How do you "buy" an election?

[LoneLaugher]

Then why is it spent?

 

[Leweman]

This whole buying the election thing is a bit overrated Meg Whitman spent 142 million and lost Linda McMahon spent 47 million and lost Carly Fiorina spent 5 1/2 million and also lost. While having the big bucks does help it guarantees nothing unless you have a message that people believe in.

Except if the democrat message is so strong and righteous! and if they lose, though, its for sure because of a money difference. Quit being ridiculous.

 

[candycorn]

We get the government we deserve. So it's #3 of the three choices. You over simplify the issue however. Millions are spent on advertising that doesn't work arguably every day. Movies that are well funded bomb all the time.

What I think you're discounting is the effectiveness of negative campaigning. You're not lured toward something as much as you're pushed away from something else.

This is why the two parties put out pig slop for the American public to consume in two troughs only. The only they they agree on is keeping only the two troughs available. It's much harder to push you away from two sides of a triangle than away from a single side, you see. If you put three guys on the stage, you may find someone in the middle you like better than the extremes.

Whether being pushed or pulled, if your opinion is swayed by a 1 minute commercial then you're an idiot.

If you see 60 commercials from groups opposed to initiative X or Y, that's an hour's worth of badgering. At what point do you think being persuaded by the passive viewing is justified?

 

[candycorn]

We get the government we deserve. So it's #3 of the three choices. You over simplify the issue however. Millions are spent on advertising that doesn't work arguably every day. Movies that are well funded bomb all the time.

What I think you're discounting is the effectiveness of negative campaigning. You're not lured toward something as much as you're pushed away from something else.

This is why the two parties put out pig slop for the American public to consume in two troughs only. The only they they agree on is keeping only the two troughs available. It's much harder to push you away from two sides of a triangle than away from a single side, you see. If you put three guys on the stage, you may find someone in the middle you like better than the extremes.

Whether being pushed or pulled, if your opinion is swayed by a 1 minute commercial then you're an idiot.

Whether being pushed or pulled, if your opinion is swayed by a post on a message board too? Right?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Dumb thread of the day

 

[Wacky Quacky]

We get the government we deserve. So it's #3 of the three choices. You over simplify the issue however. Millions are spent on advertising that doesn't work arguably every day. Movies that are well funded bomb all the time.

What I think you're discounting is the effectiveness of negative campaigning. You're not lured toward something as much as you're pushed away from something else.

This is why the two parties put out pig slop for the American public to consume in two troughs only. The only they they agree on is keeping only the two troughs available. It's much harder to push you away from two sides of a triangle than away from a single side, you see. If you put three guys on the stage, you may find someone in the middle you like better than the extremes.

Whether being pushed or pulled, if your opinion is swayed by a 1 minute commercial then you're an idiot.

Whether being pushed or pulled, if your opinion is swayed by a post on a message board too? Right?

My opinion is never swayed by a message board, or a commercial, or internet ads. If one of the afore mentioned media catches my attention the first thing I do is research what I heard/read.

 

[StevenC]

More than $76 MILLION DOLLARS to Mitt in May.

How is that NOT buying votes?

Seriously. This is not working people deciding how much they can spare and sending him a few bucks. Most of us have no idea how much seventy six million dollars is but that's how much kochs and other Bug Money gave him in just one month.

At that rate, Democracy has no chance. And, THAT is the whole point.

The R has been doing everything they can to make sure they win this election and being legal isn't important to them. Voter suppression means the days of "one vote, one person" are long gone.

My question is - Why aren't the Republicans and the rw's demanding an honest election and an end to SuperPacs? Why is it only the Dems who want it honest and democratic?

It never ceases to amaze me how the left never had a problem with money in elections when they had the upper hand. But as soon as the right gets the upper hand they start whining about how it is unfair. How the right is trying to steal the election and so on.
Tell me this. If you are against a politician buying an electing when will you demand Obama step down? He clearly outspent McCain yet you on the left had no problem with that.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

They sell them at CVS.... right next to the Colt 45.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Dumb thread of the day

Well, then you're in the right place...

 

[Claudette]

More than $76 MILLION DOLLARS to Mitt in May.

How is that NOT buying votes?

Seriously. This is not working people deciding how much they can spare and sending him a few bucks. Most of us have no idea how much seventy six million dollars is but that's how much kochs and other Bug Money gave him in just one month.

At that rate, Democracy has no chance. And, THAT is the whole point.

The R has been doing everything they can to make sure they win this election and being legal isn't important to them. Voter suppression means the days of "one vote, one person" are long gone.

My question is - Why aren't the Republicans and the rw's demanding an honest election and an end to SuperPacs? Why is it only the Dems who want it honest and democratic?

It never ceases to amaze me how the left never had a problem with money in elections when they had the upper hand. But as soon as the right gets the upper hand they start whining about how it is unfair. How the right is trying to steal the election and so on.
Tell me this. If you are against a politician buying an electing when will you demand Obama step down? He clearly outspent McCain yet you on the left had no problem with that.

Yup they had no problem with Obama outspending McCain. He didnt' buy the election.

Hell. I listed to Fat Ed grousing about how much the Reps had outspent the Dems and thats the reason Walker won.

Of course Walker is a Rep so he bought the election.

Obamas won fair and square. Oh wait. He's a Dem, Never mind.

 

[flacaltenn]

Been hearing a lot of this floating around since the failed Walker recall. So, let's discuss it.

How exactly does someone "buy" an election? Which is it:

1) Are they paying people to vote a certain way?

2) Are they paying the vote counters to count a certain way?

3) Are they paying for a bunch of advertisements?

