Buying elections

[Cail]

I saw a bit about this today on the McLaughlin Group.

Bloomberg spends record $85 million in New York mayor’s race

Mayor Michael Bloomberg has now spent $85 million of his own fortune in his bid for a third term as mayor of New York City. By the Nov. 3 election, that total is expected to soar to between $110 million and $140 million.

This means Bloomberg – whose campaign spending is estimated at $850,000 to $1 million a day – has set a new record for personal campaign spending.

By contrast, Bloomberg’s competitor, comptroller William Thompson, has spent only about $6 million.

And it's no secret that he's gonna win.

Bloomberg is apparently pretty much universally loved in New York, so most people really aren't taking issue with this.

I am.

Bloomberg is worth roughly $17 billion. Thank God he's a good mayor, 'cause if he wasn't, no one else could hope to outspend him.

[finn]

Didn't Perot try to do somethng similar with the presidency? I can't recall the details.....

You're right tho' and buying office could be the thin end of the wedge. It's not such a leap from there to imagine that if 'buying' the office were legitimate, then being sponsored or financially supported to but the office would also be ok....after all not everyone has $17billion in pocket change and any US born citizen should be treated equally in their ability to contest.

President of the USA sponsored by Coca-Cola? Nuclear standoff when Pepsi get the rights to Putin?

[Cail]

The Perot situation was different. He was running as an actual independent (instead of switching parties for expediency as Bloomberg has done), so Perot wasn't eligible for public funds for his 1992 run.

[Tatiana Ivanova]

*shrug*

politicians are, essentially, for sale these days. Like hookers, only far, far less honest.

[finn]

......and probably a lot less fun!

[Avatar]

Give every contender for every office a million bucks, and that's the limit they're allowed to spend on a campaign.

--A

[sindatur]

I've had an issue with the amount money spent on campaigning for some time now. It keeps on increasing, drastically with every election. Imagine all the good that could be done for people in need with all that money.

As Cail said, in Perot's case, he was an "illegitimate 3rd party", Bloomberg is a member of a political party, and didn't even need to spend so much money. Yes, it was his money to spend, but, he could've given it away to charity or paid extra taxes with it or created jobs or something far more productive. And his competitor only spent $6Million compared to his $85Million? What a tragic waste of money and it really makes the race lopsided, and perpetuates the growth of the wasted money for campaigns.

[Cybrweez]

Yea, and these same politicians talk about how they care about economic hardships of this country. Imagine if they spent campaign money on buying healthcare for the millions who don't have it, voila! No problems.

[Avatar]

Agreed.

--A