hussainsalas473548

Newt Gingrich, the Randy Moss of politics. He has proven himself to be a great political player in years past, but has begun taking plays off when he's not feeling it. He has a book to sell, an image to maintain, and can't be bogged down with things like running an effective campaign. Some thought he might bring back the Newt dynasty of the 90's, but he has turned his campaign over to owners who put ticket sales over a championship-quality team. He still has enough left in him to debate, but a few blunders have already cost him the season.

So conservatives are faced with a choice. Abandon what they truly believe in and vote for McCain? just because he's a republican. Or search for the best candidate for them. I choose the latter.

In Canada, by law election campaigns must run for a minimum of 36 days, but there is no mandated maximum time. Yet the longest election campaign in Canada in the last 100 years was in 1926, when the campaigning dragged on for all of 74 days.

malaysia election Why is that? Canadian law doesn't limit how long politicians can campaign, but it does strictly limit how much money they can spend on a campaign. That's no matter if it's the candidate's own money, or money contributed by supporters or special interests. And Canada seems to have been a pretty well run country over the years.

There is no Democrat who can beat them in the primary and no credible Republican opponents. John McCain? has been a George Bush lap dog on any issue of importance and he is such an obviously calculating politician, he probably can't win the Republican primary. By now, https://notes.io/qgMLQ of the voters can recognize a Republican lie when they hear it and they yearn for Democrat lies, which Hillary will supply in abundance.

Also in the BCRA was the rule that advertisements paid for by a corporation (including non-profit organizations) could not use a candidates name within 30 days of a primary and 60 days of a general election. In effect the bill limited free speech, throwing out the first amendment and putting set rules on the speech of an organization. Sounds like big government to me.

Does anyone outside of political pundits, advertisers, polling services, and others profiting from the spectacle really believe that these long mind-numbing campaigns result in a more informed voter?