Tweet
It's not an election....it's an auction.
Here's a political perspective provided by a local L.A. political commentator, Sherry Beb*itch Jeffe. She's a very bright lady and, even though I've watched her for years, I have yet to figure out where in the political spectrum she stands. 
$ 1/2 billion to get elected?!? 
Is there any chance that our next President won't be a special-interest whore??
Political Perspective: 'Is This Any Way To Pick Our President?'
LOS ANGELES -- I've been watching Presidential politics for a little while now. (My first peek at a major party's nominating convention came in 1964, when the Democrats held their meeting in Atlantic City, New Jersey -- that's my home state.) I cannot remember a contest which has geared up so fast and as intensely as the 2008 race for the White House.
It's still about a year before the Iowa caucuses are held. Imagine the election fatigue that threatens Americans who don't eat, drink and breathe politics for a living!
Or maybe not. Hopefully, most people's priorities are on straighter than those of the Inside-the-Beltway media, political junkies and assorted pundits. Maybe voters are too busy focusing on immediate demands and concerns to pay much attention to early Presidential maneuvering.
Voter indifference wouldn't necessarily be so bad this early on in the process; a weary electorate tends not to turn out. Californians have got to be among the most besieged; we've faced 10 statewide elections in the last 6 years! If the Governor and Democratic legislative leaders have their way, the state's Presidential primary will be moved up to February 5, 2008, and Californians will have to face yet another three elections next year.
In fact, the mere possibility that will occur is one of the reasons the Presidential race has gotten such an early start. As of now, five smaller states are scheduled to hold their Presidential primaries on Feb. 5. But every time California moves up, other states reposition, front-loading the selection process. Three other key -- and geographically scattered -- states, Florida, Illinois and New Jersey, are watching California's moves carefully. They could jump to Feb. 5, too.
There's no way to wage a "four points" campaign -- following on the heels of the critical New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries --without lots of money, name recognition and an effective ground organization. All that takes a lot of time to develop -- unless you're a Hillary Clinton, John McCain or John Edwards and have navigated this obstacle course before. It's called "the money primary" and it's another reason the race has already begun.
Putting added pressure on the 20, count ‘em 20, politicians a recent Time magazine article pictured as "flirting with," exploring or officially in the race, Clinton has already announced that she'll forego public funding for both the primary and general election (should she become the Democratic nominee). Others may do the same to keep up. That could mean a contender would need to raise $100 million to contest the primaries (that's about $1.8 million each week until the Iowa caucuses!), and perhaps a total of $500 million to run the election table through November 2008.
One reason the 2008 race has attracted so many comers is that this is the first Presidential campaign in more than half a century where an incumbent President or Vice-President is not running. This is a wide open -- and therefore attractive and expensive -- contest.
But there is only a small set of A-list campaign consultants available and they are being snapped up early by already-hustling Presidential contenders. If you snooze, you lose.
Ditto contributors. Or maybe, with individual contribution limits of $2300 for each election, it's more accurate to say "Ditto fundraisers." Those guys and gals with bulging Rolodexes, or golden PDA "Contacts" lists, are being courted hard, fast, and early.
Ah, but is all of this -- a nominating process that is super-sized, at super-speed, and super expensive --"good" for democracy? Is this any way to pick our President?
I don't know, but we're well on our way to finding out.
LOS ANGELES -- I've been watching Presidential politics for a little while now. (My first peek at a major party's nominating convention came in 1964, when the Democrats held their meeting in Atlantic City, New Jersey -- that's my home state.) I cannot remember a contest which has geared up so fast and as intensely as the 2008 race for the White House.
It's still about a year before the Iowa caucuses are held. Imagine the election fatigue that threatens Americans who don't eat, drink and breathe politics for a living!
Or maybe not. Hopefully, most people's priorities are on straighter than those of the Inside-the-Beltway media, political junkies and assorted pundits. Maybe voters are too busy focusing on immediate demands and concerns to pay much attention to early Presidential maneuvering.
Voter indifference wouldn't necessarily be so bad this early on in the process; a weary electorate tends not to turn out. Californians have got to be among the most besieged; we've faced 10 statewide elections in the last 6 years! If the Governor and Democratic legislative leaders have their way, the state's Presidential primary will be moved up to February 5, 2008, and Californians will have to face yet another three elections next year.
In fact, the mere possibility that will occur is one of the reasons the Presidential race has gotten such an early start. As of now, five smaller states are scheduled to hold their Presidential primaries on Feb. 5. But every time California moves up, other states reposition, front-loading the selection process. Three other key -- and geographically scattered -- states, Florida, Illinois and New Jersey, are watching California's moves carefully. They could jump to Feb. 5, too.
There's no way to wage a "four points" campaign -- following on the heels of the critical New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries --without lots of money, name recognition and an effective ground organization. All that takes a lot of time to develop -- unless you're a Hillary Clinton, John McCain or John Edwards and have navigated this obstacle course before. It's called "the money primary" and it's another reason the race has already begun.
Putting added pressure on the 20, count ‘em 20, politicians a recent Time magazine article pictured as "flirting with," exploring or officially in the race, Clinton has already announced that she'll forego public funding for both the primary and general election (should she become the Democratic nominee). Others may do the same to keep up. That could mean a contender would need to raise $100 million to contest the primaries (that's about $1.8 million each week until the Iowa caucuses!), and perhaps a total of $500 million to run the election table through November 2008.
One reason the 2008 race has attracted so many comers is that this is the first Presidential campaign in more than half a century where an incumbent President or Vice-President is not running. This is a wide open -- and therefore attractive and expensive -- contest.
But there is only a small set of A-list campaign consultants available and they are being snapped up early by already-hustling Presidential contenders. If you snooze, you lose.
Ditto contributors. Or maybe, with individual contribution limits of $2300 for each election, it's more accurate to say "Ditto fundraisers." Those guys and gals with bulging Rolodexes, or golden PDA "Contacts" lists, are being courted hard, fast, and early.
Ah, but is all of this -- a nominating process that is super-sized, at super-speed, and super expensive --"good" for democracy? Is this any way to pick our President?
I don't know, but we're well on our way to finding out.
Is there any chance that our next President won't be a special-interest whore??
Comment