Obama Ad a Hit!

[Uncle Remus]

I'm not going to disagree with that, though I think it's a matter of degree -- we couldn't have spent literally nothing over there, but we have drug it out and spent a huge amount -- but then I already said that I dislike BOTH parties, and I don't think either one is looking out for our best interests. However, that's a diversion: the topic was campaign spending.

The bottom line is that government spending is rampantly out of control in multiple areas; in the light of that fact, massive campaign spending looks frivolous and luxurious on a level that makes the ancient Romans appear level-headed.

Well, look at it this way: contributors gave money to Obama's campaign to spend to get elected.

Don't some Republicans want the government to spend their money the way they want?

I hope most folks have some bucks left over after this election to give to local charities and food banks since they're low due to the economy and a lot of families will seek this kinda temporary help during this time of the year.

 

[Goofyluver]

I guess you don't have an arguement on how raw numbers is turned into resounding success, huh???

Do you have an argument on how huge ratings are equate to a flop?

It's right to spend millions -- maybe billions -- on campaigns that are essentially out to sling mud at the other guy while at the same time our country is sinking deeper and deeper into debt? I understand your argument about the legality of contributions, and I understand the concept of "you have to spend the money in this pocket on those items only" . . . but on a larger scale, I disagree. We as a country have wasted -- totally and completely wasted -- an enormous amount of resources on this campaign. Resources that could've been put to better use elsewhere.

We as his supporters have chosen to donate to this cause. Because I, like millions of others, feel it to be very important...and worthy of our financial contribution.

Could I have donated my money elsewhere? Absolutely.

But, I chose to donate my money to a campaign that I think will bring needed change to this country.

I understand your argument...but it doesn't apply here. Because you're negating the responsbilities Barack Obama has as the candidate...those responsibilities that he MUST follow. He has no other choice.

So, essentially, your argument is with his supporters who chose to donate money to his campaign. And as I have stated, his supporters, including myself, donated to his cause in order to ensure his election into office.

Sure, he has supporters -- and if he chose to ask them to do something other than toot his horn with those funds, would they follow? If he asked them to use that money to really help some of the problem spots rather than spend it on campaigns, would they do it? Doing so would get him more free TV and more free press than he could ever buy. I'm thinking Kennedy-esque here: Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.

If he affected real change, I'd believe in him. THAT would be doing something to save this country.

Again...your argument is essentially with his supporters. Not with Obama himself. He has no choice but to put his campaign money to support his run for office.

And for the record, I donate to many other charitable causes.

This election, was VERY important to me. Barack Obama is the man I think we need in office. Accordingly, I donated money to his campaign. IMO, a very worthy cause.

 

[bicker]

Know what he could've done that would've really swayed me? He could've put that money -- an amount I can't really even fathom -- towards paying off the recent bailout.

It was such a small amount, in comparison, that it would constitute rounding error for the bailout. So small that Windows Calculator had to go to scientific notation (5.7E-6) to express the percentage.

Honestly, the amounts that've been wasted on this election are obscene. What could that money do for the public schools? For our wounded soldiers? For our debt?

The same could be said about how much people spend on cosmetics, or how much the country spends on war. Money is spent for purposes.

Then for a follow-up, he could've announced that if elected he would forego a fancy swearing-in ceremony and simply stand on the Capitol steps with the necessary people and take his oath in a simple, private manner. And put that money towards paying off the billion-trillions our children's children's children will still owe to China.

I don't think the calculator goes that low. The purpose of inagurations is well understood. George Bush understood it; Bill Clinton understood it; Ronald Reagan understood it. They are more than worth the cost.

Then he could appeal to Americans to make similar cut-backs and sacrafices in their own lives -- on a voluntary level, in whatever ways are possible and practical for individuals -- so that we can rid ourselves of the staggering debt we have accumulated for ourselves.

The last time a presidential candidate ran on a platform of sacrifice, he lost. Badly. I think he won two states. You used the term "appeal", but what you suggested wouldn't "appeal".

IF he did something like this, the press would grab it and run, and it would be fantastic for his image -- a politician who's actually going to do something in our faltering economy.

You're just plain wrong.

 

[whjoyjr]

You're not altogether wrong there, but I don't think either candidate is at this point able to do much about that. Maybe in the past when they were voting in Congress.

They do, however, control campaign money right now. And as I said, the amounts they're spending are staggering and obscene.

That McCain is spending taxpayer money, and Obama is not?