Saturday, May 22, 2004

Should Kerry postpone his nomination so he has as much money as Bush? 

Good question.

Once Bush and Kerry are officially nominated by their parties, they will no longer be permitted to raise and spend private donations. Instead, each will receive $75 million in federal funds for the general election.

By postponing his official nomination — an unparalleled move for a presidential candidate — Kerry could spend his privately raised donations for longer and receive his public funding at about the same time as Bush. The president is to be nominated at the Republican convention in early September in New York, five weeks after Democrats gather in Boston.

The Massachusetts senator demurred when asked about the possible delay of his nomination.

"The decision hasn't been made," Kerry told The Times. "But I am for anything that would level the playing field."

(via LA Times)


I'm not sure. However, I can make a case for answering No. I thought the Dean campaign went off the rails when it made exactly the same decision: forgoing Federal matching funds because the Internet fundraising operation was going so amazingly well. I thought then—and was, in retrospect, in error not to criticize Dean—that it would have been better to take the matching money, and work out a way to make the Internet fundraising operation into an operation to benefit all Democrats. If Dean had done that, he might not have been so alone at the end, and the party and the activists would have been in much better shape....

But, hindsight is 20/20, another cliche that has a certain truth.

Readers, what do you think? Should Kerry postpone the nomination? Is there a principled way to justify it?

corrente SBL - New Location
~ Since April 2010 ~

~ Since 2003 ~

The Washington Chestnut
~ current ~

Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]


copyright 2003-2010

    This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?