BARACK OBAMA WILL BE THE LAST DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT
Thanks, Justice Roberts:
Crossroads GPS, the Super PAC backed by Republican operative Karl Rove, announced Wednesday that it has launched a $25 million ad campaign over the next month — representing the same amount the Obama campaign has pledged to spend in May....
Crossroads has been able to vastly out-raise and out-spend its Democratic counterpart, Priorities USA, which launched a $4 million buy just yesterday....
Last week, Obama senior adviser David Axelrod told reporters that the campaign planned to spend $25 million on television ads in May.
Barack Obama may have the mojo -- and I stress may -- to withstand the fecal tsunami of GOP super PAC attack ads this year. But four years from now -- unless the Democrats have become vastly more friendly to the interests of billionaires than they already are -- how is the first Democratic non-incumbent to run in a Citizens United world possibly going to compete with right-wing billionaire cash? How is anyone with even vaguely progressive ideas on economic issues ever going to compete?
You can talk to me all you want about the so-called emerging Democratic majority; I'm telling you that, if Citizens United isn't reversed or curtailed, or (perhaps) hackers develop a little political savvy and make it impossible for super PACs to keep their donor lists secret, there will never be another Democratic president after Barack Obama. We will have only a far right in our electoral politics.
(X-posted at Booman Tribune.)
Yes, I hope the Roberts Court is proud of its growing Fascist Kleptocracy.
ReplyDeleteIF we get a "D" majority big enough in both houses, maybe they can pass a law banning political ads from public airwaves.
Oh, yeah, Red Dog and Whoreporatist Democrats - I forgot.
Never miiiiiiiiiiiiind...
There is more to "Democratic" than party affiliation. The headline would be more accurately Obama will be the last Democratically elected President.
ReplyDelete2012 has nothing to do with signs and portents in the sky.
Not to add to the gloom, but: let's say hackers did manage to crack PAC security and name donors. Would that make any difference? If the ads are omnipresent and "catchy" enough, will the kind of voter who is influenced by watching them give a damn about who paid for them? Would s/he even recognize any of their names?
ReplyDeleteAnd Victor, even if a (very) hypothetical Dem supermajority passed legislation gutting Citizens United, that would have no effect either unless the Supreme Court which reviewed any such legislation was at least a justice or two different from this one. This Court, or one similarly constituted, would toss the new law just like McCain-Feingold was tossed.
BH,
ReplyDeleteAlso too - what you said.
Not that anyone requested it, but I have one somewhat more optimistic notion. There probably is research data out there to quantify it, but: doesn't it seem likely that after a certain level of saturation, a massive volume of political ads becomes counter-productive white noise, more apt to piss off a voter than convince? Just anecdotally, isn't it common to hear people carp about their TV time getting clogged with political ads? Perhaps, at least until some further fine-tuning, the open floodgates for ad money will tempt the right into overplaying its hand.
ReplyDeleteSeems to me that for now (i.e., until we have a different Supreme Court and/or an amended First Amendment), the key to beating Citizens United is to neuter its effect - but as I've harped on before, that comes right back down to individual voters deciding to make their choices based on something more substantive than TV ads. When, if ever, that will happen in large enough numbers to matter, I can't say - but I wouldn't bet much on "soon".
doesn't it seem likely that after a certain level of saturation, a massive volume of political ads becomes counter-productive white noise, more apt to piss off a voter than convince?
ReplyDeleteWell, that's when you switch to sanctimony and phony uplift -- hard to do with this GOP presidential candidate, but it worked well with most of the last few.
If you are right that will only show that the people are so stupid and irresponsible and willfully ignorant that democracy does them no good.
ReplyDelete