Isn't Obama's opting out of public funding really a blessing in disguise?

[glarius]

Please explain to me why it is not a good thing that Obama is now opting out of public funding and is getting his money from donations on the internet instead. It seems to me the public should be pleased that his campaign is not costing them any tax money.
I really don't understand what all the fuss is about????

[Skink]

1. Sets precedent.

This time around it is good. May help a large number of Democrats get elected. I'd say offer 500 million to each canidate in public funding. The cost of one modern Cruise ship. Then regulate advertising rates.

[MonkeyFunk]

2. It's a mixed bag

It's good in that it means he can get more money to use in the race. It's unfortunate in that public-financing of campaigns has long-been a liberal issue.

It's just hypocritical to have complained for 20 years about how unfair it was that Republicans were able to raise more money and outspend us, using that as an excuse for public funding, then change tunes once the money advantage is on our side.

[glarius]

4. But isn't it a fact that times have changed and the internet is now

a fact of life which wasn't available in the past. Don't you have to change with the times. I mean....the thing is....this is saving the taxpayer money. It just seems to make sense to me, that's all.

[MonkeyFunk]

35. If you take a moment to reflect on your position

it's not a historically liberal one. It argues for privatizing schools, ending government aid to the poor, etc.

"Saving the taxpayers' money" is not a liberal argument. It's a classically conservative one.

[glarius]

38. You're right.........I hadn't thought of that,. n/t

[Cha]

5. And you're being hypocritical

by defending EVERYTHING that hilary did and now saying Obama is being "hypocritical" in doing something that will help us to win.

Your selective purity is too transparent.

[hokies4ever]

21. Well said!

Nothing worse than REAL hypocrites. :rofl:

[MonkeyFunk]

31. You're just ridiculous

and your behavior is close to stalking.

And argument-by-emoticon is just stupid.

[hokies4ever]

37. This is an A-B conversation, C your way out

:rofl:

Umm, I think I was talking to zidzi. Wait...let me check...yep, my reply was to zidzi, not to you. Your threats are ridiculous and laughable at best. You're going to alert me for stalking you when I was talking to another poster? If I wanted that message to be for you, perhaps I would have replied to you instead of someone else? Psst, not every post is about you, you know. This is just insane! :rofl:

[MonkeyFunk]

30. not at all

I've long been a proponent of voluntary public funding of campaigns. I'd feel the same way if Clinton had done this - that it was a mixed bag.

You really need to get over the primaries. My argument here has nothing to do with Clinton.

[papapi]

15. Hypocrisy runs rampant, but not necessarily in Obama's campaign...

but right under our noses sometimes.

[MonkeyFunk]

32. I didn't say Obama was a hypocrite

I said it's hypocritical for liberals who have argued for decades about the virtues of public financing to now turn their backs on it.

[Raine]

25. That's the beauty of the whole thing

taking them on on their own turf and beating them with it. Funny to see them hollering that now they're being out spent. The irony of it is BEAUTIFUL, surprised you can't see it. :shrug: Anyway Bwahahahahaha to them! :hurts: :nopity:

[JVS]

41. The major complaint usually centered around how the money was raised (from big business)

[Cha]

3. The "fuss" is about hypocrites and bullshit..

Those who want to see Obama elected have no problem with it.

[MonkeyFunk]

33. those who don't care about the methods, sure

but some of us think there are principles that are important separate from obama being elected.

[Faygo Kid]

6. Fuck the GOP. Nuke George W. Bush. Cut the bullshit.

Crush him, and John McCain, and all they stand for.

[papapi]

7. In order to understand this fully the 527s must be considered...

See this recent article:

Media Matters, 527s

[glarius]

9. I guess I just don't get all the intricacies of this.

It just seems to me the point is he's saving the taxpayers money.
:shrug:

[papapi]

13. The system is broken. It's a repuke tactic to use 527s to bring down the...

Democratic candidates, but this time Obama has out done them at their own game by getting money through grassroots donations to support his campaign directly. Read what he said about this:

On the first point, Obama said: "The public financing of presidential elections as it exists today is broken, and we face opponents who've become masters at gaming this broken system. ... we've already seen that he's not going to stop the smears and attacks from his allies running so-called 527 groups, who will spend millions and millions of dollars in unlimited donations."

[stevedeshazer]

23. Yes, he's saving the taxpayers some money

$84 million of our already deflated US American dollars.

But I think the main point here is that Obama really IS truly publicly funded, much more so than he would be by taking the $84 mill...if most of his money comes voluntarily from schmucks like me who choose to send twenty or fifty or a hundred bucks his way.

Now THAT'S democracy.

The only people making a big deal out of it are Republicans and disgruntled Clinton supporters. Truth is, Obama can raise as much money as he needs for the general election campaign, while McCain is locked in. Obama will likely raise at least three times what McCain will garner through public funding.

