Howard Dean raises millions, and he's a hero.

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama (and to a lesser degree, John Edwards and maybe one or two others) raise millions, and they're evil corporatists.

Does that about sum it up?

Whether we like it or not, it's going to take serious cash to win elections in our current political climate, both at the presidential level and in some of the more contested Senate and House races.

Johanns/Kerrey, should it happen, will be a $10 million race, and that's just for one Senate seat in Nebraska.

We need all the help we can get.

Howard Dean didn't raise $50 million ten bucks at a time. I'm not sure why so many expect our presidential candidates to be any different.

You expect us to believe that corporations give money to candidates and expect nothing in return? :eyes:

Or alternatively, your argument becomes that they are ALL equally compromised, or perhaps that everyone is bought off, but your candidate is a little less bought off than the others.

Any way you slice it, the buying of our politicians can't be easily explained away.

can you clarify?

are you saying people are not allowed to investigate who contributes to a campaign?

:shrug:

I have two points, actually.

First, why is it acceptable for Howard Dean to raise millions, but not OK for Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Biden, et al, to do the same? Howard Dean didn't raise $50+ million for the party as DNC chairman by accepting nothing but small donations from individuals, so why should we expect the presidential candidates to do that?

Second, it takes a ton of money to win elections. As much as that aggravates me (I'm a solid proponent of public financing and banning all corporate donations), I understand that these races require significant amounts of money, so I recognize it as a necessary evil.

It basically boils down to idealism vs. realism. Do we reject all donations from corporations and rich donors and lose, or acknowledge the fact that we can't win an election ten or twenty bucks at a time?

Whether your first sentence is a broad brush smear or a straw man argument. What did you intend it to be?

I thought it was pretty obvious.

it's not how long they make it-- it's how they make it long.

Dr. Dean revitalized the small donor by using the internet.

I think that until we have publicly funded elections, small donors are the way we show that our candidates are not made of astroturf.

I think certain may give the impression that they do not agree. And after Pelosi's quizling behavior, Dems fear more of the same rotten fruit higher up the tree.

in every poll...

and the first thing that needs to go is corporate citizenship.
That, or bring back the draft for CEO's.