$13 million dollars for what ???

[Big Duane]

I mean, 19 million is a LOT of cash to burn up for nothing. Was it for nothing ? I can think of a LOT of things 13-19 million would do better with that Richardson running for Pres. What a frickin waste



http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/09/richardson.out/index.html

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson will quit the race for the Democratic presidential nomination after fourth-place showings in the campaign's first contests, sources said Wednesday

As of September, Richardson had raised about $19 million during his White House bid and had spent about $13 million of that, according to Federal Election Commission records.

[Champlain Islander]

The whole election process has gotten out of hand just like other icons of Americana like professional sports. Too much money involved with both endeavors. Strange as it may be campaigning for some candidates has been happening in NH ( one of the smallest states) for 2 years which puts it 3 years before the election. All this costs money and you know who foots the bill either directly or indirectly. Look at all the polls, interviews etc that have occurred over the past 6 months. It doesn't matter who is the leading candidate 2 years from an election. The voters don't need years to decide who best fits the job. I would love to see term limits in Congress and campaign limits in both money spent and time. The person voted in, is all too often the one who had the resources to buy the vote. Give all candidates the same money and time to campaign and be done with it. Then again what else are CNN and Fox good for unless we have a war going, natural disaster on or a scandal in politics?

[Briman]

[Big Duane]

funny ........ one of the reasons for the electoral college was so that money couldn't so easily influence voters

[Champlain Islander]

The system has malfunctioned and changed from the original conception. Today"™s leaders are all in the money. Hillary was leading all candidates in funds raised and Romney was super funded as well. A maverick win like McCain in NH will generate some cash to keep going but that will end when he falls back at the turn. None of the under funded candidates will be there in the end. It is all about money.

[kevin1]

ORIGINAL: Champlain Islander

The system has malfunctioned and changed from the original conception. Today"™s leaders are all in the money. Hillary was leading all candidates in funds raised and Romney was super funded as well. A maverick win like McCain in NH will generate some cash to keep going but that will end when he falls back at the turn. None of the under funded candidates will be there in the end. It is all about money.

All the more reason to disband the Electoral College or go to a carefully scrutinized popular vote, or "one state, one vote" based on the existing popular vote. DC having a single electoral vote could resolve any tie that resulted.

[burniegoeasily]

ORIGINAL: Champlain Islander

The whole election process has gotten out of hand just like other icons of Americana like professional sports. Too much money involved with both endeavors. Strange as it may be campaigning for some candidates has been happening in NH ( one of the smallest states) for 2 years which puts it 3 years before the election. All this costs money and you know who foots the bill either directly or indirectly. Look at all the polls, interviews etc that have occurred over the past 6 months. It doesn't matter who is the leading candidate 2 years from an election. The voters don't need years to decide who best fits the job. I would love to see term limits in Congress and campaign limits in both money spent and time. The person voted in, is all too often the one who had the resources to buy the vote. Give all candidates the same money and time to campaign and be done with it. Then again what else are CNN and Fox good for unless we have a war going, natural disaster on or a scandal in politics?

Well put. I don"™t think the direction of our modern politics is what was intended.

[Fieldmouse]

ORIGINAL: Champlain Islander

The whole election process has gotten out of hand just like other icons of Americana like professional sports. Too much money involved with both endeavors. Strange as it may be campaigning for some candidates has been happening in NH ( one of the smallest states) for 2 years which puts it 3 years before the election. All this costs money and you know who foots the bill either directly or indirectly. Look at all the polls, interviews etc that have occurred over the past 6 months. It doesn't matter who is the leading candidate 2 years from an election. The voters don't need years to decide who best fits the job. I would love to see term limits in Congress and campaign limits in both money spent and time. The person voted in, is all too often the one who had the resources to buy the vote. Give all candidates the same money and time to campaign and be done with it. Then again what else are CNN and Fox good for unless we have a war going, natural disaster on or a scandal in politics?

It costs a lot of money to run these days and there is nothing wrong with it. Look at it this way, if you went out and are able to raise the millions of dollars it takes to get elected, people want you in that office. I guess with Richardson dropping out and failing to raise the needed cash, no body liked him.

[Aught Six]

Think about it. For the $13 million Richardson spent, I'll bet Hillary had to spend an equal amountto counter him. There is some good in that.

[The Rev]

Most of it is money that idiots give them to blow.. who's the dummy?