So the media is naming its price for the 2012 election.

[Skidmore]

$1 billion dollars from the Dems alone, and the Rs are replacing Steele in the hopes they can match it. That's the report this morning that the President will be raising a billion for the election. The media are certainly expecting bonuses. I personally think that this is BS because Rs can raise this amount of cash without the RNC, as we have seen in the 2010 election. This rot needs to be purged from the process. Noxious rot, and we had Secretary Clinton lecturing the Middle Eastern nations on the evils of corruption just yesterday.

How do we even call people out on this? Dems pissed away the 2010 election. Rs have no incentive other than to keep forging full speed ahead. We certainly cannot expect Congress, now in the hands of big money toadies, to change anything. We're fast approaching pricing ads for Super Bowl 2012. Any thoughts?

[shraby]

1. It's expensive to pay their pundits the kinds of salaries they do.

:crazy: :sarcasm:

[MadHound]

2. Let the bidding begin,

No real change is going to happen in this country until we have full and complete publicly funded elections, from dog catcher to president. That was true before the Citizens United case, and is even more true afterwards.

Which matters more to politicians in this country, the will of the wealthy and powerful, or the will of the people? We've seen the answer to that question time and again, with the tax cuts for the rich, the lack of a true job creation program, the rejection of the public option, and on and on.

[madinmaryland]

3. It's a lot more expensive for the pukes, as they are paying the entire M$M, while the

democrats are only paying Huffington Post.

[meegbear]

4. Unless they get Dr. Evil to say it, I don't believe that price