Thursday, April 06, 2006

Question Answered

Can't say that I care much for the answer:

While many debates have included the Rev. Tom Watson, WWL chose not to invite him. The station instead used a selection process that weighed fund-raising heavily, which prompted an angry response from the pastor.

"They didn't want to see money I was putting into my campaign, they wanted to see external funds," he said Wednesday, "the kind you get from cutting deals and the kind that has included nepotism and corruption in City Hall."

Obviously, with 23 candidates, there needs to be a selection process, but a candidate who's appealing to the poor and displaced is going to have a major fund raising disadvantage. As others have pointed out, the problem of money in politics is exacerbated by the fact that the media only seems to take well-funded candidates seriously. Candidates don't just need money for paid air time, they increasingly need it for free air time. In this case, the local situation only made a national problem worse. The hurricane almost certainly had a greater affect on the ability to raise money through very small donations than from large donors.

I haven't exactly made a secret of the fact that I don't like Nagin, and CW has Watson hurting Nagin. However, Watson is one of the three candidates I could see myself voting for, even if he is a distant third. I just don't see a Watson administration as the disaster that some think it would be.

Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

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

Old Favorites
  • Political Boxing (untitled)
  • Did Bush Take His Ball and Go Home
  • Teratogens and Plan B
  • Foghorn Leghorn Republicans
  • Quote of the Day
  • October's News(Dec.1)
  • untitled, Nov.19 (offshore revenue)
  • Remember Upton Sinclair
  • Oct. Liar of thr month
  • Jindal's True Colors
  • No bid contracts