[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win(Hillary's Debt)

2008-07-16 Thread R.G.
 (snip)
 
Concerning giving the Clinton's more money...

Is there anyone else in any campaign that offered to pay of a rivals 
debt.
Having gotten into debt in itself, shows irresponsiblity, and 
arrogance.
Most of the debt is owed to consultants that helped her to lose the 
election.
Did anyone help Romney pay his debt; no, he is wealthy and spent his 
own money.
The Clinton's are wealthy people.
It's just another way, the Clinton's can say- Look, Obama's no good;
He won't pay our way, and our old debts.
I wonder if the shoe were on the other foot...
and Barack had debts to pay...
I'm sure the Clinton's would be running to the bank to withdraw money, 
so they could give it to Barack?
I don't think so...
How many more millions do the Clinton's really need?





[FairfieldLife] Re: Why Obama won't win(Hillary's Debt)

2008-07-16 Thread authfriend
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, R.G. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  (snip)
  
 Concerning giving the Clinton's more money...
 
 Is there anyone else in any campaign that offered to pay of
 a rivals debt.

Yes, it happens often (but only in primary campaigns,
as far as I'm aware).

 Having gotten into debt in itself, shows irresponsiblity,
 and arrogance.

No, it doesn't. Many major campaigns end up in
debt. If you want to win, you have to spend money,
and it's not always possible to collect enough of
it in advance of when you need to spend it.

snip
 I wonder if the shoe were on the other foot...
 and Barack had debts to pay...
 I'm sure the Clinton's would be running to the bank to
 withdraw money, so they could give it to Barack?
 I don't think so...

You're right, because that's not how it works.

The winner doesn't give the loser his/her own money,
nor even his/her campaign funds. Rather, s/he asks
his/her maxed-out donors to donate to the loser's
campaign debt.

And yes, if Hillary had won, *of course* she would
do that for Obama. But it wouldn't be just out of
the goodness of her heart, any more than it is for
Obama to help Hillary with her debt.

First of all, the loser is expected to ask his/her
supporters to donate to the winner; that's a major
source of campaign funds for the winner.

Second, it's in the winner's interests to look like
a good guy to the loser's supporters (especially
when, as in this case, there's a very substantial
number of them, without most of whom Obama can't
win the general).

In a very hard-fought primary campaign like this
one, it's in the winner's interests to do whatever
s/he can to unify the party and get it behind him/
her, otherwise s/he's likely to lose in the general.

Even Obama is down with this:

NY Times, May 9:

Mr. Obama suggested today that there would be some
precedent for helping erase her debt.

I think historically after a campaign is done and you want
to unify the party – particularly when you've had a strong
opponent, Mr. Obama said, you want to make sure that you're
putting that opponent in a strong position so that they can
work to win an election in November.

http://tinyurl.com/4thjw3