Obama Chose Winning Over His Word
June 20th, 2008 at 12:30am Mark Noonan
From the Associated Press, of all places:
The Democrat once made a conditional agreement to accept taxpayer money from the public financing system, and accompanying spending limits, if his Republican opponent did, too.
No more.
The chance to financially swamp John McCain — and maneuver for an enormous general election advantage — proved too great an allure.
Obama, a record-shattering fundraiser, reversed course Thursday and decided to forgo some $85 million so he could raise unlimited amounts of money and spend as much as he wants.
“It’s not an easy decision, and especially because I support a robust system of public financing of elections,” Obama said in announcing that despite his previous commitment, he would rely only on private donations because “the public financing of presidential elections as it exists today is broken.”
And with that, the first-term Illinois senator tarnished his carefully honed image as a different kind of politician — one who means what he says and says what he means — while undercutting his call for “a new kind of politics.”
McCain, for his part, painted the issue as a character test, saying: “This election is about a lot of things. It’s also about trust. It’s about keeping your word.”
Question: Is Obama confident of winning, and thus doesn’t care, or is that he realises he’s not doing well and needs every cent just to try and win it in a squeeker?
My bet is the latter - though we’ll have to see if Obama really has all the cash he says he does…seems to me that we’ve seen some stories of late of Democrats not being able to get the money together…of course, maybe part of Hillary deal on concession would be her rolodex of illegal donors? Plus, perhaps Al Gore can go get some money from some monks?
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Corruption, Democrats, Republicans
28 Comments
1. ViralNexus | June 20th, 2008 at 1:17 am
Mark, I want you to do one thing for me. Go to AOL Political Machine or any other vote tracking system and look at the primary and caucus results for each individual county. You will notice one thing. The second place Democratic contender more often than not garnered 50% more votes than the first place Republican contender. Even where this isn’t the case, in EVERY county in the US there were no less than 30% more votes cast for the Democrats than the Republicans. I don’t think you all have caught on but people aren’t voting for the Democratic Party, they are voting against the GOP. I know there were some places such as Texas where open elections were exploited by Republicans who voted as Democrats to throw off the votes but this was a rare occurance. And that tactic also failed because the point was to help Hillary win which she obviously did not. Short of telling America to f**k off, there isn’t anything that Obama can do to loose. Especially something like this that most people don’t even know about much less care. FYI, I am not an Obama supporter- the GOP needs to stop standing there with their fingers crossed hoping they’re going to win and actually do something about it.
2. Vicodin-N-Cocoa | June 20th, 2008 at 1:43 am
It was always my impression that you played politics to win not to lose. So long as there is such a thing as corporate “personhood” Buckley v Valeo decision can’t be overturned.
Either you’re for complete public financing of campaigns or you’re not. If not, all’s fair. Money is fungible so these 527s are just window dressing.
I wasn’t complaining when the Bush Pioneers raised all that money and I’m not complaining now. This is the US system for better or worse.
3. Gaijin | June 20th, 2008 at 1:44 am
Keep talking Mark, keep talking. Your party is going to lose, badly. America is tired of Compasionate Conservatism, Trickle Down Economics and the like. The Republicans had complete control of the government for most of this decade. People saw what your ilk is capable of. The American people are not impressed.
Maybe your next book could be,
“How I Got It Wrong…”
Peace, Gaijin
4. Kahn | June 20th, 2008 at 1:47 am
VN, OK. I pick the counties in Florida.
5. Rana Quijotesca | June 20th, 2008 at 1:49 am
I would prefer public financing of campaigns, but since we don’t have that, candidates should be able to use the money that comes in from their donors (within the confines of the law, of course). Obama realized that he couldn’t do that while staying within the confines of the public financing system, so he left to maintain respect for that law. McCain on the other hand, he over-spent that limit (and used the fact that he was getting that money as collateral on a loan to his campaign, or some such tripe). Neither candidate stayed in the system… only one is being open about it…
6. OpChaosUK | June 20th, 2008 at 2:18 am
VN, the goal of “Operation Chaos” was not a Hillary victory, but to keep the primaries going as long as possible so that the Donkaroach candidates could “bloody each other up” while McCain went untouched.
