Blogs 4 Brownback

August 20, 2007

Money Talks, Principle Walks

Filed under: Election 2008 — Psycheout @ 12:45 pm

MoneyThere’s an interesting article in yesterday’s Baltimore Sun that warrants a read.  It demonstrates how money, and not much more, determines who is in the top tier and who gets the coverage.  The value of the candidate himself is hardly a consideration these days.

Class warfare, or at least class envy, is alive and well in the 2008 campaign. Those at the top command constant media attention. They reap millions in donations and soar in their private jets. The long shots, short on cash, waste hours in airport lines, waiting for their middle seat in coach. Most have been campaigning for more than a year, but they seldom make the news.

Money over value.

Many in the lower tier boast resumes at least as good as those of the top candidates. But anemic poll numbers create a vicious cycle that makes upward mobility extremely tough.

And it’s a vicious circle.

Attracting campaign contributions is difficult, which means less money for organizing and advertising, which makes it harder to lift poll numbers, which makes money-raising even harder.

Naturally the Democrat party top tier is the worst.

Earlier this year, on the morning after a South Carolina debate, Sens. Christopher J. Dodd and Biden had to get up at 5:30 a.m. for a five-hour trip back to Washington for an important Senate vote. Neither Clinton nor Barack Obama, with private planes at their disposal, offered a seat.

Biden said that, in his first presidential run, “if Jesse Jackson had a plane or if Dick Gephardt was going back for an important vote, he’d say, ‘I’ll give you a ride.’ Not any more.”

Who’s at the bottom?

Stuart Rothenberg, an independent analyst, rates those at rock-bottom as “no shots,” with no realistic chance of winning: Democrats Dennis J. Kucinich and Mike Gravel, and Republicans Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter.

And which principled candidates have a shot (even though they don’t have gigantic warchests of cash)?

In between are the “credible” or “serious” long shots, with at least a remote chance to get nominated: Biden, Huckabee, Dodd, Brownback and – since his dizzying plunge from the top tier – former front-runner John McCain.

Both Sam Brownback and Mike Huckabee are fine candidates who deserve more serious coverage.  But they can’t buy it like the top tier candidates can.

When campaign cash alone, not principles, determines who our President will be, we get awful candidates like Mittens and Clinton.  If that’s the best we can do, our nation is in terrible trouble indeed.  Food for thought.

— Psycheout


  1. There’s an interesting article in yesterday’s Baltimore Sun that warrants a read. It demonstrates how money, and not much more, determines who is in the top tier and who gets the coverage. The value of the candidate himself is hardly a consideration these days.

    That´s why Huckabee got more votes despite investing less cahs that Brownback into the Straw Poll?

    Otherwise, you´re showing nothing new here, Psycheout. Has ever been like that.

    Comment by PG — August 20, 2007 @ 1:12 pm | Reply

  2. Dear Senator Brownback,

    If you are truly pro life you must now bow out of the race for president. The recent Ames straw poll clearly shows two things:

    1) The conservative, Christian, pro-life vote does not support Romney. Combined, your support and Governor Huckabee’s support in the poll was greater than Romney’s. The voters have spoken. It is time for the pro-life vote to coalece behind the one candidate who can carry the pro-life message effectively forward.

    2) Continuing your campaign will only continue to divide the conservative, Christian, pro-life constituency and will only contiue to prop up Mitt Romney’s false status as a “front-runner.” You know that Romney is not truly pro-life and that his candidacy is a danger to the very principles you stand so admirably for.

    Rich Lowry of National Review Online agrees, saying that continuing your campaign in the wake of the straw poll “might end up hurting the pro-life cause.”

    According to Lowry, continuing your campaign hurts the man pro-life voters want and, “in practical terms for pro-lifers, [your] campaign is balanced somewhere between pointless and counter-productive.”

    And, devastatingly, Lowry goes further: “the truth is that the Brownback presidential campaign is doing the senator’s moral cause no favors. If anything… his cause is being hurt by the association.”

    Senator, you are a great man and respected leader whom I admire tremendously. It is time for you to demonstrate that leadership and your committment to protecting the unborn by making a very unselfish decison — you must continue the important work of promoting the cause of protecting and honoring the dignity of all human lives — in the U.S. Senate.

    Senator, please. Choose life.


    Comment by BSR — August 20, 2007 @ 1:26 pm | Reply

  3. BSR, please see Rich Lowry Is Wrong and Here’s Why.

    Comment by Psycheout — August 20, 2007 @ 1:33 pm | Reply

  4. Otherwise, you´re showing nothing new here, Psycheout.

    Yet you keep coming back. You just can’t get enough of B4B!

    Has ever been like that.

    Translation please.

    Comment by Psycheout — August 20, 2007 @ 1:35 pm | Reply

  5. YOUR SECOND TEIERS cant match ron paul in funds, yet they must spend like the top tier shills.
    i like bromback on some issues BUT I’ll give you a hint: It isn’t about ron paul, its about a long string of government abuses which have resulted in an unprecedented loss of our liberty. This has been brewing for more years than most realize. The ron paul candidacy is a way to turn back some of this peacefully.
    The war-mongers want freedom for Iraq more than they want to preserve freedom in America.
    They had their OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM… Now its high time for OPERATION AMERICAN FREEDOM.(at the ballot box)
    The Ron Paul supporters will be around LONG after the election is over. They will grow to a political movement
    of unmatched proportions. I would take one RP supporter committed to the freedom message to any 50 of the other
    candidates “paid staff”. Besides, we work tirelessly and support our cause – LIBERTY – generously.
    Again, This thing is much bigger than any one candidate.

    Comment by rich — August 20, 2007 @ 1:46 pm | Reply

  6. Yet you keep coming back. You just can’t get enough of B4B!

    I meant this article, specifically.
    And old habits are difficult to lay down. 😉

    Translation please.

    Elections in your country have always been 90% money and 10% value. At least since the 50´s.

    Comment by PG — August 20, 2007 @ 2:13 pm | Reply

  7. I respect Senator Brownback, but if he needs to decide which is more important: pursuing an increasingly long shot candidacy, or helping unite conservative voters behind someone with a realistic chance to win the nomination: Mike Huckabee. Imagine the huge story that would be, if Senator Brownback threw his support to Huckabee. It would truly demonstrate the selfless values that I believe the Senator represents, and would go a long way toward ensuring that the party remains pro-life and devoted to liberty.

    Comment by Wayne Bowen — August 20, 2007 @ 6:35 pm | Reply

  8. After we kill all the liberal Democrats and take their money, is there any way some of it could be distributed to Republican patriots? Ralph and I saw a very nice kitchen island at Walmart the other day, but we can’t afford it on a fixed income.

    Comment by Marcia P. — August 20, 2007 @ 9:28 pm | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: