Subscribe by RSS
There has been much discussion swirling around this topic since Obama pledged to accept public financing if his Republican opponent did the same. McCain has yet to commit either way on public financing so the topic is still up in the air.
However, some news today breaking that Obama appears to be planning on ignoring public financing, story from AOL News:
MALVERN, Pa. (AP) - Barack Obama, whose fundraising prowess has set records, appears to be paving the way to bypass the public financing system in the fall without yet spelling out his intentions.
Last year, Obama indicated he would accept public funds if his Republican opponent did as well. But as John McCain takes steps to accept the $84 million available in federal money for the general election, Obama has been hedging.
This week, he appeared to be making a case that his broad base of small dollar donors is as egalitarian as the government’s public subsidy.
“We have created a parallel public financing system where the American people decide if they want to support a campaign they can get on the Internet and finance it,” he told donors at a Washington fundraiser Tuesday night. “And they will have as much access and influence over the course and direction of our campaign that has traditionally reserved for the wealthy and the powerful.”
Campaign communications director Robert Gibbs said Wednesday that Obama’s remarks were “not a policy statement.” He said Obama merely was trying to underscore the grassroots nature of his fundraising.
But Obama’s point is an echo of an argument made privately by a number of Democratic strategists who believe that if he were to raise his own money in the general election, his base of nearly 1.3 million donors could easily deliver in excess of the amount available from the federal treasury.
Obama has continued raising the millions such as $40 million in the month of March. Not a record, but double Hillary Clinton and more than double John McCain.
On that topic, here’s a Wall Street Journal video report on McCain’s fund raising:
Public financing is going to be a hot topic this election season especially considering McCain, a staunch support of the controversial McCain/Feingold campaign finance reform law, will be the Republican candidate.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...Visit the You Decide 2008 Store »
Loading ...
Not cool that he went back on his word.
This is really disturbs me more than anything else that’s happened in his campaign thus far. As a candidate I don’t see how he can justify this - he only wanted a fair fight until he realized he was going to have the upper hand in this battle?
If the American people are going to trust in his ideals, he’s going to need to follow them through to the end, whether they benefit him or not. This is Barack Obama’s first test of leadership, and while he remains my favored candidate, I’m afraid he stands to fail this test miserably.
I don’t think they need public financing. Any of them.
And I dont think he’s going back on his word. He said he’d accept public financing if the Republican candidate would do the same. McCain didn’t take a stance so Obama formed his opinion on it.
IndiMinded, this has really disturbed me, too, because he IS going back on his word. I thought this was interesting on the subject, since it included a letter to Obama from McCain concerning his back peddling. You might want to read it:
http://news.aol.com/polit.....8/04/10/o/
Michelle - you’re probably right. None of them need public financing, least of all Obama. But this is important because it was never expected of him. It never would have been. It was a challenge he laid out to his republican rival as one he would aggressively pursue. He threw down the glove and said this is how he would like to see the two campaigns compete in this election.
And he could do this if he wanted to. McCain didn’t obviously accept, but let’s be honest - he would do so in an instant. He’s clearly the underdog in the election when it comes to money. He’d love nothing more than a more even playing field - which is exactly what Obama initially proposed.
But when Obama made this challenge he assumed - as everyone probably did - that the Republicans would have tons more money than the Democrats. They usually do. Now that he’s not the underdog, he’s just not interested in his own proposal anymore.
So he never wanted an even playing field. He wanted a leg up. As an Obama supporter, that’s very discouraging to see.
IndiMinded,
I am pleased to know that you are a fellow Obama supporter, especially one that will call out what you see as a problem. It’s just y personal opinion on the matter. He challenged McCain, and McCain has a habit of not touching tenative issues (for instance, he had no comments on Bush’s speech today). I appriciate Obama being more decisive on the matter; get what you are saying about the money, but remember the following:
You can only donate so much per election cycle: McCain has already won the primary, and will most likely raise a ton of money in the general election. Plus, he’s super rich.
Obama supporters have made it so Obama is not he underdog in donations, but it will still be an uphill battle, epecially if Clinton is not his VP (not like I’m drooling over the idea, but it’s a smart move all around).
Lastly, if both candidates have the means available and donations are plenty, AND our economy isn’t so great, maybe “no to pubic financing” is the way to go.
Just a thought. ~.*
IndiMinded and Michelle, as Obama supporters may I ask you both a question (and anyone else who wants to answer it)?
There’s much being publicized now about who Obama supporters would vote for if Obama does not win the nomination. The latest shows (I think) 25% would vote for McCain instead of Clinton. Do you agree with the sentiment of that percentage? Or do you think the poll was biased?
I think it’s too early for a poll like that to be valid. Many things will change before the general election - VPs will be chosen for one thing. If Obama and Hillary end up on the same ticket obviously that will change things. If Romney becomes VP I think that could chase away a lot of Dem support, but maybe I just say that because I have a strong opinion of the man myself.
If superdelegates choose a candidate that wasn’t elected by popular vote, that would probably cause some really hard feelings. Depending on how Fl and Mi work out, there could be some resentment about how that gets resolved.
Then of course everyone’s going to have 5 months to reflect on the situation and for new things to arise before the general election. I think many dems who say they’ll switch now will actually stay in the party after they have a few months to accept the results. Especially once they see McCain’s VP choice, who isn’t likely to be as acceptable to them as McCain himself. Since McCain, as a candidate, dissatisfies his conservative base, I’m guessing his VP choice will threaten to drive off his more liberal support.
It’s just way too early to tell, though.
I agree with Indi; I think most would just feel saddened that their candidate lost, but if you would vote McCain over the other Dem, it says that you are voting for McCain out of spite. I like Obama, but I don’t hate Hillary. If you wanna vote for McCain, you should have voted for him to begin with. It’s obviously not the issues that had you voting Democrat.
Babs,
Much of the recent speculation over possible McCainocrats will, as IndiMinded and Michelle explain, remain only speculations.
Either Clinton or Obama will bow out in the end, as late as June if need be. Those months from June to November will allow a lot of unhappy and angry feelings to dissolve and allow for reorientations. I assume the mending will be effective particularly because either candidate will support the other if s/he loses.
The reshaping of the campaign around Democratic/Republican ideals will reduce these numbers. I assume that in the end those who will jump ship and vote for McCain are going to be people who had bought more into the identity politics that the issues (i.e., wanted Hillary because she was a woman, or wanted Barack because he is an African American).
That was pretty much my thoughts as well. I don’t put a lot of stock into most polls now, and really couldn’t imagine as many as 25 to 30% of voters swinging, that’s a lot of voters.
When you look at most of the polls, the ones that favor the democrats over republicans surveyed almost 2/3 democrats with only 1/3 republicans, and vice versa. So in my opinion the poll can only result in a biased figure.