McCain Has More Money than Obama?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by stevento, Oct 30, 2008.

  1. stevento macrumors 6502

    stevento

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #1
    Obama raised over $150,000,000 in September and has a total of over $600,000,000 raised.... but somehow McCain - who is restricted to the measly $85M from public financing - has $20M more in cash on hand, so says this email I got from Obama.

    https://donate.barackobama.com/page/contribute/RNCadvantage1?source=20081030_MM_D1

    Obama must win this election. America couldn't afford four more years of the same in 2004 and we lost then and look where we are now!


    Also, I updated my homework site. More videos, more attacks.
    click here: www.cs.lmu.edu/~jbillingsley or click in my signature.
     
  2. Peace macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
  3. geese macrumors 6502a

    geese

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2003
    Location:
    London, UK
    #3
    They raised that on the 15th October - not much evidence that they've spent much of that.

    Dont forget though, that the McCain campaign has been rather shabby, and not very well organised.

    I'd donate if I was eligible.
     
  4. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #4
    You're looking at combined McCain/RNC and Obama/DNC totals, not just candidate versus candidate.

    Why do you think McCain was so desperate to force Obama into public spending limits? Because the RNC as a fundraising machine is unmatched -- even by Obama's impressive numbers. There are an awful lot of rich Republicans and donations to the national parties are not capped at the same low limits as to campaigns, IIRC.

    Of course, the national parties *nudge nudge* are *wink wink* not supposed to be coordinating *say no more* with the campaigns, but somehow the DNC and RNC just seem to know where their respective campaigns need money spent.

    However, the RNC is also forced to play defense for the Congressional arms of the GOP, who -- again, IIRC -- have been handily outraised by the DSCC and DCCC this time around. I think if you throw in the Congressional fundraising, the Dems come out with a slight advantage though.
     
  5. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #5
    I will say the fact Obama has raised and spent so much money more so wasted so much money on campaigning makes me loose a lot of respect for them.

    600 mil... and right now we are in a financial mess. That 600 mil could be put to so many better usesages than campaign spending.

    You have to give McCain a lot of respect in the fact that he stuck to public Financing and choose a much more reasonable number in campaign spending.

    I would love to see a law pass that limited Campaign spending to 100 mil and adjust it to inflation. 600 mil is a complete huge waste of money.
     
  6. geese macrumors 6502a

    geese

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2003
    Location:
    London, UK
    #6
    That 600 million was raised by private donations specifically for the Obama campaign though, its not like he's using taxpayers money.

    You could say that its a shame that the 4 billion Americans spend on porn could be put to better use - its their own choice as it is with donating to campaigns.

    I agree that campaign spending should be capped though.
     
  7. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #7
    I might like to point out that the public finanicing does not come out tax payers. When you do your taxes there is an option to put like 3-4 bucks something like that into Public Financing fund. It is not a line item part of the budget.

    Instead of standing up and making a point about spending such huge chunks of money from the private donation. Obama could make a point and reduce the spending. The point about McCain and the RNC having more money than Obama/DNC while true it not because they raised more but because they have spent less.

    I stand by my point the amount of money spent on this election is out of hand. If you look back over history spending on the campaigns is massively out passing inflation. We are already over 1.2 billion this year. By the end election I expect to see that number cross 1.3-1.4 billion total.
     
  8. geese macrumors 6502a

    geese

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2003
    Location:
    London, UK
    #8
    You're right. On principle.

    But the election is a battle, where you've got to out-wit, out-think and out-spend your opponent. Its an arms race. McCain could might have the moral high ground in not being so profligate with his election spending, but look where he is now?

    Obama had to bring all the guns out for his campaign, like it or not, that's how elections are won.
     
  9. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #9
    But oh noes! You're advocating the abridgement of free speech. Turn in your conservative bona fides card at the nearest exit please...
     
  10. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #10
    If that was true free speech would cost billions. Free speech doesn't mean you need to spend a lot of money.
     
  11. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #11
    As I recall, no less an authority than the SCOTUS has ruled that money = speech.
     
  12. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #12
    Free speech is free, pay to speech costs money.
     
  13. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #13
    I do find it funny how people who complained 4 years ago about how much bush spent are just fine with Obama spending a hell of a lot more.

    Let me put it this way at the rate campaign cost are ramping up it will soon increase the coruption in goverment far beyond where it is. The campaign financing is quickly turning into bribs to do what the person offering wants.

    Our elective president is just being brib to do what we want them to do.

