Both, are a waste of money.
It takes too much money to run for political office and some just don't want to mess with it, along with the BS associated with running for political office.
2007-12-01 08:52:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by Bubba 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Money spent on the 2008 Presidential election. And let me guess, Its not the answer you wanted
2007-12-01 08:56:56
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Money on the elections... I hate it when everyone reports on how much money this or that person raised or spent. Its ideas and policies that matter not money, and it doesn't take 50 million to get a few ideas across. Look at Huckabee, he hasn't raised or spent anywhere near the amount as Romney, or Rudy, and is right there with them in the polls.
2007-12-02 13:52:05
·
answer #3
·
answered by anti-lib 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Iraq war is a big waste of money.
2007-12-01 08:58:12
·
answer #4
·
answered by Citizen1984 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The invasion/occupation of Iraq. Though I do find the amount of money spent on running for office unnecessary.
2007-12-01 09:00:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by gone 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The war in Iraq.
2007-12-01 08:51:49
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
2008 election, I feel that this is sending a statement that only the super rich can run America. That is not what our founders had in mind
2007-12-01 08:52:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by Tip 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
dropping time because of the fact then the money you dont spend you could save. If i circulate out as quickly as I dont could desire to easily to waste time im continuously spending funds on ineffective junk and after a on an identical time because it provides up.
2016-10-18 12:36:30
·
answer #8
·
answered by gilboy 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't see help people to gain their freedom as a waste.
The money for Ron Paul is waste but that is part of free country we can do things we want with our money.
2007-12-01 08:57:46
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
iraq war
2007-12-01 09:53:20
·
answer #10
·
answered by echoalphapapa 2
·
0⤊
0⤋