President Obama is forced to hold endless fundraisers
By louisehartmann
President Obama will likely become the first ever incumbent President to be outraised by his opponent in his re-election bid. And in a desperate attempt to even the playing field just slightly before November – the President has been forced to hold endless fundraisers. As the Center for American Progress reveals, President Obama has already held nearly 200 fundraisers during his first term in office. To put that in perspective, George. W Bush held slightly more than 80, and President Clinton held roughly 70.
But in the post-Citizens-United era, when billionaires can dump their fortunes in to changing our elections, then politicians are forced to endlessly raise money. And it’s not just President Obama: Members of Congress are stuck in this trap, too. If the average House Member spent 40 hours a week fundraising, he or she would need to raise, on average, $367 an hour. For a Senator, $819 an hour.
This is one the biggest problems facing our democracy. We elect our representatives to go to Washington and represent our interests. But in reality, what they are forced to do by our Supreme Court is fundraise, fundraise, fundraise – giving those with deep pockets more influence than average voters. To fix this – we need to get money out of politics. Go to MoveToAmend.org.
Comments
#2
Suprised Your Not Leading On The Romney x10 Of Years Of Zero Tax Bombshell It's Out There Now - Romney Either Will Go Down Now In 'A Death By 1000 Cuts' Relentless Media Zero-Tax Shit-Storm OR Release His Taxes, Informing A Grateful Nation, That In x10 Years The Person Cleaning The Toilets In McDonald's Has Been Paying More Tax, Than His Quarter-Billionaire Ass Has. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/31/harry-reid-romney-taxes_n_17240...
#3
Romney becoming president would be a start toward getting money out of politics, or at least over-turning Citizen's United in 2016, as Romney's administration and other Republican candidates would certainly ride that horse to death. I believe that things haven't gotten bad enough yet to open most people's eyes. Romney in charge would be a terrible way to have that happen, consequence-wise (sorry), but it may be the only way given Americans' disconnect with elections and the workings of government. Where are you, Civics classes, when we so desperately need you?!
#4
I like our system in Canada. No fixed election dates. The election is called and three months later we are done. Very little money is spent and they don't have time to make endless attack ads. Mainly just policy. I can honestly say, I am 50 years and don't know what religion any of our prime Ministers where. They don't have time for things like that. I can't beleive you talked about a birthcertificate for 4 years, Bill Clinton received less airtime for having sex with an intern. Do you not see that millions of people are out of work. People are losing there homes daily. Don't even get me started on the trillions you are spending on your failing green energy policies. Do you know how many people you can feed with a trillion dollars? Stick to the issues that matter. Jobs, Jobs, Jobs
#5
Of course, it was the right-wing conservative business party that spent 4 years talking about Obama's birth certificate. And then same for Clinton's Monica affair. So how are all those conservatives, that currently run Canada, doing up there? Don't they have any liberals in power that they can bash?
#6
After both wings of our business party get done wasting all that money....wouldn't it be really great if we voted for neither one....if we vote for someone who was not owned by the right-wing power-elite it would sure do a lot to show them that money will no longer buy votes. Vote for Roseanne Barr or Jill Stein!!!
#7
Obama lost his ethics a long time ago. He no longer has any credibility. The ruling elite are his puppet-masters. They are counting on the American voters to be cowed into voting for Obama who will continue to pander false hope and sell us out. Unfortunately, too many American voters will not have the intestinal fortitude to take a chance on a third party candidate and risk a Romney win. But if a third party wins...I'd bet the Supreme Court would rule it unconstitutional and shoot it down. They'll find some ridiculous excuse...maybe national security...or they will invade Iran..or something like another 911 false flag operation. Obama would then declare himself dictator. Sieg Heil!! But voting in a third party candidate, aside from all-out rebellion, is the only way to smack down the "he who has all the gold...rules" system we have now.
#8
No all the Liberals have there heads in the sand. The Conservative party has replaced all the jobs lost in the rescission two years ago and we are doing better than any other G20 country by austerity and infrastructure rebuilding not by building solar panels and wind turbines that do work.
#9
If Obama didnt roll over and betray us on this one too, then he wouldnt take pac money and wouldnt be beholdent to all those corps that he is busy paying back on a daily basis. Then millions more like me would support him and he would win hands down anyway. But instesd he's a piece of crap and doesnt deserve our vote. I wont make that mistake again. I dont know why thomm works on his re election campaign daily instead of being a Progressive instead of a Democrat. And get with the program and start supporting canditates that support us. We got Rocky Anderson and Jill Stein for starters. They wouldnt sell us out
#10
I think Obama would have won over thousands of us if he had refused to take PAC money. I think the small contributions would pour in. And millions of voters would see an ethical candidate. Imagine! I think he would have made huge gains -- beyond what money could buy -- if he had done that.
#11
Steve Figler #4 may have it right: Things may have to get worse before better.
