In response to:

SuperPACs and "Wasted Money"

toucan1953 Wrote: Nov 08, 2012 7:13 PM
Let's hope that this makes Rove irrelevant and drives him into shamed exile - which he deserves. Rove is a vile, lying criminal. I know he was behind the "rumor" about Senator McCain fathering a child out of wedlock. Senator McCain (although I don't agree with his views) deserves the respect of the country. Fat Boy Rove deserves whatever he gets. I know it was Rove's idea to raise the "threat" level to orange or red (remember that bs?) everytime Kerry pulled ahead of Bush. Fat Boy (reminds me of Porky Pig) terrorized his country in order to win an election.
Jerry555 Wrote: Nov 08, 2012 7:15 PM
You remind me of a tie dyed hippie of the 60's, that Votes in people to take more of people's money, OPM, Other People's Money.

Networker Wrote: Nov 08, 2012 7:47 PM
i agree. You can't say for certain that money is the sole cause for winning, but you can definitively say that without it, you're almost certainly doomed. Bottom line, it's necessary to have and spending more almost always wins, Looking at other factors, such as quality candidates, policy positions, etc... money is always the one factor that shows up each time a candidate wins.
Much digital ink and wind is being expended today on the interwebs and cable TV lamenting the ineffectiveness of outside spending from conservative-aligned groups in electing Republican candidates. Indeed, some of the largest groups spent incredible amounts of money to what looks to be little effect. Many Republican candidates who had large SuperPACs behind them lost, and in what looked to be winnable races. This wasn't just Mitt Romney - it was down the ballot with candidates like Josh Mandel, Scott Brown, Tommy Thompson and George Allen.

The Washington Post's headline is "Spending by independent groups had little...