Mark, do you ever sleep? I see posts from you at all hours.
I see Gaygin hasn’t changed a bit, still delusional, still has the MorOn.org mentality. However, I don’t look at November with much optimism; the GOP has lost its way, IMHO.
It’s a great time to be in England…
7. Brian (Boston) | June 20th, 2008 at 3:15 am
I do wish campaigns were limited on the amount they can spend to make the races even to some extent. It is disappointing that Obama has opted out.
8. Mark Noonan | June 20th, 2008 at 3:54 am
Viral,
That is fairly common in primaries - while the Donks have been more enthused, they haven’t been that much more than usual.
Also, nice try at completely changing the subject from Obama’s rank hypocrisy.
You guys sure you want a man like this to be President?
9. clark smith | June 20th, 2008 at 5:54 am
To Obama and the Dems, winning is everything, with or (as is most often the case) WITHOUT honor.
10. OpChaosUK | June 20th, 2008 at 6:14 am
Speaking of Obama, did anybody see the YouTube video of him in 2007, promising to weaken this country beyond repair? He gonna end the war, end all war, and disarm our nukes.
Who was he speaking to?
Speaking of ending all nukes, you all should see some of the kooks over here in the UK. They were here back in the 80’s when I was here, and they’re still here. Holdovers from the Vietnam era, as kooky as ever, living off the dole. These idiots haven’t stopped anything ever, except diverting traffic from the main gate.
These are the types of people Obama is courting/pandering to.
Look libbies, I know you hate Bush and everything GOP, but is this what you really want?
11. kmg | June 20th, 2008 at 7:43 am
1. Obama always made participating in public financing contingent upon reaching an agreement with his opponent. That agreement could not be reached.
2. Obama did nothing illegal. McCain is currently breaking the law by exceeding the primary spending caps he agreed to when he applied for public funding. The chairman of the FEC said he can not opt out without the approval of the FEC, yet McCain continues to bust the spending caps. That’s a criminal offense.
12. bongoman | June 20th, 2008 at 8:02 am
Hang on. McCain opted into public financing & accepted the spending limits and then profited from that opt-in by securing a campaign saving loan.
And then he tried to opt-out.
But Obama is the one you take to task?
13. js | June 20th, 2008 at 8:29 am
it must excede your ability to grasp here, no? two idiot posts in a row…its not about mccain….its about the ability to trust obama’s word….you run off making accusations against mccain that even the FEC hasnt done, and its off topic….
14. neocon | June 20th, 2008 at 9:27 am
If you’ll notice in every Obama thread, our resident liberals deflect the issue rather than address.
It’s apparent that they realize their candidate is flawed and what must really hurt, is that they believed he was different.
Turns out, he is just another corrupt Chicago politician who also happens to be an inexperienced racist.
Ouch.
Gaijin,
Anyone older than 19, knows that the Democrats controlled Congress for forty years prior to 1994, and Pelosi and Reid have reminded us all about that long nightmare.
peace, neocon
15. Sunny | June 20th, 2008 at 10:28 am
clark smith | June 20th, 2008 at 5:54 am
To Obama and the Dems, winning is everything, with or (as is most often the case) WITHOUT honor.
You can say this with a straight face? With the swiftboat tactics form the GOP for the last 10 years? There was no honor in putting out a flyer insuating that John McCain had fathered a child with a black woman out of wedlock when this was a child he and Cindy had adopted. When the GOP attacked the military service of John Kerry? There have been so many really dirty tactics used by the GOP and their ilk that for anyone to accuse the Democratic party of using any tactic necessary to win is a hyprocrit. Before you throw stones you need to check your own party’s sins. And now, there are the attacks on Michelle Obama - and the smears make the GOP look petty and impotent.
16. Chris | June 20th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Deleted - off topic.
17. Timothy Horrigan | June 20th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Hey, winning is what it’s all about. And all it takes to win is 270 electoral votes. Even massively unpopular candidates can do that…. e.g., George W. Bush.
