Rule of Thumb

[vrimj]

The side of a legislative measure or ballot measure doing the most advertising for political support is probably the side I want to side against.  A healthy advertising budget usually means that this will disproportionaly benefit wealthy people or corporations. Not that there is never a reason to do this, it just needs to be very good.

Comments

[tevarin]

Not sure on this. Obama had a large advertising budget compared to McCain.

(You could argue that, through economic stimuli and bailouts, Obama has disproportionally benefited wealthy people and corporations, but I think few people had that opinion back when advertising funds were being raised for the campaigns)

[vrimj]

Candidates have a different set of rules of thumb (are they polite to the help is an important one) this is for legislative measures and ballot initiatives, individual laws, not lawmakers.

[bernmarx]

I like the rule of thumb as a rule of thumb. As such, it's important to try to look behind the budget to find out where it's coming from. In Obama's case, it was the result of lots and lots and lots of small donations (including mine! :) ). In the case of Cali's Prop 8, on the other hand, it was mostly the result of a small number of very deep pockets, especially the LDS.

[kwanboa]

Is Obama a person, a legislative measure, or a ballot measure?

Your surety on this issue requires clarity.