I thought the article by David Brooks was very interesting and informative. I like how he mentioned that only 45% of funding is from donations of less than $200. Although he mentions how Obama made the claim that 90% of his campaign was financed by small donors, I still think 45% is a pretty impressive amount.

 

The groups that donated we what would be streo-typical of party lines. The educated professionals still tend to donate and vote Democrat while the Corporate mangers tend to vote and give Republican. Surprise, Surprise!

 

The article on McCain’s energy record made him look like a typical politician. Saying one thing in front of the big corporate leaders and another thing in front of your average Joe farmer. Although I think it is absolutely necessary to report on what the candidates actual voting record is, and I commend Levey for doing so, I think that she should explain a little bit more about what the bill was that he actually voted on.

 

I understand the purpose of the article; to report that McCain is not consistent when voting on energy issues. I just wish there was a website where each candidate would explain why he voted the way he did. Some place where the candidate could be like well, I had to vote against this because I spoke with members XYZ who agreed to vote with me on another bill if I voted with them on this issue. Or I was facing tremendous pressure to vote along party lines. These aren’t necessarily good reasons but it does happen time to time in Washington. I think a candidate with a “flip flop” voting record should be questioned I just think they should be given the opportunity to explain why they voted that way.

 

Although I was surprised to see a Wikipedia link , I really appreciated  the October Surprise. I had never heard the term before and really enjoyed the past examples of October Surprises. It is sad though that candidates waste so much money campaigning two years in advance, when an event occurring right before the election in October can have much more of a significant effect.