but then use poverty as a forum? Hello? Media is free, stand on the soapbox and talk- a camera will show up, most campaign merchendise is just landfill fodder- run a campaign on poverty then take most of those funds and give them to the poor!
2006-08-14 13:08:12 · 8 answers · asked by ghostchaser.christy 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Becuase then the other opponet will use his money to pay for ad and gain votes.
2006-08-14 13:14:41 · answer #1 · answered by College Guy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A member of Congress has to raise $10,000 a day for campaign funds. And you know it is all coming form Corporations or the wealthy. If Big Oil gives 1 million dollars in campaign contributions to several candidates and then they get 14 billion dollars in corporate welfare it's a good investment for them. We need to go to publicly financed elections. For $5 a year on your taxes we can finance all campaigns for national offices. That would take the corporations out of it and it would become a government for "We the People" again.
2006-08-14 21:51:35 · answer #2 · answered by ggarsk 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Does it surprise you that they sing a song and dance during the election, but after winning, don't follow through on their "promises"? It's all part of the game - people will throw money at someone to get them elected, so they have someone "inside" the process, and hopefully will help them out with their agenda. But people will not give that same amount of money to help the poor and homeless. Sick, if you think about it.
2006-08-14 20:18:09 · answer #3 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The reason they "raise" so much money is because they want to SPEND a lot of money on campaigns. And I think it was very weird for a multi-millionaire by the name of Jon Corzine spend roughly $60 million of HIS OWN money for the chance to win one 6-year term in the Senate ..................... and then he doesn't even stay for all six years of his term!
And yes, it is very "weird" how much money they spend on campaigns. If freedom of speech weren't at stake, then I would say that out of simple aesthetics I would like to ban all political advertising. But freedom of speech is at stake.
2006-08-14 20:18:52 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If a candidate does not spend enough money to brainwash
voters they will lose the race, not get the office, and not help
the impoverished. So, no, it is not weird at all.
2006-08-14 20:36:03 · answer #5 · answered by Mon-chu' 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The pay is up to $400,000 now for president, along with all the benefits and power you could want.
2006-08-14 20:19:57 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, but i do wonder why the spend millions of dollars to get a $300,000 per year salary. must be some serious backroom profits in it.
2006-08-14 20:16:05 · answer #7 · answered by justnotright 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, ain't it funny that so much money can be raised so fast for such a load of CRAP?
2006-08-14 20:13:58 · answer #8 · answered by IthinkFramptonisstillahottie 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