McCain has painted himself into a corner here. If he were smart, he'd also forgo public financing. The only reason the Republicans are bitching about it because they know this means they will be crushed come November because they won't be competitive.

And I love it!

[Igel]

27. No, he's not.

All public money is taxpayers' money, but the public financing doesn't use tax dollars. Voluntary donations.

[Happyhippychick]

8. McCain and his ilk are whining about it but the truth is, if he could raise private donations then

wouldn't take public financing either.

Obama is going to have to defend himself from the Republican smear machine, he should take every dime that he needs and has earned.

[gcomeau]

10. Blessing yes. Disguised no... it's of the obvious variety.

"Public financing" was a trap, pure and simple. Obama is still doing public financing only he's doing it better. We're the public, and we're financing him... in case anyone has overlooked that.

[blogslut]

11. The only people "upset" about Obama's decision

...are the yapping heads on teevee and the repubs. It's manufactured outrage.

[Growler]

39. Agreed n/t

[Inuca]

12. I heard a pundit the other day

forgot who, say that Obama would be liable for political malpractice if he did not opt out. I think he was right (both the pundit and Obama).

[high density]

14. Of course it's a blessing

...Though the GOP-owned media would love to make everybody think otherwise. The bottom line is that nobody cares about this issue besides the talking heads in DC.

[papapi]

16. How very right you are and....

maybe some disgruntled Democrats. (read thread carefully)

[karynnj]

20. Also, the thing that can't be said is

that even without 527, even money is not equal ability to get the word out. The Republican candidate has a ready built network of radio and cable shows that will parrot his message 24/7, attacking the Democrat. None of that is counted as paid advertising. In 2004, only the most blatant use of Repoublican allied media was stopped to some degree. That was when Sinclair broadcasting wanted to play "Stolen Honor" as a film, when it was really the SBVT shortly before the election. This was stopped not by the FEC, or any other part of the government, but bu Democrats calling mutual funds companies asking to switch out of funds with Sinclair and their advertisers. The advertisers started to abandon Sinclair and Sinclair caved.

This was a victory - but a simple listen to talk shows in any area I have been in and you will find a predominance of RW hate radio - including in NY/NJ and MA! (I hear LESS hate radio, using "scan" driving from Salt Lake City to Southern Idaho recently - it may have been the time - Saturday morning - but they seemed mostly garden and health shows.)

[butterfly77]

17. There is no fuss..

the Gop and the media want the people to think there is. There is no problem because he is being publically financed by WE THE PEOPLE, that is why mccain is crying...

[randr]

18. Dupe

Obama aims to win!

[randr]

19. It takes money to win

Obama aims to win!

[JerseygirlCT]

22. Strangely enough, Obama will succeed in meeting the

spirit of finance reform while not participating. His campaign has been fueled by many smaller donations, not by a select group of fat cats looking for rewards later.

McCain, who will take public money, will depend on the RNC money - raised from said fat cats.

[Raine]

24. It's not in disguise, it's OBVIOUSLY a VERY

GOOD thing and don't let anyone tell you different! Taking the public funding would have been STUPID cause it would've limited Obama. now the "sky's the limit" on what he can spend to win this. It's a GREAT thing for anyone that wants this country back in the hand's of THE PEOPLE! :thumbsup:

[Hippo_Tron]

26. It costs the taxpayers less than one cent each

Do you know how much taxpayer money is given to corporations because our members of congress are beholden to big money? Billions of dollars and trillions if you count legislation that favors corporations over people.

I can't stand it when people bitch about their tax money going to finance campaigns. Public financing (if it is done right) SAVES TAXPAYERS MONEY because it limits special interest influence over our elected officials.

That being said, Obama is right to opt out. The GOP will spend an absurd amount of money on 527's and he need to be ready to counter that.

[Igel]

28. It's not tax dollars.

See my post downthread.

[Igel]

29. It's not a difficult concept: Public campaign finance is not tax money.

There's a box you can check on your tax return. If you check it, it increases the amount you owe by $3, reducing your return or increasingly your liability.

It's not tax money. It's collected through the tax return mechanism and funneled through the IRS to the appropriate agency, but it's strictly voluntarily.

Not taking public financing doesn't save anything money but the public finance fund. The money then just sits there, unused. Taking it doesn't increase the amount of money dedicated to public finance; it just uses the money from voluntary donations already set aside.

Obama's not saving anybody tax money.

[Hippo_Tron]

34. No, it is tax money

http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/pubfund.shtml#anchor688095

It is voluntary whether or not you want to send $3 to the fund but you don't pay an additional $3 if you do.

[RNdaSilva]

36. Yes, you're correct...

"your tax or refund will not change."

But agree, no fuss.

[JVS]

40. This is not even a disguised blessing. Public funding means not as much money.

Candidates go off public funding when they are able and want to spend huge amounts of money.