For Sale: Governor of California. Price? $150 Million Dollars+

Modbert

Daydream Believer
Sep 2, 2008
33,178
3,055
48
Thriftless Meg Whitman Gives Another $20 Million to Her Campaign

Pushy California gubernatorial candidate and ex-eBay CEO Meg Whitman has given her campaign another $20 million of her personal wealth, bringing the total to $90 million, mostly to win a primary. What is wrong with her?

Whitman, who spent approximately $56 per vote to win her Republican primary, has signaled that she will spend up to $150 million of her own fortune to purchase this election. Who does she think she's kidding? We all know that she'll spend more than that.

She's really confusing the entire world, here, with this incredible desire to purchase the World's Worst Job.

Meg Whitman just wants to be president and needs one of those "governor" jobs on her resume. Which is fine! Go nuts, if that's your thing...

Thoughts USMB? Does Meg Whitman just simply want to use the Governor job of California as a stepping stone to the White House?
 
Do you have some sort of problem with someone spending their own money to get elected? Doesn't that make more sense than getting donations from a bunch of bigwigs and special interests who will expect a return on their investment?
 
Do you have some sort of problem with someone spending their own money to get elected? Doesn't that make more sense than getting donations from a bunch of bigwigs and special interests who will expect a return on their investment?

Or, just simply refuse all donations from said special interests and accept donations from actual people.

Amazing concept eh?
 
Do you have some sort of problem with someone spending their own money to get elected? Doesn't that make more sense than getting donations from a bunch of bigwigs and special interests who will expect a return on their investment?

Or, just simply refuse all donations from said special interests and accept donations from actual people.

Amazing concept eh?

To bad no one is ever going to do it, or ever has.
 
Thriftless Meg Whitman Gives Another $20 Million to Her Campaign

Pushy California gubernatorial candidate and ex-eBay CEO Meg Whitman has given her campaign another $20 million of her personal wealth, bringing the total to $90 million, mostly to win a primary. What is wrong with her?

Whitman, who spent approximately $56 per vote to win her Republican primary, has signaled that she will spend up to $150 million of her own fortune to purchase this election. Who does she think she's kidding? We all know that she'll spend more than that.

She's really confusing the entire world, here, with this incredible desire to purchase the World's Worst Job.

Meg Whitman just wants to be president and needs one of those "governor" jobs on her resume. Which is fine! Go nuts, if that's your thing...

Thoughts USMB? Does Meg Whitman just simply want to use the Governor job of California as a stepping stone to the White House?

Does the phrase "ignorant partisan hack" ring any bells in your hollow little head? It ought to.
How much money did Mike Bloomberg spend to become mayor of NYC?
How much money did Hillary Clinton spend (including $5M of her own money) to become POTUS?
How much did John Kerry spend of his wife's money to become whatever he's run for over the last 15 years?

So freaking what? It's their money. Let them spend it like they want.
But this is the result of "campaign finance reform." Only people really good at fundraising and the independently wealthy can run for office anymore.
 
Thriftless Meg Whitman Gives Another $20 Million to Her Campaign

Pushy California gubernatorial candidate and ex-eBay CEO Meg Whitman has given her campaign another $20 million of her personal wealth, bringing the total to $90 million, mostly to win a primary. What is wrong with her?

Whitman, who spent approximately $56 per vote to win her Republican primary, has signaled that she will spend up to $150 million of her own fortune to purchase this election. Who does she think she's kidding? We all know that she'll spend more than that.

She's really confusing the entire world, here, with this incredible desire to purchase the World's Worst Job.

Meg Whitman just wants to be president and needs one of those "governor" jobs on her resume. Which is fine! Go nuts, if that's your thing...

Thoughts USMB? Does Meg Whitman just simply want to use the Governor job of California as a stepping stone to the White House?

What do you expect? This is what American politics has been reduced to. And our USSC just allowed corporations to give even MORE money to candidates. IIRC, Obama spent well over $700 MILLION to help win the White House in 2008!
 
