When you run for office in a state, should the majority of your campaign donations come from that state (from the people who have to live with your policies if you win)? I am not planning to answer that question, I simply put it out there for everyone to think about.<\/p>\n
On July 15th, The Washington Free Beacon<\/a> reported that only 14 percent of the money raised by Stacey Abrams in her race for governor of Georgia came from inside the State of Georgia.<\/p>\n The article reports:<\/p>\n Nearly half the money raised by Abrams’s campaign and leadership committee ($22.7 million) came from donors in three deep-blue states and one liberal territory that wants to be a state but never will: California ($10.2 million), Washington, D.C. ($6.4 million), New York ($3.6 million), and Delaware ($2.5 million). The result is not entirely surprising given that Abrams recently described<\/a> Georgia as “the worst state in the country to live.”<\/strong><\/p>\n Those astonishing figures stand in stark contrast to the fundraising numbers posted by Abrams’s opponent, Gov. Brian Kemp (R., Ga.), who has raised most of his campaign funds from in-state donors. More than 83 percent of the $31.5 million raised by Kemp’s campaign and leadership committee came from Georgia residents, the analysis found.<\/strong><\/p>\n So the takeaway here is that the people inside George want to see Brian Kemp elected and the people outside Georgia want to see Stacey Abrams elected. If you were a voter aware of this fact, who would you vote for?<\/p>\n It will be interesting to see who wins. Can elections really be bought in America?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" When you run for office in a state, should the majority of your campaign donations come from that state (from the people who have to live with your policies if you win)? I am not planning to answer that question, … Continue reading