"More Money is Pouring In for Clinton and Obama"
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/07/us/politics/07campaign.html
March 6 2008

Summary:
As the presidential campaign becomes close battle, candidates start to pour more money into the campaigns. In February, Senator Obama had raised $55 million and Clinton raised $35 million. Also, dating from March 1st, Clinton’s campaign has raised $6 million, a rate of about $1 million a day. In Republican side, McCain has raised $85 million that is to be spent in the final two months of the race. As they raise money, polling shows that Mrs. Clinton leads statewide in Pennsylvania, but Mr. Obama is counting on doing very well in Philadelphia, with its large black population. Despite arm-twisting from the presidential campaigns, the city’s 69 Democratic ward leaders may not endorse anyone as a group at their meeting, which is closed to the news media. But of the 27 ward leaders who are African-American, most have endorsed Mr. Obama.
Analyze:
Presidential candidates’ battle is the headline in the modern days. To win the battle, candidates come on TV as much as they can and they travel around the states to promote themselves. To exercise such things, they raise money for their campaigns. Up until February, Hilary and Obama raised $90 together. Well, it seems reasonable that they have to raise money, but it is questionable if the one who spends more money earns more votes.
In my opinion, there seems to be no parallelism between pouring money into campaigns and earning votes. I understand that they have to spend certain amount of money to promote themselves and their viewpoints. However, spending fifty millions of dollars in a campaign seems to be a waste. Voters pick certain leaders not based on how much money they spend, but who they are as people and if they are good leaders who can lead the country. It seems to me that candidates should save the money that they are going to pour into the campaigns and use it for the public developments.