If you think the answer is number 1 or 2 then that's a pretty big claim and would need some serious evidence to prove. If you think the answer is number 3 then isn't that more of an indication of the american people being easily led idiots? Mass advertisements are only as effective as we allow them to be. It's not a problem with people spending money for commercials, it's a problem with americans being easily distracted by shiny objects and catch phrases.

Again, the true blame lies with what you see in the mirror. The american people are the zero sum of the country's problems.

Definitely #3..

Unfortunately Americans choose their leaders and public servants like they choose their soft drinks.. So it works.. Instead of complaining about the money --- they should look in a mirror and work to have society place more value on "INFORMED CONSENT"..

 

[Truthmatters]

Been hearing a lot of this floating around since the failed Walker recall. So, let's discuss it.

How exactly does someone "buy" an election? Which is it:

1) Are they paying people to vote a certain way?

2) Are they paying the vote counters to count a certain way?

3) Are they paying for a bunch of advertisements?

If you think the answer is number 1 or 2 then that's a pretty big claim and would need some serious evidence to prove. If you think the answer is number 3 then isn't that more of an indication of the american people being easily led idiots? Mass advertisements are only as effective as we allow them to be. It's not a problem with people spending money for commercials, it's a problem with americans being easily distracted by shiny objects and catch phrases.

Again, the true blame lies with what you see in the mirror. The american people are the zero sum of the country's problems.

Let me splain this to you Lucy.


You buy a shit load of lying fucking adds to confuse the people.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Imagine the simpletons that fell for meaningless adolescent slogans like "Hope & Change" and "Yes We Can".................

Those idiots were bought off cheap................

 

[StevenC]

More than $76 MILLION DOLLARS to Mitt in May.

How is that NOT buying votes?

Seriously. This is not working people deciding how much they can spare and sending him a few bucks. Most of us have no idea how much seventy six million dollars is but that's how much kochs and other Bug Money gave him in just one month.

At that rate, Democracy has no chance. And, THAT is the whole point.

The R has been doing everything they can to make sure they win this election and being legal isn't important to them. Voter suppression means the days of "one vote, one person" are long gone.

My question is - Why aren't the Republicans and the rw's demanding an honest election and an end to SuperPacs? Why is it only the Dems who want it honest and democratic?

It never ceases to amaze me how the left never had a problem with money in elections when they had the upper hand. But as soon as the right gets the upper hand they start whining about how it is unfair. How the right is trying to steal the election and so on.
Tell me this. If you are against a politician buying an electing when will you demand Obama step down? He clearly outspent McCain yet you on the left had no problem with that.

Yup they had no problem with Obama outspending McCain. He didnt' buy the election.

Hell. I listed to Fat Ed grousing about how much the Reps had outspent the Dems and thats the reason Walker won.

Of course Walker is a Rep so he bought the election.

Obamas won fair and square. Oh wait. He's a Dem, Never mind.

And this is their problem with citizens united. It takes away the advantage they had with the unions pouring money into elections. Of course they will lie through there teeth about that.

 

[StevenC]

Been hearing a lot of this floating around since the failed Walker recall. So, let's discuss it.

How exactly does someone "buy" an election? Which is it:

1) Are they paying people to vote a certain way?

2) Are they paying the vote counters to count a certain way?

3) Are they paying for a bunch of advertisements?

If you think the answer is number 1 or 2 then that's a pretty big claim and would need some serious evidence to prove. If you think the answer is number 3 then isn't that more of an indication of the american people being easily led idiots? Mass advertisements are only as effective as we allow them to be. It's not a problem with people spending money for commercials, it's a problem with americans being easily distracted by shiny objects and catch phrases.

Again, the true blame lies with what you see in the mirror. The american people are the zero sum of the country's problems.

Let me splain this to you Lucy.


You buy a shit load of lying fucking adds to confuse the people.

So you are saying Obama confused the people in 08?

 

[paulitician]

A pack of smokes and a 40.

 

[paulitician]

Democrats greatly exaggerate the costs of buying Elections. Ask groups like ACORN how much it costs them to buy Elections. It's much much cheaper than most think.

 

[HUGGY]

How do you "buy" an election?


You start by paying off the debts acrued by your opponents in the primary thereby getting thier endorsements...which usually makes the supporters of your opposition want to physically throw up. That activity makes it clear that everyone's vote and support is for sale. Quite disgusting really.

 

[paulitician]

This question still hasn't been answered satifactorily. Especially by the Left, who are known to screech hysterically about it. For instance, Romney raised $76 Million in May, compared to Obama's $60 Million. Now how exactly does that extra cash Romney raised, translate into 'Buying an Election?' Both Candidates are raising a crazy amount of cash. I'll wait for the Left to give us a logical & coherent answer on this.

 

[flacaltenn]

How Do you Buy an Election?

You get elected..

The REAL bribery and kickbacks and voter influence occurs AFTER the election when the next crop of mental midgets start parceling out the bootie. DWARFS anything that Soros or Koch can do with sketchy TV/Radio Ads..

The LEFT parcels out BILLIONS in promises for a risk-free life, free food, free retirement, free medical care, literally free money, and lots of windmills and parties. Literally "bread and circuses"

The RIGHT just seems to promise to fiscal sanity by furthering corporate subsidies, saying nice things about the flag and Capitalism. Not a particularly lucrative "voter benefit" package, but not everyone believes in a "free lunch" or "unlimited debt ceilings".

The BIGGER the Dems and Reps allow the Govt to get -- the more power they have to "BUY ELECTIONS".. That's the simple truth guys..

It's NOT the lobbyists and the money they have --- the CAUSE is the power to hand it out like candy and get rewarded at election time..... Try to deny it at your peril.....