Yeah, we’d need something like laws against advertising and fundraising and such. I’m pretty sure they have them in Britain and most other places.
I think there’s a pretty big personal benefit to sticking around in hopeless presidential campaigns. It’s a great way to become famous way out of proportion to your actual achievements (think Huckabee, Cruz, Santorum, for example).
1 Like
Not sure if this was discussed but I love this headline.
Pete Buttigieg: race is between me and Warren – as new poll puts him fourth
1 Like
What I don’t get is the people who donate to campaigns that have literally 0 chance of winning. Seems like lighting money on fire.
I get it if you’re a rich person and trying to buy a favor in the future, but why in the hell are non rich people donating to Klob/Booker/Kamala etc?
Even a hopeless candidate can influence the political discourse. Yang might be a prime example of this.
It’s also a signal to other candidates that adopting certain policies might gain them votes and donations.
1 Like
I know someone who donated to Steve Bullock. He described it as a protest donation.
Ok but like what policies do these people want that every other centrist dem doesn’t also want? What direction do they want for the discourse?
I personally know several people who are “media consultants,” whose job is to place ads for political candidates. They are among the scummiest, sleaziest people I have ever met, and I work in finance.
4 Likes
Let them know our forum has available slots.
1 Like
I don’t have a good answer to that.
Lol
Imagine an incumbent president being described as ‘highly competitive’. We live in really really strange times.
Counterpoint: 1 year until election.
They get such a nice cut that it’s impossible to believe they are objective, or even honest.
cuts both ways