No I'm not giving up, but I don't see our representative institutions doing anything to reverse Citizens United, reduce money's corruption of government, make big-money a liability, etc. -- other than arm-twisting the grass-roots for more spare-change.
We need to do it ourselves; but if it's too late, things may yet have to get worse, before better. IF so, WE should be preparing now to exploit that possibility. -- Duhhh, what a novel concept. Whatever. Oh well.
#12
youre right, Obama is a right wing Neocon. Thanks...good point
#13
Thats unrealistic . Reality is as long as we have Citizens United money pouring in from billionaires, Super Pacs & huge corps. Obama has no chocie but to compete and sadly that means raising lots of money. Campaign finance reform is needed but for election 2012 Obama must do what he can to beat Bagger run gutless Romney.. Then we must work to end Citizens United . Its a slap in the face to all US citizens. What has Obama to do with Genocide Murder & insanity ? Finally Obama losing his' job' means Mitt wins ! That must not happen ! ONe election can make drastic difference in events / Ask yourself if Gore had been Pres for 8 yrs rather that Bush . I propose Iraq would not have happened. Global crash may have been averted . Wall St would have been regulated. Bin laden may have been stopped since Bush admin ignored many strong CIA warnings of a coming Al quada attack CIA said ' All lights were flashing red in August Sept 2001 ' .
#14
That comment is just ridiculous .
#15
Cons have replaced all the jobs lost in the Bush crash ? ? whoa Thats nonsense Has NO basis in fact . Last 3+ yrs 4 mil jobs created . Under W US lost 700 K jobs a month . Waged 2 long screwed up wars based on lies and fear tactics Bush Paid for nada Unfunded corp cuts - Unfunded wars . Mission Accomplsihed by Obama & Seals Got Bin laden & top al qauda Saved US auto business Mitt said Let them die I thought Hartmann has smarter listeners but I think some are paid to post lies. Nothing new Thats Fox fans M. O.
#16
"Giving those with deep pockets more influence than average voters."
No matter how much is spent to convince a vulnerable citzen to vote themselves into jobless poverty....the average voter still has to make the choice to vote for the scoundrels who are willing to prostitute our democracy and become cowering little submissives to those deep pocket bastards.
So why would a seemingly sane person vote this way......turn on the television or FM radio!!!! Without truth in reporting, ALL IS LOST....we will have no functional democracy....I really think it's that simple.
I wouldn't trust Romney around my dog, let alone as President, but I can honestly say I would trust President Obama with the keys to my own house, so I know who I'm voting for, the person who wants to improve things for the average hard working citizen. It's up to us to provide him with a house and senate that won't obstruct every damn thing he trys to do to improve things. By the way, I'm an independent who has voted for Nader, so yes I do get it!
#17
We need to repeal Citizens united and change our system to publicly funded elections. Candidates only get so much money to fund advertizing elections, when that is gone tough luck. We as a nation can no longer afford to let the military industrial complex run our country. Their is no reason why we can't have full employment in this country,it is a sham put forward by the rich that don't want to supply jobs for the people. It's easier to control people through welfare. The right wing doesn't want to do away with welfare or they would change the tax laws to give breaks to corporations who make jobs in this country, not in China and other countries. In 30+ years we have had 3 unnecessary wars that weren't paid for. We have a drug problem in this country it would be less expensive to have treatment programs and supply controlled drugs to addicts than spend Billions of dollars on abatement programs that don't work and never will work. We are just putting more money in a police state have police breaking and entering without warrants. This is becoming a police state especially since the patriot act which should be called the unpatriot act. What happened to the Constitution of the United States. This is a country where if you have wealth you can break any laws withouy being punished. What happened to America land of the FREE.
A Concerned Citizen
#18
Change is coming after the 2012 Presidential Elections. When the flood of SUPER PAC money hits the fan in October 2012 Americans will finally get the message that we must change the law that allows unlimited funds to flow into our election process including from foreign corporations and American corporations. We will finally be fed up with the madness. The Republican Party mouths that they do not like hiding donor names however they gladly receive the funds without complaint. The Republicans are disgusting and at the same time they are corrupting the political process. Nothing corrupts more than money and the Republicans are in bed with billionaires who have no conscience.
#19
But, Obama is also "in bed with the billionaires who have no conscience". Both Candidates are. I like Obama way more than Romney and I believe he is a way better person than Romney...at least he didn't make a career of destroying people's jobs. And I hope, if a third party candidate doesn't win, that Obama wins over Romney. But we will never change things for the good of the majority of Americans if we continue to let the corrupt two-party bait-and-switch system run rough-shod over us. The bait... is Obama the smooth-talking panderer of "hope we can believe in" (NOT) and the switch.... is Obama the Wall Street and corporate owned puppet who will continue to give in to the dictates of the wealthy. Obama is being used by the ruling elite to keep the people from doing things that will really make a change. By pandering hope, they catch a lot of people, who would otherwise be in the streets and businesses really demanding change, diffused and confused...divide and conquer. What scares the ruling elite the most is that the masses will organize, or at least burst out in unison, against them.
