good deal for the President. His $74 mil has to last 60 days while kerry’s money has to last 5 months

Posted by: chris at May 6, 2004 11:34 PM

Kerry has the advantage of having media people on his side who are willing to use entertainment for political messages.

Posted by: eric at May 6, 2004 11:52 PM

Do you know Joe? If you do, you know that at the core he is conservative - like most minorities. If “conservative” is to hard a word for you, try descriptive phrase “common sensical”.

Thank God for Joe Lieberman. Whenever things are really bad, and the radical left gear up to start throwing poo like monkeys, Joe seems to put things in perspective.

As bad as this abuse scandal is (I have lost some sleep), it is worse because it is one of those topic traps on liberal ground. Watch what you say, or be accused of condoning torture.

Joe reminds me of my Grandfather - and I am black! Contrast him to Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, or Kennedy and you can see a man with a moral core and preference not to lie about his true beliefs just to make a point.

Like foam in your soda, the liberal Democrats try to whip up and agitate. By the time the election comes they are gonna find their support will have gone flat. All they will have left are the kool-aid drinkers.

Posted by: Agrippa at May 7, 2004 10:29 AM

Eric,

Kerry is still in the primary phase of his candidacy and as such will be spending the money that he is currently raising hand-over-fist. He will not touch his general election money until the end of the Democrat convention in July.

Bush will have an advantage in August. You can count on him saving 20-30 million dollars of his primary money for the between-convention period, when he will spend it in the hope of forcing Kerry to reply with his general election funds (which will give Bush a big money advantage going down the home stretch.

Here is a relevant quote from the article above:

“Bush, 57, and Kerry, 60, both rejected federal matching funds for primary election season so they could raise and spend as much as they want until the nominating conventions. Kerry has raised about $112 million so far. With the Democratic convention ending July 29, Kerry will start spending his federal campaign money a month earlier.”

So have the Republican convention late this time was a good political move. However, it pissed me off because it means that I can’t go.

Posted by: Andy at May 7, 2004 01:01 PM

Oops, I meant to direct the last comment to Chris.

I also want to mention that those ads being run by “independent” groups in support of the Kerry campaign will be off the air starting 60 days before the genral election (per federal law). Those groups may also be forced to run their media buys with “hard money” instead of Sorros’ millions if the FEC gets off of its lazy butt sometime soon.

Posted by: Andy at May 7, 2004 01:09 PM

Actually, Andy, as long as the 527 report to the FEC, they can run ads up until election day.

Posted by: Karol at May 7, 2004 02:25 PM

Actually, Andy, as long as the 527 report to the FEC, they can run ads up until election day.

Posted by: Karol at May 7, 2004 02:25 PM

“Kerry has the advantage of having media people on his side who are willing to use entertainment for political messages.”

This is a very serious issue. I was shocked this morning to hear Howard Stern say that he had offered Kerry a one-hour prime-time interview on ABC two days before the election but Kerry turned him down. Now, Howard has a contract with ABC to do a couple of Barbara Wallters-type shows, his choice of subject, but when he said he was basically offering a “free one-hour commercial” I couldn’t believe how blatantly this was. No telling if ABC would have gone with it and I’m sure it was a bit too legally grey for the Kerry campaign, but I’m sure Howard isn’t the only person thinking this way.

Posted by: submandave at May 7, 2004 03:06 PM

He can hog the air all day on Channel Gore!
Remember, though, his ratings fall whenever he speaks. It’s only his aides that put out vaguely sensible statements. The man himself is a goofball.

Posted by: Woody at May 7, 2004 03:46 PM

This is absolutely disgusting! President Bush is going to use Taxpayer money to fund his election year even though he already raked in $180 million in donations? Who does he think he is? King Tut!?

Posted by: Jeff MacMillan at May 7, 2004 06:03 PM

I don’t think the press being liberal really matters much anymore. Polling data shows that most Americans don’t trust the press to be anything like unbiased and a majority feel the press is too liberal. Fewer people read the newspapers, nobody gets any real news from the networks anymore, and FoxNews is trouncing CNN and MSNBC in the ratings war.

I’ve said this before many times. The liberal press has led to substantively weaker candidates for the Dems over the years and now we have reached the nadir. Kerry is a joke. He can’t win. Clinton shouldn’t have won on substance, but Bush Sr. was such a bad campaigner and Bill was so damned charismatic and politically ingenious that he was able to ascend to the presidency. Plus his competition was crap in ‘92 as well. The Dems have two real statesmen as far as I can see; Zell Miller, whose campaigning for Bush and Joe Lieberman, who doesn’t have the hate necessary to rally the DUmmies.

I don’t know what the future of their party is, but it ain’t good. Bush wouldn’t accept the Fed funds if he was worried about winning, so I think this is a good sign. Rove and Co. have already factored in the press slant. The truth is the more the medias turn on Bush, the louder they scream, the more fragrant the stench of desperation will be for the public. If John Kerry doesn’t nominate the perfect V.P. then he is sunk. And I don’t think Kerry has shown anything like the intelligence or foresight necessary to make a pick that will help him out of the hole I believe he is in. Remember Kerry’s problems are inherent, while Bush’s problems are circumstantial. Circumstances can change, indeed they will change, but John Kerry will always be John Kerry and that’s his biggest problem.

