When I think of all the ways the millions of dollars wasted on presidential elections could help our economy and schools it angers me. To make matters worse is the fact that as Americans the joke is on us, because who ever does get elected, their first loyality will be to the lobbyist and corporations that funded their campaigns.
2007-07-29 04:35:32 · 6 answers · asked by cave man 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
It's a good point. Some countries let the current leaders pick those who will take their place. More efficient, I suppose, but not very democratic. In a country as large as ours, it takes a lot of money for candidates to reach out to all the voters to let them know who they are and what they believe. Some have argued for elections to be entirely public-funded, so that every candidate gets exactly the same amount of publicity. Would you support that?
2007-07-29 04:46:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
What we see today is 'money politics' and survival in an election, let alone winning, depends on the size of the money bags a candidate can boast of!
2007-07-29 11:39:55 · answer #2 · answered by Sami V 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because whoever can buy the most airtime has the best chance of winning.
2007-07-29 11:47:42 · answer #3 · answered by Duffman 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's mainly rich people who donate. Shouldn't you be happy that the "evil" rich people are spending money on something rather than hording it?
2007-07-29 11:39:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE.
2007-07-29 11:38:30 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
wat are u talking about ... lol
2007-07-29 11:39:05 · answer #6 · answered by waycoolrml 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