[–] Trevelyan-s_corn 0 points 10 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago
It helps that the media give him full attention and help him a lot.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-has-gotten-nearly-3-billion-in-free-advertising-2016-05-06
[–] 5324178? 0 points 6 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago
Part of his message was "I want none of that standard politician bullshit, I just want to make America great again", which has meant that he needed to keep his Super PAC donations low and focus his campaign here in America (rather than travel overseas to meet with foreign leaders), so getting the extra word-of-mouth from the mainstream media can almost be viewed as an essential part of his campaign strategy.
[–] ArchmageMordenkainen 0 points 9 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago
That's just another point in his favor--he knows how to get the media to work for him.
[–] Trevelyan-s_corn 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
Yup, that's his main quality imo. He knows how to play the medias and the medias like him (personally). Heck, they built his persona over decades and now he is using them wonderfully.
[–] CaliforniaOrange 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Nothing kills a bad product faster than good advertising.
Trumps product is great.
[–] TheCompanionCube 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
What super pac donated to Sanders? I thought he didn't accept pac dollars
[–] aileron_ron 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
And I still say idiots will vote for Clinton.
[–] Sixtysixpixistix 4 points 4 points 8 points (+8|-4) ago (edited ago)
What relationship is there between spending money on a campaign and running an economy?
[–] AdultRandy 0 points 9 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago
I think the idea is that it tries to show the person is frugal/good at managing money. I don't know much about economics, but I imagine that business/personal finance is not the same as understanding the entire economy. Still, people like the idea that the candidate isn't wasteful and hopes this will translate to their administration as well.
[–] Sixtysixpixistix 4 points 0 points 4 points (+4|-4) ago
If the candidates were spending money on the same campaign that would make sense. Maybe person Y can afford to spend more. Maybe the campaign is more important to him. Maybe he needs to spend more in order to compete with person X. The possibilities are limitless because we're not comparing like with like.
That said, it does seem to be effective propaganda. People take a short-cut in their thinking and assume the disparity in campaign spending means one candidate is more frugal than another.
[–] Palaver 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
It is becoming increasingly clear the events before an election have no bearing on the events after an election.