18. Rich | June 20th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
I asked this in the other thread and no libs replied so I’ll ask again. What ads was Obama referring to that 527’s are running against him? Please i just want to see one national ad. On the other hand, moveon.org is running an ad against McCain. If you cannot answer this simple question, then i am assuming you do not care Obama is a hypocrit and a liar.
19. kmg | June 20th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
MoveOn’s adds have been run by their PAC, not their 527. They announced they were shutting down their 527 today at Obama’s request, even though the 527 hasn’t really done anything since ‘05.
20. Rich | June 20th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
“MoveOn’s adds have been run by their PAC, not their 527. They announced they were shutting down their 527 today at Obama’s request, even though the 527 hasn’t really done anything since ‘05.”
Ok so Barak has asked to shut the 527 down. Good. Now can you tell me what 527 Obama said has been smearing him so badly that he has to decline public financing?
21. OpChaosUK | June 21st, 2008 at 2:59 am
And now, there are the attacks on Michelle Obama
Well, Sunny, when you get up in public, say stupid, racist crap, and your husband is the party’s nominee, youu’re fair game. Both sides do this, or do you only focus on the GOP?
Swift boating? John “Spitball” Kerry? Gee, have I missed something? Has he finally released his SF180?
22. kmg | June 21st, 2008 at 8:29 am
Rich,
I don’t believe Obama named a specific group. An example is the National Campaign Fund running ads insinuating that Obama is a muslim. The Swift Boaters have also said they will be gearing up for this election.
I don’t have a problem with Obama declining public financing. His campaign is fueled by small donors. The average donation is a little over $100. It is funny, though, that all of those who are railing against Obama on this have not said a word about McCain being a campaign finance scofflaw.
23. Rich | June 21st, 2008 at 10:20 am
“I don’t believe Obama named a specific group. An example is the National Campaign Fund running ads insinuating that Obama is a muslim. The Swift Boaters have also said they will be gearing up for this election.”
Never heard of the national Campaign fund. Where are the playing these ads? On tv or internet? In what states? How much money have they spent? Youre gonna have to do better than some obscure group no one has ever heard of if the candidate for president is gonna go back on his word. By the way, the media has been very unkind to obama over this decision, so you know and I know it was wrong.
24. Rich | June 21st, 2008 at 10:25 am
Found the national Campaign fund on the internet and quite frankly kmg you were disengenuous. They have shitty ad posted on youtube and that is about it. Obama opted out and went back on his word for pure political reasons and then lied about it. Change you can believe in my ass. I would like to thank Obama for supporting the telecom immunity bill, that has got to piss you libs off.
25. kmg | June 21st, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Rich,
We are supposed to judge right and wrong by what the media tells us?
We disagree about whether Obama lied, but for the purpose of debate I will concede the point. So, Obama lied about whether or not he would accept public funding. McCain knowingly broke the law when he declared he was pulling out of public financing for his primary campaign. Which is worse? Why aren’t you lambasting McCain for his lie and criminal conduct?
26. jayhay | June 21st, 2008 at 12:44 pm
when obama can get 3 times as much from small donors, regular americans, why should he go on the government dole like mccain? since when have you guys supported public ANYTHING? (except maybe executions…)
just watch the GOP 527’s ramp up the smears, and you’ll see why obama wanted every dollar he could get. you break it, you own it.
27. eddie johnson | June 22nd, 2008 at 2:23 pm
I am not a rascist and how dayre jayhay accuse me of being one. I am a patriot and thinks Obama will sell us out to Iran, The Liberals (who seem willing to have us all wearing religious garb on our heads, bowing down waiting till someone deigns to cut said head off), the druggies, the Europeans, The Russians, etc..
Isn’t free speach charming
28. Smokedsalmon | June 22nd, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Obamas Broken Promise
In the recent past, on video, Obama promised that he backed the public funding of presidential campaigns to keep the evil of big money out of the elections process. He promised to work with his Republican opponent to mutually commit to that if nominated. That promise has been broken. Now that he sees he can raise 3x his opponents money he has publicly stated that he will renege on that promise.
I guess his idea of change is to go backwards in time over 30 years to the bad old days of fund raising. Shame on you Obama.