Do you believe the American government should fund candidates that need money to help them with their campaign

Question

it could be like a loan from the government

Answer 1

We loan enough money. We should limit the amount that can be spent on elections. THis is getting way out of hand. We started the campaign at least a year before the first primary. We have debates with 10 and 12 candidates. We are concerned about who is going to win the election when we haven't even had the convention. Money has been much too important to the election. We need to put a limit and anyone that spends more is automatically eliminated. We have to take the elections out of the hands of the rich and not have the huge debt that politicians have at the end of the elections to people that want them to vote a certain way.

Answer 2

Yes, I believe the American government should fund candidates that need money to help them with their campaign. I also believe that not only the USA but all the countries should have fund allocated for election purpose and no one should be allowed to use black money, muscle and other illegal means to win the election.

Answer 3

Not necessarily, but there should be a device that allows an even playing field for all candidates. Unless there's a better alternative, I think campaign funding should come from the government. Tasini was prevented form participating in a debate in New York not because of low poll support, but because of insufficient campain budget! Absurd!

Answer 4

Funding may not be the best way to level the playing field. Maybe we should modernize the concept of free speech and insure that each candidate has a minimum of airtime on television. I've heard this is done in other countries such as England. It is a threat to the two party system, but in many ways the two party system is a threat to democracy. I don't remember when I've been well represented by either Democrats or Republicans.

Answer 5

Umm in some ways. I for one think that the canidates should have a fixed limit for a few reasons. For one it will cut down on "favors" and "punishments" for donating and not donating it could also cut to on special intrest groups buying caniditates.
It would also tell the American people if the canidate was frugal or excentric good with money etc. Could help us get someone in there who could lower the national debt. Not sure how you could do it though. As for the Feds helping nahh let them get some kind of bank loan with a fixed intrest (determined before the election for all canidates) so the tax payer doesen't doesn't get stuck paying the bills.

Answer 6

No, the American government does not need to be giving anybody else any money. We should not be giving out any money any way except for defense, the way the Founding Fathers wanted it to be.

Answer 7

No!

Answer 8

NO!!!!!Talk about the potential for fraud!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!