Posted by: Kerrey Is Unelectable at May 7, 2004 07:07 PM

Jeff - I don’t think its quite that simple. Without having matching funding available, big money would have even more of an influence on the political process than it already has. I think having mandatory public funding and limits might be a better solution, though I suspect there’d be First Amendment problems with that.

There’s no question this is a political move rather than a moral or ethical decision, but that’s not news.

Posted by: tagryn at May 7, 2004 08:57 PM

“Jeff - I don’t think its quite that simple. Without having matching funding available, big money would have even more of an influence on the political process than it already has.”

And that’s a bad thing how!?

What’s with these people? BIG MONEY! Oooo Scary.. Run away and hide from Big Money!

There are 2 types of Big Money. There’s the big money brought forth from 527s which usually consist of a whole lot of ‘Little Money’ that can be used to Lobby for Bills and Campaign for Politicians.

Then there’s the BIG MONEY from corporations and corporate sponsored organizations such as the Henry Ford Foundations.

I see nothing wrong here folks. This is the American People speaking out. A person making 5.15 an hour can have his voice heard just as much as a person making 500000/ hour.

People are just sooooo brainwashed in society… Where’s the fear? Where’s the anguish? Where the heck is the problem? There isn’t anything of the sort.

Big Money: YES! Tax Payer Money: NO!

Posted by: Jeff MacMillan at May 8, 2004 04:17 PM

American People should be allowed to spend their DANG MONEY however they see fit for their own personal interests.

Everyone is an interest group. YOU are an interest group. If it was MY OWN interest to pursue things through the Governmental system, I would have funneled tens of thousands of dollars by now… and I’m unemployed at the moment! I’m not rich and still trying to find a job.

People such as myself should be allowed to spend their money. But instead we have a bunch whiny, crybabies, who don’t even understand how Campaign Finance Reform has utterly destroyed our 1st Amendment Rights.

There’s nothing wrong AT ALL with soft money contributions. There is NO POINT in regulating it. There is NO POINT in putting up a fuss and complaining about such and such having more money than you.

A Million lower class people can out class a half a hundred upper class rich snobs any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Leave the Soft Money alone. Leave our tax money alone. President Bush is PIMPING for Cash when he doesn’t need to.

Posted by: Jeff MacMillan at May 8, 2004 04:23 PM

At a certain point, it stops being “contributions” and starts being pay-to-play and bribery (which see: Teapot Dome Scandal, Clinton’s pardons, etc). We need less money in the political process, not more.

Posted by: tagryn at May 8, 2004 06:08 PM

The problem tagryn is that business and large special interests need to lobby the govt. because the govt. regulates and taxes them. In the case of pay-to-play and bribery you simply prosecute. If it can’t be proven in a court of law then I’m not sure there is enough evidence to say with confidence that it was bribery or pay-to-play. Moreover, my taxes are needed for a lot of things, but the advancement of someone’s personal political career is not one of them. Pay for your own campaign and if you can’t afford it find someone, or a bunch of someones, who believes in you that can pay for it.

Posted by: Kerrey Is Unelectable at May 8, 2004 06:35 PM

Tagryn,
“At a certain point, it stops being “contributions” and starts being pay-to-play and bribery “

This is a ‘categorical mistake’ and categorical mistakes are easy to make… No offense to you or anyone. I make them myself quite often.

Here’s an old adage: Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.

Same goes here! Money doesn’t bribe people or abuse people. People abuse people.

And when any of this happens as Kerrey points out.. People can be ‘prosecuted.’ In the case of government the politican can also be voted out of office.

The Categorical Mistake is easy to make and it makes people, forces people, to get angry over an object! Instead of the human being. It is about time Society Wakes out of ‘Tangible Object = Villain’ mode.

Posted by: Jeff MacMillan at May 9, 2004 01:21 AM

sudman- you complained about giving kerry a one hour interview before the election calling it a commercial- and this compares with Bush’s two hour press conference live on national tv how? Of course things might be different with kerry and stern- when Bush gave a non answer to a question, the press didnt get to follow up. and they presubmitted their questions.

Posted by: typhonus at May 10, 2004 01:48 PM

Typhonus, the difference is that the press was and is largely hostile to President Bush, while Howard Stern says daily that he wants to defeat President Bush and would allow John Kerry to say whatever he wants. Now don’t get me wrong, I would love that — John Kerry wouldn’t know when to shut up and would tie himself up in knots of nuance.

BTW, Stern is sorely misinformed about the supposed witchhunt he is facing at the hands of the FCC. Just look at the Congressional votes on increasing FCC fines. They pass with overwhelming bi-partisan majorities. And he also neglects to mention that his bogeyman Michael Powell was appointed to the FCC by Bill Clinton, not GWB (although GWB did make him Chairman). Howard has become so stunted after years of lesbian jokes, freakazoid midgets, porn stars and strippers that he is no longer funny. He’s just bitter and uninformed now.

Posted by: tibor at May 11, 2004 06:23 PM