Meg Whitman is spending 81 million dollars of her own money on a Senate seat

[bigdarryl]

According to Big Ed

[Auggie]

1. For Governor, not Senate

[DJ13]

2. ......and she claims to be a fiscal conservative

I guess that kind of logic works on the the typical Republican.

[butterfly77]

3. Just think of all of the people..

that money could help carly forina is another one.They spend millions to make sure that millions of people will suffer.

[O is 44]

4. Pls vote today fellow Californians...n/t

[Jennicut]

5. And I thought Linda McMahon's 16 million spent so far in CT was bad.

I hope CA voters reject her. I think she will win the primary. But buying an election...should so called fiscal conservatives hate that?

[Brother Buzz]

9. Just who are Calif. pubs going to reject?

Whitman's closest rival in the primary race, Poizner, has spent $25 million of his own money. All three pub candidates, Whitman, Poizner, and DeVore are corporatist puppets hellbent on maintaining status quo for the men behind the curtain pulling their strings.

[Jennicut]

14. In the general election, I am sure she will win the primary.

[Brother Buzz]

15. The 'Fence Sitting' moderates are already tired of her ad blitz.

No way for her poll numbers to go but down between tonight and November.

[ej510]

18. Looking to cut more programs, fire more government workers.

Weaken regulation, and Vetoe Single-payer health care.

[CanonRay]

6. That means she expects to get at least 82 million

if she wins. Simple math. Question is, from who?

[global1]

7. Here's Another Post That Deals With This Same Topic......

seems an obscene amount of money to spend on a primary. What does that say for such a candidate should they win the seat? Will she squander the taxpayers of California's money?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8511820

[MadBadger]

8. Thats a lot of money for a race she isnt in

[blue_onyx]

10. The candidate who has the most money does usually win.

It not always true though. During the 2006 campaign for Michigan's governor, Dick DeVos spent 42 million (35 million of his money) compared to Gov. Granholm who spent 14 million. DeVos lost by 14%. DeVos was a horrible candidate. I'm not too familiar with Whitman so I can't judge how strong of a candidate she is. If she's unlikeable, has no ideas, and has a strong Democratic competitor, this may be very costly failed venture for her.

[Dr Morbius]

16. In 2004, a fellow named Blair Hull spent about $40 million of his own money

in an attempt to win the Democratic nomination for Senator in Illinois. He finished in third place with 134,453 votes, meaning he spent $297.50 per vote. A man named Dan Hynes took second place with about 295,000 votes, and the winner of the primary got about 696,000 votes. That was Barack Obama.

Money helps but you have to know what you're doing. Obama, as it turned out, ran a very clever campaign and didn't start running TV ads until a few weeks before the election, and by the time he did he had wrapped up the support of four congressmembers from the state, several important unions and every newspapaer in town. He ended up with more votes than the top eight Republicans in the primary combined.

It was then the most expensive Senate primary in American history. We'll see that record broken this year, I bet.

[Politicalboi]

11. Voted for

Jerry today. People who spend that kind of money to get elected have other agendas. I hope she goes broke.

[uponit7771]

12. WOW!!! I pray she loses big time....that and she's a conservative makes me not trust her

[Thrill]

13. Is it going to be tough for Brown to beat her?

.

[golfguru]

17. That is about the same as me spending $810

on something I really do not need. It will not cause
any upheaval to my overall financial situation.