#20
If Obama wins, it will be 4 more years of more of the same. If Romney wins, it might just be the last straw that will set the masses in motion to overthrow the tyranny of the elite powers in this Country. The ruling elite knows this and although they would love to have Romney in power, providing it didn't trigger a revolution of the masses, they realize that their "tool" (or "fool") to quell that possibility lies with an Obama win. Think of it this way....if the ruling elite didn't want Obama to win...do you really think they would have chosen such a nitwit flunky like Romney to run against him? There are lots of Republicans that could have been much more palatable and less threatening to more people than Romney.
The whole reason why the ruling elite (and not the Republican politicians who are just pawns of the ruling elite as well) wanted someone like Romney to run against Obama was because they wanted to scare the crap out of anyone thinking about voting for a third party candidate. Many of Obama's supporters who voted for him the first time are very unhappy with his performance in the last four years and want to vote for a third party candidate. So, the ruling elite uses tactics (running Romney) that will scare them into remaining in the fold of voting for Obama once again.
Thanks to the corrupt two-party system we have all become frogs in a slowly boiling pot. It is time for us frogs to jump out of that pot before it is too late...it may already be too late...like Global Warming...Climate Change...whatever you want to call it. The only thing that might help to change is to finally break that chain of corruption, black-mail, fraud, and duress is to massively, over-whelmingly vote for a third party candidate. And even then, I would surmise that even they would eventually have to back-track on what they originally stood for because the corrupting powers would be too great. But, it would be a history-changer and a sign that things have to be done to change the course of corruption.
I suspect that even if Al Gore had won the Presidency, that even he would have eventually had to play ball with the corporate elite and compromise on what we all believed he stood for. I believe that no matter who wins the Presidency...if they don't play ball with the elite powers in the US then they would eventually meet with the same fate as JFK. We have an illusion of a political system but the real people that hide behind it and control it are not controlled by the political system or the collective powers, or their laws, of the people of the US. They are ruthless and will stop at nothing to maintain their wealth and power.
As Jack Nicholson said in the movie... A Few Good Men...."You can't handle the truth!". And most Americans will continue to act out the illusionary games that have been manufactured by the ruling elite..and will continue to do nothing more than go to the polls and vote for Tweedle Dee or Tweedle Dum. Then they will sit and twiddle their thumbs again and frown and fret as to why things aren't getting any better.
#21
Love your posts, Palindromedary. It does not really matter who gets elected. The President could, if he chose, not accept PAC money and just be the President. He is not "forced" to fundraise. Right now, all he seems to do is campaign. I think more people would vote for him if he just did the job we expect him to do. With all the fundraising, he looks just like the guy he is running against. It also brings out that mean destructive side of his personality which is not particularly appealing.
#22
If Obama had been the man we voted into office, he would have taken on the big banks first. He did not, so none of the real problems are fixed. Health care did not cause the crash of 2008. The investment banks did. They are operating the same way they did before he took office, and we are heading for another crash. I am reading Keen's Debunking Economics, as recommended by Hartmann. I think Iceland followed his theories, and the country is coming back from the brink. We should have let GM go through bankruptcy along with the banks. It would have been painful, but less painful than it will be when our economy collapses. Unfortunately, neither McCain or Obama were up to the task of becoming President in 2009, and Obama never grew into the job. He may be brilliant, but he's a major disappointment.
#23
Thanks, SaltoftheEarth...and I sure agree with all your other points as well. Good recommendation on that book you mention in your next post. I'll check it out.
Thom's Blog Is On the Move
By webmaster
Hello All
Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.
Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.
Images of Thom
With His Holiness The Dalai Lama, at His home in Dharamsala, India (Synthesis Dialogues - made into a movie narrated by Harrison Ford)
From Screwed:
"Once again, Thom Hartmann hits the bull’s eye with a much needed exposé of the so-called ‘free market.’ Anyone concerned about the future of our nation needs to read Screwed now."
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Thom Hartmann seeks out interesting subjects from such disparate outposts of curiosity that you have to wonder whether or not he uncovered them or they selected him."
From Unequal Protection, 2nd Edition:
"Hartmann combines a remarkable piece of historical research with a brilliant literary style to tell the grand story of corporate corruption and its consequences for society with the force and readability of a great novel."
If President Obama had the courage to be ethical, he could break from this system. He could tell the entire truths by STOPPING and REFUSING to play this filthy GAME called politics. Who dares to really make change? One who would use the bully pulpit and refuse to take this earth down by American corporate/government fascist design. Who has the courage to challenge this and believe in another way? Why won't leaders actually lead? Answer: They, too, are afraid to buck this system. A truly ETHICAL Leader would not/could not compromise with this murder, this genocide, this insanity which America has descended deeply into. Even if the cost was this "job", an ethical leader would lead. Period.