<p>Last year both him and senator McCain said if either were their parties nominee they would take public financing. That was back when Rudy (a fundraising machine) was expected to be the nominee. Now that it’s McCain, and Obama has a fundraising edge, he has decided not to take public funding…hmmmm. McCain is calling for Obama to make good on his pledge and receive public funding…</p>
<p>Okay. I don’t get this at all. How does it hurt McCain for Obama not to take public funding?</p>
<p>Or, he is waiting to actually become the candidate before focusing on this.</p>
<p>Wait til August, when this might actually apply. And considering Obama could easily double McCain’s fundraising, this is obviously an attempt by McCain to take away that advantage. My guess is that Obama will raise a ridiculous amount for the Primary, and advertise heavily through June, July, and August, then use public financing, with some not so subtly associated 527’s on his side.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[The</a> New York Times > Log In](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/02/us/politics/02fec.html?_r=3&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1203341276-olxOCyC520LnOfIsu2ecsw]The”>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/02/us/politics/02fec.html?_r=3&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1203341276-olxOCyC520LnOfIsu2ecsw)</p>
<p>Obama has not broken this ‘promise’ yet. </p>
<p>He may break it later on in September. I will not be disappointed. </p>
<p>I hope he breaks a lot of his promises after the November election.</p>
<p>Frankly, since his campaign is being funded by small online donations from the public (almost 1 million donors so far), I would say he <em>is</em> accepting public financing.</p>
<p>“IF” each candidate wins it’s party’s nomination, is the operative condition of the agreement. While McCain certainly has the Republican nomination locked up (I don’t believe The New York Times’ latest manufactured scandal will compromise that), Obama can’t rest on any of his primary successeso yet. The Democratic nomination may not be decided before the Denver convention. It is way premature to insist that Obama has “broken” his first campaign promise. Is McCain running his campaign entirely on Public Funds? I doubt it.</p>
<p>Why would it hurt McCain? Because Obama is raising much more $$ through individual donors…which McCain isn’t. Accepting public funding evens the playing field.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That doesn’t sound like a whole lot of “change”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course not…but they didn’t promise to run their primaries on public funds, only the general election. McCain has already admitted he will seek public funds in the general election (as of yesterday). Obama is dodging the issue and party insiders say he’s not going to stick to his promise.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>McCain is promising to stick to a pledge he made last year, Obama is not. So Obama only seeks change when it suits his own aspirations? I mean, a year ago when it looked like <em>he</em> was going to be the financial underdog he was all for it…but now that the roles are reversed he’s backing away from it.</p>
<p>“So Obama only seeks change when it suits his own aspirations?”</p>
<p>Well I should hope so! ;)</p>
<p>“Party “insiders” say, he’s not going to stick to his promise”. Oh God, spare us from those nameless, faceless, but never-the-less must be believed “party insiders”:rolleyes:</p>
<p>This is just one more wildly, swinging air punch. Accusing a man who hasn’t yet secured his party’s nomination of, “going back on a campaign promise” is absurd. There’s no reason for him even to address the agreement with McCain before they have each secured their party’s nomination. It is McCain who is in desperation territory. Any idiot can see what motivates him to push this issue prematurely. I applaud Obama for not allowing McCain pin him against the ropes on on a non-issue. The smell of desperation on a candidate is not a cologne.</p>
<p>Why is this important? Were you a bama fan and now you’re not going to vote for him? Or we’re you gonna vote mccain anyway and feel a bit desperate? Who bloody cares?</p>
<p>okay poets…I’ll bump this thread when he actually does break his promise. Why is this important Opie? For a guy who runs on a platform of change and honesty to go back on a promise he made is pretty important. He’s already starting to practice the same kind of stuff he rails against. It’s like the guy on Matthews yesterday who couldn’t name one single obama accomplishment. Sure, the guy has accomplishments but that’s not the point…it hints at a larger issue, people following obama because it’s the “cool” thing to do when in fact they don’t know what he’s really about. I know that’s not true for alot of people here on CC because you’re all well informed (even if I disagree with many of you) but I’ve run into numerous Obama supporters who seem to like the guy just because it’s “cool” to do so.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>February is a little too early to be feeling desperate. I’m confident McCain, the man who had my vote in 2000, has a good chance at winning. Be wary though for what I post in October may very well be desperation ;)</p>
<p>Newsflash! Obama may possibly, at some future time, break a pledge about campaign funding, that he never firmly made in the first place!</p>
<p>See [The</a> Obama ‘pledge’ - Fact Checker](<a href=“http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/the_obama_pledge_1.html]The”>http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/the_obama_pledge_1.html)</p>
<p>I do think that Obama and his handlers can be fairly criticized for trying to create the impression that he had made such a pledge, while leaving an excape hatch in the actual words that were used. When various Republican attack groups start pouring money into ads outside the McCain campaign, it won’t seem so unreasonable for Obama to say that he has to spend money to respond in kind.</p>
<p>Lax,</p>
<p>If you believe everything a politican says be it hillary, john or Ob, could I interest you in some “prime” eastern WA property? </p>
<p>That’s why I ask why it’s important, if you’ve been around the block or paid attiention in school there are three parts of government. Whatever, they say they want to do, they not do simply because when the rubber hits the road, they can’t get the other two parts to join in. </p>
<p>And as I ask, will it actually change the way you’re going to vote?</p>