Billionaire Meg Whitman Has Spent $104 Million Of Her Fortune or $21 Per Vote

[TomCADem]

In 2006, over 8 million people voted in the gubernatorial election. Meg Whitman has spent $104 million of her personal fortune so far, which works out to about $21 per vote assuming that she does even better than Arnold did against Phil Angilides.

http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_16005234?nclick_check=1

Republican gubernatorial nominee Meg Whitman also has drawn even with Democratic standard-bearer Brown, the longtime officeholder who is the party's candidate for governor.

Whitman has spent $104 million from her personal fortune so far, but Brown maintains he will have enough money to run a competitive campaign through the November election. He will begin airing his first television commercial on Tuesday.

Sharon Hechler, a grocery store worker from eastern Los Angeles County, said she thought Whitman's high spending on campaign ads would be a turnoff for many voters.

"Working people are not impressed with that sort of money," said Hechler, 55. "Besides, we know how she made it—on the backs of workers."

[lordsummerisle]

1. That is a

staggering sum of money...

[NewJeffCT]

2. What are the polls showing in this race?

Fiorina is ahead of Boxer in the polls I saw this week.

[AndyA]

3. She should have just bought them all dinner.

And what's in it for her? Sheer power? The joy of helping people? Why would anyone spend this much to get a job that doesn't pay anywhere near close that? (At least, money on top of the table, who knows what's passed along under the table to our "elected representatives" who don't seem to represent us anymore.)

[DJ13]

4. Yep, she's a real fiscal conservative spending $104m on a job that pays

$200,000 per year.

I want someone with her reasoning ability in control of the state budget.

Yep.

:rofl:

[Retrograde]

7. She just keeps thinking President Whitman

She's not going to stay at this level long - just enough to make enough of a splash to make running for the next office (2012?) plausible, but before the California legislature drives her batty. After all, if Sarah could run for VP after a half a term as governor of a state with a smaller economy, why shouldn't she run for pres after running (I use the term loosely) on of the top ten global economies?

I can't wait to get my mail-in ballot so I can vote against her.

[valerief]

5. Wonder who she's bought with it. nt

[spanone]

6. offices for sale