LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
2010 Webby Award Winner for Best Political Blog
 
May 26, 2012
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Trending:     gay marriage     barack obama     robert scheer     chris hedges     ndaa
Most Read

TED: 'A Money-Soaked Orgy of Self-Congratulatory Futurism'

Truthdiggers of the Week: 400,000 Canadians Launching the ‘Maple Spring’

Russia and Exxon Mobil Sign Arctic Oil Deal

I Can't Hear Myself Think

A Rare Admission That Money Trumps Everything Else

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports
Why Bain Questions Matter
OSHA Struggles When Tower Climbers Die

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
Better Than We Found It
The Good-Natured Dictator

Digs
Financial Meltdown 101

Truthdig Bazaar
In Reckless Hands

In Reckless Hands

By Victoria Nourse
$16.47

more items

 
Ear to the Ground

It Cost Meg Whitman Only $81 Million to Buy a Shot at the Mansion

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   

Posted on Jun 9, 2010
Meg Whitman 2010 / Max Morse (CC-BY)

Former eBay CEO Meg Whitman has promised voters to apply her business savvy to running the state that roughly one-tenth of Americans call home. She can start by explaining why she had to spend $81 million, most of it hers, to win the Republican nomination for governor of California. Her opponent, Steve Poizner, spent $25 million.

The Democrat running for the job, former Gov. Jerry Brown, has been busy raising somewhere in the neighborhood of $20 million. He’s going to need it. Brown is running against a billionaire who knows what she wants and is apparently willing to pay for it. 

At least Brown can take comfort in knowing that Whitman spent the GDP of a small country convincing a mostly blue state that she’s a dyed-in-the-wool conservative.  —PZS

AP via Google:

Meg Whitman, the billionaire former chief executive of eBay, easily won the race for the Republican gubernatorial nomination, setting up a general election contest against former Gov. Jerry Brown.

Whitman took a large lead in the polls in the final weeks of the campaign after a negative ad war over which Republican was the most conservative.

Read more

More Below the Ad

Advertisement


New and Improved Comments

We are launching a major overhaul of our comments section.

In addition to more robust spam filtering and moderation, new features include the ability to rate other comments, sort how they are displayed and respond directly via e-mail or in a thread.

Unfortunately, commenters will lose their existing Truthdig identities. It's a pain, we know, but on the plus side you will now be able to log in with a plethora of options, including Google, Twitter, Facebook and Disqus accounts.

Before launching this system we spent months in discussion with our top commenters. We listened to the feedback and we hope you like what we've come up with.

Please direct any problems or concerns to us via our contact page.

Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, June 10, 2010 at 6:15 am Link to this comment

If I was a zillionare, I would prefer to be King!

What is the big deal? So another person running for office to become president, who relates to me like I am a bug.  Maybe Meg Whitman can get Palin to teach her to gut a Moose while nursing a baby, then the NRA would vote for her.

Wonder if she knows what it is like not to have Medical Coverage, or be unemployed or not to have a private Jet?

If one is to vote for an elite person why not vote for Meg Whitman, how more elite can one possibly be? Well, I need to catch up on my who’s who in the jet set elite circles.

Well if I lived in California, such a hoyty toyty rich state, were peoples poo don’t stink, I would never vote for someone like Jerry Brown, he just is not elite enough.

Report this

By ofersince72, June 9, 2010 at 10:44 pm Link to this comment

I wonder if Cris Hedges is going to keep his
weekly posts talking about religion and Christian
fascism.

Report this
G.Anderson's avatar

By G.Anderson, June 9, 2010 at 8:38 pm Link to this comment

Sadly, Meg Whitman is the governor California deserves. There is no doubt that she will fulfill her campaign promises to the letter. Like a stern mother she will give her sick child California a dose of cod liver oil, without remorse or guilt or self recrimination. 

If she wins liberals will once again be clueless as to why she won, since to them liberal ideology is self evidently true, and conservative Ideology self evidently false. (This makes it easy to avoid examining the consequences of your actions.)

Feminists should be happy that she will be our first female governor. No doubt a big help to Sara Palin when she runs again.