    Now saying campiagn finance reform is conservative now THAT is a new one.... Normally it is the other way around so I say you should tell your self to head to the nearest exit....
     
  14. abijnk macrumors 68040

    abijnk

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #14
    POST OF THE DAY!!!!!

    Pssst, that's what elected officials are supposed to do, the will of the people. That's why is great that Obama is making all of his money off of small donors like me and my fiance, because now he is accountable to us, American people.
     
  15. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #15

    LOL you think you little donation means crap... No it is the ones who donate big money that matter.

    it is not the will of the people. The will of the people who not require me getting into my pocket book and having to pay money.

    No my will as one of the people for an elected official should not require ONE PENNY out of my pocket much less anything else. The should be held accountable to everyone. Not just the people who put money into it.

    With out something to slow this down we will be spending 2 bil+ in 4 years. Somethings needs to be done to bring this INSANE amount of spending under control. It would make them much more true to the will of the people. Not special interested groups. We are country run by the will of the minority (aka special interested groups.) because that who gives them the money. With out that money they could not convince the people they are the best thing for them. If there was a limit and a reasonable limit (which is a less than what being spent right now) we would get people more of the true will of the people. No longer controlled by the people with the money.
     
  16. abijnk macrumors 68040

    abijnk

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #16
    Ok, you took that a little too literal... My point was that you were complaining, in the line that I quoted, that politicians are being bribed to do the will of the people. In Obama's case, he is apparently being bribed to do the will of the people by actual people, making your point silly.
     
  17. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #17
    Average donation to the Obama campaign: $86.

    I'll be calling him up after the election expecting lots of return favors. He's in my pocket. ;)
     
  18. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #18

    Believe me, he'll sort you out. He'll enable you to quit your job and live off welfare, comrade.
     
  19. jplan2008 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    #19
  20. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #20
    I do find it funny how people who didn't complain 4 years ago about how much Bush spent are now complaining about Obama spending even more.

    :D

    If you think "pay to play" is a new phenomenon, you are dangerously naive.

    I do find it funny how people who didn't complain 4 years ago about the "K Street Project" are now complaining about how badly money corrupts those in power.

    Oh you and that rapier wit of yours... I'm sorry, who was one of the co-sponsors of the campaign finance laws recently enacted? Someone-Feingold, as I recall. Perhaps you could fill in that blank for us?

    Also, I would note that the notion that money = speech is one that generally comes from the right, not the left.
     
  21. stevento thread starter macrumors 6502

    stevento

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #21
    All this time, I got the idea, from the media that Obama was outraising and outspending McCain 3 and 4 times over and that McCain was so far behind, he had no chance. But now I'm starting to doubt that he'll win. I've donated money to Obama, I've committed a web site to him, I've support him all that I can. If he does not win, he will be known forever as the guy who talked a big game and raised nearly 3/4 of a billion dollars, but still led us to our 3rd consecutive defeat.

    John McCain brilliantly picked a hell raiser as his VP. and somehow he managed to get to a point where he's got $10M more cash on hand than Obama the weekend before the election. I dont know how he is doing this, but if he pulls off an upset, the story is not going to be "John McCain's big comeback". the story is going to be "how did the democrats manage to lose this one?" This is not McCain's election. It's Obama's. This is his election to win or lose.


    I will only say this much more... if Obama loses, it's jumpin' off. i aint lyin'. that is all.
     
  22. Beric macrumors 68020

    Beric

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #22
    The fact that every year, it comes down to a money race, makes me lose hope that American are capable of actual rational thought and thorough investigation, and are simply waiting in front of their televisions waiting to be convinced by whoever spends the most money. Campaigns didn't use to be about money. People actually evaluated candidates based on integrity, positions, character, and experience. But with the influx of ill-informed, easily-swayed voters, our political process is down to whoever spends the most money the most effectively. Imagine if the hundreds of millions of dollars spent by both campaigns hadn't been spent, and instead, voters were thoroughly investigating the candidates on their own initiative. That's the American political process at its finest. Politics is the way it is now not because of capitalism applied to politics, but because a large number of voters can't think for themselves and want others to do it for them.
     
  23. jplan2008 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    #23
    What years are you referring to when it was "based on integrity, positions, character, and experience?"

    What influx of ... voters? Who is part of this group you're talking about? When?
     
  24. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #24
    The religious right. For once I agree with Beric on this. It's quite an astute observation.
     
  25. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #25
    The religious right hardly has a monopoly on this.
     

Share This Page