Does the phrase "ignorant partisan hack" ring any bells in your hollow little head? It ought to.
How much money did Mike Bloomberg spend to become mayor of NYC?
How much money did Hillary Clinton spend (including $5M of her own money) to become POTUS?
How much did John Kerry spend of his wife's money to become whatever he's run for over the last 15 years?

So freaking what? It's their money. Let them spend it like they want.
But this is the result of "campaign finance reform." Only people really good at fundraising and the independently wealthy can run for office anymore.

Go find me a thread where I defended Bloomberg, Hillary or Kerry's spending. Otherwise, all you're doing is creating a strawman there scarecrow.
 
Does the phrase "ignorant partisan hack" ring any bells in your hollow little head? It ought to.
How much money did Mike Bloomberg spend to become mayor of NYC?
How much money did Hillary Clinton spend (including $5M of her own money) to become POTUS?
How much did John Kerry spend of his wife's money to become whatever he's run for over the last 15 years?

So freaking what? It's their money. Let them spend it like they want.
But this is the result of "campaign finance reform." Only people really good at fundraising and the independently wealthy can run for office anymore.

Go find me a thread where I defended Bloomberg, Hillary or Kerry's spending. Otherwise, all you're doing is creating a strawman there scarecrow.
Talk about scarecrows, junior. Did anyone say you had? No.
Show me a thread where any conservative complained about the above mentioned spending their own money on their campaigns and we can have an issue.
 
Do you have some sort of problem with someone spending their own money to get elected? Doesn't that make more sense than getting donations from a bunch of bigwigs and special interests who will expect a return on their investment?

Or, just simply refuse all donations from said special interests and accept donations from actual people.

Amazing concept eh?

Ya why didn't Obama do that? after all his campaign claimed the little people was were he got all his money.
 
It's a little odd to see someone spend that much money to get a job that pays $175,000. a year. You think she's not going to cater to corporations, with her background?
Welcome to Corporatist America.
>
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power."
Benito Mussolini
 
It's a little odd to see someone spend that much money to get a job that pays $175,000. a year. You think she's not going to cater to corporations, with her background?
Welcome to Corporatist America.
>
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power."
Benito Mussolini

Probably what you mean to say is, "Don't you think she is going to work with corporations to help build wealth for California instead of destroying them or driving them out of state?"
That's probably it, right?
 
It's a little odd to see someone spend that much money to get a job that pays $175,000. a year. You think she's not going to cater to corporations, with her background?
Welcome to Corporatist America.
>
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power."
Benito Mussolini

The same could have been said for Jefferson, Washington, Kennedy, Roosevelt, and almost every other Presidential Candidate: They didn't want the job because it paid well.

I don't know if she'll "Cater to Corporations" (whatever that means): However, I'm sure she'll be more savvey to corporate activities that could endanger the nation than career bureaucrats and politicians (Bush, Clinton, GW, Obama).
 
If Whitman, or anyone else, could pull California out of the mess they're in, then they will have earned the right to use it as a stepping stone for whatever they want.
 
Talk about scarecrows, junior. Did anyone say you had? No.
Show me a thread where any conservative complained about the above mentioned spending their own money on their campaigns and we can have an issue.

You called me a ignorant partisan hack unless you somehow decided to make a general statement while responding to my post.

What you're doing right now is creating strawmen.
 
Thoughts USMB? Does Meg Whitman just simply want to use the Governor job of California as a stepping stone to the White House?

I don't understand how anyone could spend that kind of money running for a job that will pay you less than a tenth of a percent of that a year.
 
Talk about scarecrows, junior. Did anyone say you had? No.
Show me a thread where any conservative complained about the above mentioned spending their own money on their campaigns and we can have an issue.

You called me a ignorant partisan hack unless you somehow decided to make a general statement while responding to my post.

What you're doing right now is creating strawmen.

There's no strawmen except in your posts, junior.
You titled this thread. You implied she was trying to buy her way into the governor's mansion with her own money.
I simply respond to that. What's your problem?
 

Forum List

Back
Top