Comments on: Missing the Non-Existent Bus

By: lulu

lulu — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:02:12 +0000

I will vote for a first time candidate who makes a mistake violating campaign law, acknowledges it when brought to his attention, and immediately makes a plan to rectify the situation by coming into compliance.

I will vote for a first time candidate who realized the an early start and grassroots approach to his campaign is necessary to have a reasonable chance at election. And by the way, it looks like Jon’s efforts are working as the endorsements keep coming aboard!

By: The Amherst Times » Blog Archive » Hey! Can Anyone Hear Me?

The Amherst Times » Blog Archive » Hey! Can Anyone Hear Me? — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 04:49:13 +0000

[…] April 29th, 2008 News 3 Comments […]

By: Russell

Russell — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:35:21 +0000

It’s better than the days, not too long ago, when politicians could do whatever they wanted with that money. It was as if it were part of their retirement fund, at least at the federal level. So at least some progress has been made on that front, ensuring that the money has to be spent for political purposes. It’s not like the money can just be spent on a substitute teacher’s housing expenses.

By: shopitall

shopitall — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 16:56:28 +0000

And what about “retiring” and making off with your “campaign war chest” like MANY politicians do?

It seems to me that voters who support a candidate with money expect that money to be spent getting (usually RE-) ELECTED, not so he/she can run a lame campaign, lose & make off with a pile o’ CASH to become a LOBBYIST!

This seems wrong to me. Perhaps that money could go BACK to the people who originally wrote the checks? I’m just thinking out loud………………

By: Russell

Russell — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 15:32:18 +0000

“Enough… of campaign funds subsidizing the personal lives of elected officials.”

I agree wholeheartedly. Who could ever support a candidate that attempts to pay his rent or mortgage with campaign funds, even when it is against the law?