Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!cca!ima!inmet!wisen
From: wisen@inmet.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Orphaned Response - (nf)
Message-ID: <655@inmet.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 30-Dec-83 23:51:13 EST
Article-I.D.: inmet.655
Posted: Fri Dec 30 23:51:13 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Jan-84 02:05:01 EST
Lines: 28

#R:brunix:-607800:inmet:7800039:177600:1305
inmet!wisen    Dec 29 18:07:00 1983

	Maybe it's just too bad that Cambridge voters are so easily swayed
by reports that big bucks are being spent on them :-)
	The voters in Boston, on the other hand, are less easily swayed.
In Boston's mayoral elections, the candidates who raised the most money
lost big, and the two candidates who eschewed expensive campaigning (in
the primary campaign) passed through the primary into the final.  
[Though I must mention that the final loser put a $250K self-imposed
limit on campaign spending, while the final winner spent about $350K;
the media money may have helped the winner in the final, but I 
chose without benefit of TV.  As Ellen Goodman said, for
every generalization there is an exception.]
	Anyway, I think it takes a significantly massive amount of money
to brainwash the voters hereabouts, and I have no objection to certain
parties wasting their resources here, on halfway measures.  
	On the other hand, you'd better hope that no special interest groups
ever get access to UseNet, because I'm certain that all of you out there,
"Liberal" and "Conservative" alike, are already brainwashed.
						.
						|\
	------Bruce Wisentaner		       /| \
	cca!ima!inmet			      / |  \
	   	     } !wisen	 o	     /  |   \
	  harpo!inmet 		 ^_.       _/___|=====
				O\/`O	     \_______/]
						\_(