Where there’s a will, there’s a way. It’s not that Perry is the sole rogue in this case, either. These methods are available to all the candidates.
What is the impact of all this money on the candidates? It means the influence of people with that kind of money to invest in a campaign are going to get something tangible for that investment, plain and simple. Opensecrets.org is a great resource for looking at where all the politicians are getting their money from. You can see the major contributors and their politicians of choice. It helps to explain why, in the middle of a deep economic crisis, the boys in the Capitol seem to be more concerned with protecting Goldman Sachs than you or I.
Perry will have plenty of fundraising because his investors know that their money is going to be well spent, and used in a beneficial way. Put that on top of getting something in return later on, and you’ve got a great deal for investors.
Shoot it’s not just big business that’s pulling the strings. If politician’s would get away from the big mothership of their parties platform for two seconds, think for themselves, and grow a few vertebrae they might actually make an intelligent decision or two. Honestly I think political parties are what’s screwing up our economy.
Are there ever cases where investors will invest in more than one canidate so that no matter the outcome, they still have a near guarantee that they will get something in return? or is that just plain stupid because of the opportunity costs?
Has Perry purposely concealed some of his negotiations with potential bundles so that he might be framed as behind in financial aid. Is there any benefit to waiting to announce his total budget till the first quarter when he is sure to receive the backing he is in need of?
It seems like this is one continuous cycle. If the candidates need money to have a serious, competitive campaign, how can we avoid the big businesses that give them those dollars pushing their agendas on the candidates? It’s easy to say we need someone who won’t succumb to corruption, but is that even a possibility with the campaign system the way it is?
It’s true that these politicians are having their strings pulled by big businesses. And though candidates, especially Rick Perry, don’t have pure intentions to begin with, like susan said, it is the campaign system that encourages and perpetuates this greed and bribery. Until the campaign system is changed, if there are any politicians that refuse to accept contributions from big businesses, they would be able to keep their morals but as a result remain relatively unknown.