How hypocritical of a state that worships money, to condemn someone who has so much. Instead Californian’s should worship her as a goddess.  All hail Meg, our savior!

So when she wins liberals need to take a good look in the mirror, because you made it possible.

Report this

By berniem, June 9, 2010 at 6:40 pm Link to this comment

Hey Meg! Ya know that if ya woulda sent that $81 mil. down to the Gulf to kinda,Ya know, help out all those folks who are now victims of somebody else’s “business savvy”, Ya woulda surely been endorsed by both halves of our glorious one party dictatorship and won in a landslide! Just a thought. By the way, is the govenorship of Calif. payin’ that good these days or are Ya just real, real, real altruistic?

Report this

By Maani, June 9, 2010 at 6:36 pm Link to this comment

“At least Meg Whitman went out and earned her own money. Parasite Jerry Brown has fed at the public trough all his life. Meg for Governor!”

Yup, “damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead”: since she “earned her own,” who cares what her actual politics are?

Hmmm…

Report this

By ofersince72, June 9, 2010 at 4:51 pm Link to this comment

I believe it was a good American spectacle, it is what
we deserve…...we asked for this..!!!

  Over in Arkansas, another political show, thats all it
was there tooo

  and a way for the Democrat Party to rifle $10,000,000.00
from the union lobby.,,,,they knew durn well what they
were doing,  basically , the unions pissed 10 mil away.
The Dem and Pub fascist are laughing hard at this ...
10 they can’t spend on progressives that could have won.
Does everyone understand what is really going on in their
country???? These elections don’t mean jack….jack….

Report this
RAE's avatar

By RAE, June 9, 2010 at 4:17 pm Link to this comment

Why bother with the election?

Why not just appoint the candidate who can assemble the most money in a given period and save us all a lot of time and BS?

Until elections are publicly funded with each candidate allowed/restricted to spend, in cash or in kind, ONLY that set amount or be disqualified from the race, the whole process is bogus.

Report this
kerryrose's avatar

By kerryrose, June 9, 2010 at 4:06 pm Link to this comment

The kind of money Whitman made is usually not ‘earned.’  Unless you consider that CEO’s actually deserve their salaries, and there is nothing honorable or ethical or moral about making (not earning) a s***load of money.

Report this

By Mundt, June 9, 2010 at 3:14 pm Link to this comment

At least Meg Whitman went out and earned her own money. Parasite Jerry Brown has fed at the public trough all his life. Meg for Governor!

Report this
kerryrose's avatar

By kerryrose, June 9, 2010 at 3:11 pm Link to this comment

Spoiled brat.  Thinks she can buy what she wants, and what she wants is power.  It’s even better than money when money gets boring.

It’s strange that she feels no shame in spending that kind of money to get herself elected.  If she was popular, she should expect to get contributions.

Report this

By garyrose66, June 9, 2010 at 1:19 pm Link to this comment

Sheep like being led by sheepdogs that bark.  Those who can buy the best televison barking dogs will lead the sheep.  it is that simple.  The only way to stop this madness is to ask the simple question why 81 million was needed….to buy advertising.  If the media, television and radio was required to give equal blocks of advertising time to candidates based on the population of electorate, because the airwaves they use to make a prfit are owned by the public, AND all political advertising for offices like governor would require that only the candidate appear in person in the advertising touting their talking points (eliminating movie style productions with voiceovers) and private advertising is not allowed, then we would have fair elections based on the ideas and policies not the advertising dollars spent.  Media news is not going to rock the gravy train by pushing for reforms that take money out of politics because all money gets funneled to them, making news reporting of elections biased and actually conflicts of interest.

Report this

By Spiritgirl, June 9, 2010 at 1:03 pm Link to this comment

Yes, and just remember Californians when you go to the polls in the fall, Orly Taitz wants to be your Secretary of State!  If ever there was a raison d’etre to keep these people out of office think: privatized government, less corporate regulation, ENRON STYLE pricing!  Oh boy, your fun is just beginning…...

