Politics is Big Business

In case you’re still not convinced that politics is big business, check this out…

Hillary Clinton spent $212 million to secure her 18 million votes. That’s nearly $12 per vote. Alternatively, that’s nearly $109, 823 apiece for her 1, 926 delegates.

So… What else could this amount of money buy?

According to an article in the NY Daily News, here’s what Hillary could’ve done with that money in the context of her key issues…

Family values: She could’ve… Sent more than 76, 000 New York families to Disney Land.

Energy policy: She could’ve… Bought 9, 838 people a new hybrid Toyota Prius, or given out 70.7 million energy-efficient light bulbs.

Gas prices: She could’ve… Handed out nearly 53 million gallons of free gas.

Health care: She could’ve… Paid for 705 artificial heart surgeries, or (presuming an average price of $20) bought flu vaccines for 10.6 million people.

Women’s issues: She could’ve… Bought all 2, 300 students at Wellesley College (her alma mate) a Porsche 911 Carrera.

The economy: She could’ve… “Invested” the $11 million she gave to her campaign by buying everyone in NYC a Mega Millions ticket.

Or, if she wanted to thank her home state voters, she could’ve taken all NY state residents to a movie (though there wouldn’t be much left for refreshments).

I don’t intend to disparage Clinton in particular by publishing this list. Rather, I just wanted to point out the scale of political spending in our country.

10 Responses to “Politics is Big Business”

  1. Anonymous

    Wellesley College tuition is $43,288 a year. She could have paid for 4,897 first year scholarships.

    I thought the examples for Family Values, Womens Issues and the Economy were pretty weak.

    I would be interested in seeing how this number has changed since JFK was president, adjusted for inflation of course 🙂

  2. Anonymous

    That is ridiculous. That is crazy. I could help charity, buy a bunch of cars and houses, clean up a dozen people credit and finance 401Ks.

    See that is why it is beyond anyone means if they want to run for office. Most of the people are flithy rich. The founding father would turn in their graves over the amount that is spent. I wonder what George Washington had in his Presidential war chest??

  3. Nickel

    Michele: Not sure where you’re getting your numbers, but according to this report, Obama’s spending is on par with Clinton’s through the month of April (May numbers will be out in about a week). Yes, he raised a lot more money than her, but it sure doesn’t look like he’s been outspending her 4-1.

    Bottom line: She lost, so people are dumping on her. That’s the way it works. The same sorts of articles would be getting written about Obama if he had lost.

  4. Anonymous

    Gee, Obama outspent Hillary 4 to 1. Why are there no lists about him. Honestly, it is very telling that Hillary always is singled out for this stuff. As offended as I am at the Rampant spending to get a job that pays $300,000 a year. This blantant dig at Hillary yet again really offends me. Its all about perception.

  5. Anonymous

    It is amazing how much is spent, and yet I’m not sure that campaign finance reform is the way to go, Cabby. I mean, look at how broken the system is now– where whole television networks can ignore some candidates (Fox News and Ron Paul), can pretend that there’s only two political parties (what about the Libertarian, Constitution, etc. party candidates), etc.

    There has to be some money for these people to go out and meet the voters. Now, changing how television works might be an option– opening up the debates to all the candidates, providing a weekly platform to get the message out, etc. Eliminating all commercials, or giving all equal time might help– and the Internet has done a lot to equalize this playing field.

    I just don’t think I want the media and the government telling me who the candidates are and how much money a candidate can spend. I see that as a path to ensuring votes like those joke votes for Sadaam before Iraq was toppled.

    I mean, look at the gerrymandering states do now to make sure the incumbents win. Congress has no incentive to do anything but help itself.

  6. Anonymous

    With all the money spent by the candidates, do you think the economy is in bad shape? I suppose that most of that money was from large corporations and the very rich, and not the common ordinary person.

  7. Anonymous

    You should add the spending of Obama, McCain, etc etc etc to the total and see what we could have done to our national debt, improving schools, taking care of wounded veterans, etc. Heck, it might of even paid for the (IMHO ridiculously stupid) economic stimulus checks.

Leave a Reply