HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Good Reads (Forum) » Money can't buy elections

Tue Nov 20, 2012, 01:38 PM

Money can't buy elections

(no shit..)

An op-ed in the WSJ by Jayson Lusk titled: The Food Police Are Routed at the Ballot Box

Mostly about the defeat of Prop. 37 in California (that would have demanded labeling genetically modified food) but also:

the residents of El Monte (near Los Angeles) and Richmond (near San Francisco) also voted down a "fat tax" that would have added one cent per ounce to the price of sugared sodas. The food movement is in retreat overseas, too: In Denmark, the government this month rescinded its one-year-old tax on saturated fat because of consumer backlash and adverse economic impacts.

But I liked this comment:

Supporters of these failed food initiatives decry the money spent by Big Food on negative campaign ads. But one of the key lessons of politics in 2012 is that money can't buy elections. After two attempts and spending more than $80 million of her own money, Linda McMahon, the former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment, could not win a Senate seat from Connecticut. Casino owner Sheldon Adelson's $60 million couldn't earn Newt Gingrich the GOP presidential nomination.

And, I would add: gazillioner Mitt Romney could not buy the White House, too.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323551004578121523513242716.html

(copy and paste the title, in bold, in google to read the whole story)

3 replies, 973 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 3 replies Author Time Post
Reply Money can't buy elections (Original post)
question everything Nov 2012 OP
Uncle Joe Nov 2012 #1
ROBROX Nov 2012 #2
krakfiend Nov 2012 #3

Response to question everything (Original post)

Tue Nov 20, 2012, 03:26 PM

1. Money doesn't buy elections and never has, it just rents them.

Having said that, the last place I would trust to tell me that "money can't buy elections" would be the Bible of Capitalism.

I believe Lusk takes a too limited view in making that determination, more often than not he/she with the most money wins out.

Over the long term and big picture having the most money will become increasingly important particularly after the Citizens United decision.

Romney was self-destructive and only Deadeye Dick would be more apt to shoot Mitt in the foot than the Republican candidate; himself.

Thanks for the thread, question everything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to question everything (Original post)

Wed Nov 21, 2012, 12:33 AM

2. CALIFORNIA GOP SPENT 140 MILLION FOR GOVERNOR AND LOST

 

The CEO spent her own money and still lost because she was FAKE. The some dumb company hired this loser. California voted for a person who was a previous two term Governor and this fired up the GOP.

The state of many thinkers and a bunch of republican sheep.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to question everything (Original post)

Wed Nov 21, 2012, 11:30 AM

3. not yet

the republicans hoping to buy this election and several others lost this time, but they won't give up. next time they will be smarter. they know they do not have to tell the truth, only add confusion and misinformation. a ignorant, misinformed voter will most likely vote with their gut instinct. luckily we were able to get the truth out into the masses, the swing voters and independents understood what and who mitt romney stood for. we can't give up the fight to provide the truth

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread