary was allowed to speak without any controversy. Does this $10,000 come from her campaign chest?
The story is why, oh why, are people giving so much money to Hillary Clinton? Who are the people giving her so much money? With the limit set at $2300, that's a lot of donors. Who are they?
-
It Matters More Than Ever
The Jimmy Carter Model has been rendered next to impossible by the current structure. That model called for you to slog away for months quietly building grass roots organizations in Iowa and New Hampshire where you could pull off upsets. Get a little notoriety and let the money flow, giving you a shot as the races headed to the south.
Bush for whom I worked in 1980 sought to parlay that strategy after having seen Carter succeed with it. Clinton deployed it to an extent. Dean and McCain snuck up on people as well.
But primary selection procedures shift with the tides. Bush 2 pushed for open primaries fearing he was going to be challenged from the right by Steve Forbes and his millions. So Haley Barbour went for open primaries hoping for cross over to drown out flat taxing max spending Forbes.
As we all now McCain sprang up on the left of Bush, essentially boxing him out and forcing him to lurch rightward with an obscene smear campaign in South Carolina. At the same time Haley Barbour had to move to the talk shows to demonize the very primary process of crossover voting he fought to install. Oh the irony.
This time around it is more state desire to be relevent to the process, and as such, there are many that are front end loaded to February 5th. (By contrast, the NH primary in 1980 was near the end of February.)
That means there's about two weeks from Iowa Caucus to the super tuesday that could decide the races. That means if you are doing it on a wing and a prayer hoping to parlay an early win into a bounce, you simply are not going to have the time to get the cash raised. You cannot go from dark house to full player with organizations and media buys in 20 states in two weeks.
So what will February 5th look like? I expect it to more closely resemble the final weeks of the national race when the two candidates criss cross the country for the three or so states that matter like, say Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania this last time around/
Only it will likely vary by party. Still, the candidates will focus on their best shots. Close winner take all states will get attention as will those that do proportional rewards.
It is going to take piles upon piles of cash. It is set up to play to the strength of the established candidates. This ought not surprise as Hillary has the hold over "machine" to leverage in much the same way Bush 2 had access to those levers from his father's tenure.
I think this in reaction to our having both parties having open races without an incumbent president or veep running for the first time in decades. Each wants to wrap it up quickly while the other party gets into the knife fight in the life boat and beats the bejeezus out of their ultimate standard bearer, doing the opposition party's dirty work for them.
In that regard it is too bad. This *should* be a wide open year, but the states and national party apparatus want to wrap them up quickly.
It is my belief the viable candidates will have to be in the top three or four by November of this year to have half a shot. They are also going to need to have about $50M cash on hand going out of New Hampshire. Organizations will be nice, but media buys -- or internet metamarketing -- will be what wins or loses the thing for these guys.
I think Obama takes it and haven't a clue who will pop up on the Republican side. I think Huckabee has a shot given his christian credentials and his amenable demeanor. People are sick of the Clinton/Bush viciousness evidenced by Hillary's Geffen Gaffe. She doesn't play well in spite of the cash.
None of the republican ones energize the base that has stormed my party and turned it into a crusade. If it goes with history, though, they give it to McCain as the presumptive runner up as they have with Reagan, Bush 1, and Dole in recent memory.
So, the premise as posited fits with past cycles. This one is unique given the wide open nature of both primaries and the front end loading. It's designed to send the dark horses to the glue factory before even getting out of the starting gates.
More's the pity, in my opinion.