Do you think there is too much money in politics? Tough luck.
“You are officially certified as the $120 million man,” Politico’s Mike Allen said to Bush during an on-stage interview at a summit of GOP mega-donors.
“What’s the question?” Bush deadpanned.
“How much is too much?” Allen pressed.
By now, hopefully, you are familiar with the fact that Jeb Bush pretended not to be running for president for a good long while for no other reason than that it allowed him to raise money for his Super PAC. This is called a violation of the spirit of the law, and lawyers can always help you get around the letter of the law. If you have a problem with skirting the rules?
“Money helps. I’m playing by the rules of the game the way it’s laid out,” said Bush, who worked with the political committees before officially becoming a candidate. He also sent several of his former top advisers to outside groups to manage the unlimited cash machines. “If people don’t like it, that’s just tough luck,” he added.
Now, you might be thinking to yourself that no gives a shit about the arcana of campaign finance rules, but I thought that, too, before I read Stan Greenberg’s piece in last month’s Washington Monthly. Take a look:
Three-quarters of voters in the twelve most competitive Senate battleground states in 2014—states flooded with campaign money—support a constitutional amendment to overturn the Citizens United ruling. Three in five of those voters support “a plan to overhaul campaign spending by getting rid of big donations and allowing only small donations to candidates, matched by taxpayer funds.” The American citizenry has become progressively more supportive of barring big donors and corporate mega-contributions and using public funds to empower small donations. Even in the face of charges that public funding is “welfare for politicians,” voters in the midterms said that they would rally to a candidate who argues that “we need a government of, by and for the people—not government bought and paid for by wealthy donors.”
I’m still having troubling accepting these numbers, but if they are correct then Bush’s big haul of big-donor money and his skirting of the campaign finance laws are significant potential liabilities. He probably needs a better comeback than “Tough luck.”
Now, you might be thinking to yourself that no gives a shit about the arcana of campaign finance rules, but I thought that, too, before I read Stan Greenberg’s piece in last month’s Washington Monthly. …
Arcana? No one really cares. If you tell them the results, as you state about Jebby? They’ll certainly care. Except the Democrats have little interest in fixing things.
That really should be his 47% moment, but it won’t be.
It’s too early for that. People aren’t yet paying attention. But you make a good point in that Jeb can (and almost certainly will) say stupid things at inopportune times. It’s far from certain he’s ready for such a big stage. Let’s see if he even emerges from the primaries.
Karl Rove could make being a Vietnam War hero into a liability.
How is it not possible that Democratic candidate cannot make the one who spends the most campaign money symptomatic of how they will treat your tax money? And make the one with the biggest war chest into a liability.
The only hitch is that the public needs to find out without using conventional media approaches and especially without using negative advertising. In other words, they need to find out who’s who in ways that are actually credible and truthful.
Is that too much to ask?
Barack’s people put this beauty together:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ud3mMj0AZZk
One of the best political ads I’ve ever seen. One would think Jebby susceptible to something similarly hard hitting around campaign money with his “tough luck” comment figuring prominently. Hilary’s not the ideal candidate to pull it off though.
When I first saw that ad, I knew how powerful it was. Eerie and to the point.
Rmoney singing about America while his record shows that he was a part of the outsourcing movement.
Please proceed, Governor.
door to door, local campaign workers. allowing enough time to talk with people. where I went last fall people invited me in to talk
Politician’s arguing for campaign finance reform have one problem: hypocrisy.
Now you and I know that nobody is going to be elected without being a full-throated participant in the system; money in campaign finance is bad like steroids, not like cigarettes — you can be against it and still need to take it to compete. It’s like Al Gore being a fraud for having air conditioning.
I would like to see an amendment floated, but I don’t know what horrors must happen for it to pass through congress. As income inequality steepens, Republicans (mostly) are not going to want to give up their advantage over Republicans. I think we may be screwed until the revolution comes.
If American voters in the GOP were intelligent. They would tell Jeb “Tough Luck” at the polls and not vote for him. But as this is the GOP. He just cinched the GOP Presidential Nomination.
A strong majority of voters also always say that they hate “negative campaign ads,” but the ads continue to work.
On the issue of campaign financing, do they prefer the billionaire that claims he can self-fund over the guy with plenty of wealthy friends?
Bush’s “that’s just tough luck” response was his try-out effort to sound more like Trump. Probably sounds better to the public when the speaker is a billionaire.
If we’ve got the Republican establishment’s candidate actively trying to sound like the buffoon imbecile, we’ve truly fallen through the looking glass. No wonder Comedy Central has become a mainstay of the MSM. In this climate it’s impossible to do insightful analysis without resorting to irony, satire, sarcasm, etc.
“We” haven’t done anything. The GOP establishment candidate was already a buffoon imbecile — he just wasn’t as articulate before Trump appeared to show them all how to speak teabag.
If those poll numbers are accurate, it could just be that people get fed up with all the campaign ads, period. Especially in battleground states, since that’s where they tend to be subjected to the most ads.
It’s not something to get overconfident about, but massive campaign spending can backfire.
it won’t be much of an issue because Hillary is going to raise money from many of the same issue.
I have never seen much evidence that process based arguments like campaign finance reform will generate much heat.
That the candidate is talking over the heads of his intended constituents to the ‘people’ he seems to be addressing; other campaigns, political professionals, the media and villagers. “If people don’t like it, that’s just tough luck”, he added.
At this stage in the nomination he may have a point; nobody else is really paying much attention. Excepting the media’s ‘summer of love’ for Trump, obviously.
“Well, Mike, as they say on MTV, that new channel that all the kids are listening to, ‘Too much is not enough.'”
The Republicans are still in the denial stage:
Really? Seriously? “No clear sense of who his constituency really is?” Not every yahoo and tub-thumper they’ve spent the last six years winding up, perchance?
6 years?
You mean 36 years?
please proceed, really
Hard to say if it will matter, especially since Hilary is perhaps not the best vessel for that criticism. But it has gotten just about as ridiculous as it can’t get short of candidates wearing sponsorship patches or corporate uniforms like NASCAR teams. A small handful of families are running this presidential election. These donors aren’t calling the candidates. The candidates are calling them, going to their events, kissing their rings…
Reminds me of the 2000 campaign, when that turd Phill Gramm said “There’s nothing as good as early money” or something of that sort. He went on to go nowhere.
Jeb!: too much is just enough!
Thanks ~ Boo! – love your site. Please don’t retire [completely]
Need more Grateful Dead Family stories…
…and your thoughts on HitchBOT, too…
Catching a 737 to the promised land…. See ya
If there was a functioning FEC Bush would certainly be busted. He did not obey the letter of the law, though he pretended to, smirking all the way, except for that famous three seconds in May when he forgot he wasn’t supposed to be a candidate. Otherwise he lied, saying he “hadn’t made up his mind”, while illegally coordinating with the Right to Rise superPAC. They collected a hundred million dollars in violation of limits on donation size! His strategist Mike Murphy admitted on Buzzfeed audio that they were still coordinating after Bush finally made his declaration!
Check out this Facebook video – it pretty much says it all.
It’s good. Now how to get 100 million Americans to sit still and watch it.
Is the solution to send this group money? Why would they end a video like that?
Looks like they want you to join their group.
people care about this but when it comes down to actual voting they don’t care
Why are you so surprised? People have been griping about “special interests” since Reagan’s time.
since Washington
Bush’s money isn’t going to help him tomorrow night. My predictions: T-rump will emerge from the debate still leading the pack. Walker(gag) will gain a point or two and Kasich will pick up strongly, while doofus brother will drop 5 points. All this in my deservedly humble opinion. God bless America.