So Hillary Clinton has a $26 million war chest.
Barack Obama maybe $20 million.
John Edwards, likely $14 or 15 million.
Mitt Romney... 23 million smackers!
And all this is supposed to impress me, why?
I have no idea.
The argument is those with the most dough, go all the way to the nomination, maybe even the election. Well, everyone says so. I'm just here to ask: Why does having the most money make it so?
You know, if I were running for office, you know what I'd say… and proudly: "I didn't raise a cent! Not a cent! And I'm damn proud. Furthermore, the 26 bucks I do have for the campaign, came from family. And not my entire family at that!"
I'm only being partly funny. My point is very serious: Why is it a bragging point to say you have a lot of money?
To me, that sounds like a lot of people who want something for that money? You're indebted to them and only tangentially to us.
Their bucks got you where you are. So far, not a single one of our votes. Because no one has voted.
Not a single caucus state. Not a one primary state. No one.
So, generally speaking, everyone's even-steven. But, of course, we know that's not the case. Because money talks. I'm here to ask, why should it?
All the good people who are kept out of races because the good money isn't there to back their vision.
There's something wrong with a system that judges the caliber and seriousness of its candidates by what they have in their wallet, and not in their hearts.
Money talks, all right — loudly, very loudly. Pity it does so, without ever saying anything at all.
Watch Neil Cavuto weekdays at 4 p.m. ET on "Your World with Cavuto" and send your comments to firstname.lastname@example.org