Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Paul Ryan Fundraiser Bans Recording
This interesting article from the Huffington Post talks about how a fundraiser for Paul Ryan had a very interesting message on one of the signs. The sign said no audio or video recording. This is strange given that the fundraiser was being covered by the press anyway, but I think many people can guess why recording has been banned after Romney's slip-up last month. It is going to be interesting seeing whether this will cause controversy or not for the Romney campaign. Ryan raised $2.5 million for the Romney campaign with ticket prices for the fundraiser going from $2,500-$75,800. Does anybody else find these prices disturbing or sickening? If I am paying that much money there had better be some pretty awesome stuff at that fundraiser, not just give this politician your money so he can insult the other candidate and shake his hand. Also included on the article page is a picture of the sign and some interesting videos if you go to the bottom.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This article is kinda disturbing...that's really all i can say. We all know why the sign said "No audio or video recording." It was because of Romney's slip-up as Brian said. I find it funny actually, but it still makes me dislike him in a way too, but it's whatever. I guess they have to take into account Romney's mistakes. As for the ticket prices, that is ridiculous. $2,500-$75,800, are they being serious? To add on to what Brian said, people better be getting some high quality food or whatever is there or else they just got ripped off.
ReplyDeleteI think we all know that the reason for the sign is because of Romney's slip-up. I think that it is a strange rule and I'm not quite sure how I feel about it. On one hand, I think that the vice presidential candidate should be prepared to be in the public spotlight and shouldn't try to hide anything, but on the other hand he is completely within his rights to ban recordings and isn't really doing anything wrong by doing so.
ReplyDeleteI have to say that I completely disagree with Brian and Aubrey about the ticket prices. I don't think it's ridiculous. The people attending the fundraiser are well aware of how much money they are spending. They chose to attend the fundraiser to support Ryan. The point of the ticket price is to raise money for the campaign, not for a good meal or to get anything out of it. It’s in no way sickening or disturbing because they CHOSE to pay the money for the ticket and attend the fundraiser. No one forced them to do so. How can someone spending money on something they believe in be sickening? Also, I’d like the point out the fact that Jay-Z and Beyoncé hosted a fundraiser for Obama with ticket prices set at $40,000 and no one thinks that that’s disgusting.
I am in complete agreement with Nicolette on both points. Ideally, I do not want to see candidates potentially hiding anything from the public but there is nothing to say he can’t and really we will never fully understand or know every intention of a candidate when electing him.
ReplyDeleteI also feel that if that is how the people attending these functions want to spend their money that is entirely up to them. Sure it could be used for one of the million causes you can name off of the top of your head, but this is a cause too. To the people paying for these tickets, they believe that they are putting money towards a better America. Disturbing and disgusting are pretty intense words to be using on something that is so normal.
I think it's suspicious of these guys to ban the recordings. They're making it so obvious that they act differently from how they really are. An increasing amount of energy goes into analyzing the character behind the potential president since we've grown accustomed to dissecting the personality and lifestyles of the candidates in recent years, especially with the mocking of candidates on shows like Saturday Night Live. Character has become almost as important as policy, so I don't see any good behind hiding from the public when you're supposed to be a leader. Also, are they expecting to say something incriminating? People wouldn't go as far as banning recordings unless they were expecting to relentlessly vent about the opposition, or just lack self-control.
ReplyDeleteAt first I am a little frustrated when people running for public office hide what they say to their core constituents and don't tell the general public, but then I realize that's how it is for anyone running for any public position in any Democracy in the world to some extent and I accept it as a feature of our style of Government. I'm sure most, if not all of candidates now days running for president would not have a shot of being elected if they said everything they truly believe. I can kind of see too why campaigns would not want people seeing what they have to say to their big contributors because it's mainly about how they plan on winning the election. It's not ideological, it's a business meeting, like how companies have investor meetings to discuss the state of the company and how they plan to make the company work but they need investments in order to do so. And in their campaign strategy, they could easily say something they wouldn't if they were talking to the general public, like Mitt Romney did earlier. I don't care how much money somebody is willing to give a campaign as long as it's disclosed and it is being donated by an individual, not a company or a super PAC. I just hope they get a nice meal for that amount of money.
ReplyDeleteIt is just troubling to me that they would ban all recording devices. In the modern world that we live in where everyone has a connection to the internet. Candidates should really be prepared for everything to get out to the general public, because it will. I mean if you need to hide it then maybe you shouldn't do/say it. Sure this is common practice for both parties, but being more transparent when you are running for president helps in the long run. Regarding the prices it is insane how much that costs you really gotta be dedicated to your candidate to spend that much cash.
ReplyDeleteThere is a shock. First off, what Mitt Romney said during that recording was not a slip up. He has not backed down on what he said, he said it was not "worded delicately". That recording truly showed how Mitt Romney things about this country. It was not in a script or he was not trying to persuade independent voters. That is what Romney really thinks. And it was a good thing that people got to see his true colors.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the price tag on the ticket for that fundraiser is sickening. 2,500-$75,800... Are you kidding! I know for one thin for sure, those people at the fundraiser are not the 47%, they are the top 1% who are looking to pay less in taxes. That is the true difference between the people who are in favor of Romney, and those who are in favor in Obama.
This ban on recordings is just showing they are afraid that people will find out what there plan really is, or what they really think about 47% of the country. Whatever they will be saying at this fundraiser, it is obvious they do not want it on the record. They are trying to hide things, and one can't can help but wonder what those things are.
Putting up a poster at the entrance saying "no audio or video recording." We all know why, and it creates a doubt in people's mind, if Paul Ryan hiding something. With today's technology and smartphones, anybody in a matter of seconds can post a video. I think the price of the tickets ranging from $2,500 to $75,800, is just ridiculous. There must of been some people who were beyond dedicated to Paul Ryan, like Seamus said.
ReplyDeleteMost people on here agree that recording was not allowed because the Romney campaign doesn't want something like the 47% comment to happen again. Romney has since then apologized for the comment, stating that he was completely wrong. However, I agree with Seamus that when you're a presidential candidate you simply shouldn't say things in a relatively public setting that you wouldn't want to say in a televised speech. The Romney campaign added that a presidential candidate is bound to say something that "doesn't come out right." What Romney said doesn't sound like it came out wrong, more like an informal speech sharing his personal opinion about almost half the American people
ReplyDeleteThe fact that Paul Ryan is banning recording from the fundraiser is understandable because of Governor Romney's slip up. However, I can not help but to be a little suspicious of the content being delivered behind doors. I feel that the Republicans should have just kept the fundraiser public, with recording, and if a mistake did arise just apologize and justify it as John McLaughlin stated Romney did. However, one of the reporters does make a valid point that in this era, it is almost in possible to keep people from recording due to advancements in technology.
ReplyDeleteThe ticket price does not bother me as much is it seems to bother my classmates, because the participates are choosing to pay 2,500-75,800 dollars to attend. Obviously it is working, since Paul Ryan profited 2.5 million dollars off of tickets for the fundraiser.
The amount people paid is not for a dinner, it is for access to the candidate. The people who are paying these amounts of money to attend fundraisers can obviously afford it-- they are called "rich people." Don't feel sorry for them!
ReplyDeleteI don't feel sorry for them I am wondering what else they could put that money towards that would be much more productive!
ReplyDelete