Report this

By Tobysgirl, June 9, 2010 at 12:30 pm Link to this comment

Good comments (with one exception). The woman is a creep. Feminism never meant the equal right to suffocate people with your voluminous ego.

Report this

By P. T., June 9, 2010 at 11:30 am Link to this comment

Meg Whitman attacks big government.  However, she got rich off of government.  The Internet was a government invention.

Report this

By MeHere, June 9, 2010 at 9:14 am Link to this comment

Next time you go to vote just think of what your modest contribution to your
candidate of choice means versus what big money people and business invest in
candidates.  It may make you change your mind about voting at all.  How can this
be a democratic process?  Campaign reform is urgent -it may not automatically
produce paradise on earth but it may make us feel less like sheep and more
realistic about what the country is all about.

Report this

By Maani, June 9, 2010 at 9:08 am Link to this comment

Hmmm…

-The SCOTUS decision in Citizens United allows for unlimited corporate/union money.  (Though it admittedly did not help to unseat Blanche Lincoln.)

-Former corporation bigwigs Meg Whitman (EBay) and Carly Fiorini (H-P) win (though admittedly mostly on their own money), and Linda McMahon (WWF) is likely to win the nomination for U.S. Senator in CT.

-New SCOTUS decision overturns matching funds in AZ, allowing the sole wealthy candidate to outspend all others.
(http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/09/opinion/09wed1.html?ref=opinion&pagewanted=print)

Anyone see a pattern here?

Report this

By MountainBear, June 9, 2010 at 9:08 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Yeah, GW was going to run the U.S. gov’t like a
business. Someone should have mentioned that every
business he ever ran failed…We need to all
incorporate so we the people have some of the same
rights as corporations, AND when dealing with
corporations do what they would do: lie, cheat, steal
and declare bankruptcy at the turn of a hat. What’s
good for the corp with human rights is good for the
humans with corp rights.

Report this

By squeaky jones, June 9, 2010 at 8:29 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Whitman could have done more good by giving that 81 million, of her own money, for after school programs for kids. Face it, it is her huge ego, and strong desire to sell off California to her stinking rich cronies. She will call it ballancing the budget.

Report this

By ofersince72, June 9, 2010 at 7:22 am Link to this comment

We need a lot of stuff the take this country out
of the hands of fascist that have it in a strangle hold
around the neck.

Election reform a first, total election reform, not
just the financial mess.  The federal primaries need
to be standardized and all held within three months of
eachother.
Levin and Nelson of Florida had a good bill after the
Florida scam of the last primaries, however as soon as
the DNC and the Florida Democrat Party had their little
under the table compromise,  they quickly scrapped that
bill.  It only was on the table for about a week.
They got rid of it quick

Report this

By felicity, June 9, 2010 at 7:15 am Link to this comment

I’ve never really understood why or how mere money can win an election.  I still don’t and it still does.  And now that SCOTUS has given the go-ahead to unlimited spending by factions that have unlimited amounts to spend, the only ‘qualifications’ for public office will be merely how much money one can spend to buy the office.

As a Californian, I’m ashamed of us.

Report this

By grumpynyker, June 9, 2010 at 6:38 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Well, FW de Bloomberg spent $100 million to bribe/buy
his reelection as Mayor of Hymietown 2010.  You
assholes deserve what you get; especially when you’re
priced out of your neighborhoods.  Have a BLESSED day.

Report this

By Big B, June 9, 2010 at 5:06 am Link to this comment

Ah, yes. Another generic repug touting the benefits of reaganomics. Conservatives still believe that reaganomics, like slavery, has just been marketed poorly and just needs a little more time.

Report this
Fat Freddy's avatar

By Fat Freddy, June 9, 2010 at 3:52 am Link to this comment

Running a state government is not the same as running a major corporation. Just ask Jon Corzine.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, June 9, 2010 at 2:30 am Link to this comment

A prime example of why we need serious financial reform in politics.

PAC’s, lobbies, corporate sponsers, zillionaires with nothing better to do with their money.

Report this
Newsletter

Get Truthdig in your inbox


 
 
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2012 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.