Skip to main content

There needs to be a better, more constructive metric by which to assess a given campaigns' prospects of success versus its opponent(s).   Each time I read about how a particular campaign is going in terms of who has raised how much money (frequently within these dKos diaries), my reaction generally falls somewhere between dismay and disgust.

Don't get me wrong, in the short term, if raising lots of bucks is what's required to win back the Congress in 2006, then by all means, let's raise as much as we can.  But in anticipation and preparation for such an outcome, shouldn't electoral reform, including campaign finance reform be more prominent in our platform narrative?

Buckley v. Valeo, if overturned, could be great first start. Public financing of campaigns, including equal allotments of national broadcast airtime seems like another good idea. In the meantime, we ought to be able to find better ways of characterizing a campaign's status.  Use of polling data is obviously one alternative metric, but there must be others.   If we really must keep score, wouldn't it be more elucidating to examine how the candidates stand with the voters rather than the corporations and special interest groups?

Originally posted to solitodd on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 04:23 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  A Message not a Method (none)
    There's plenty of info out there that counts people, rather than dollars, leading up to an election: polling data. The power in your concept is not in its ability to handicap races, but as a political message to separate progressives and liberals from conservatives.

    The entire conservative economic and political platform -- shrinking government, privatization, ending business regulations of all kinds -- is all about how decisions will be made. They want to make decisions by counting dollars; whoever has the most wins.

    When you make decisions by counting votes, you empower people. Conservative say they empower by cutting taxes. But that's only enough pocket money to buy a few more meaningless trinkets at Wal-Mart; it doesn't return nearly enough capital to the pocket of the average citizen to make any real difference in the major decisions that affect their jobs, their health and their lives.

    That's a message we need to carry to the masses. The political choice is about how we will make decisions: By counting votes? Or counting dollars? That's it in a nutshell.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site