Are you saying, hypothetically, if the cap is 200 million, and Romney only gets 137 million in donations while Obama gets the entire 200? In that case, it is what it is. If you cannot reach the cap, that is on you.

__________________

Why have a cap at all if it doesn't equalize the monies avalable to each candidate?

Don't get me wrong, I hold that any candidate ought to be able to raise any amount they can and individuals ought to be able to contribute as they wish.

I don't think the reason is to "equalize" but to reduce the influence that money has on a campaign and maybe the amount of time a candidate spends raising funds and then (if elected) paying back favors. I wouldn't agree to totally equalizing it because the candidate needs to show some effort. Or, maybe there should be a base amount - publicly funded - and a certain amount beyond that (capped) that they can raise...I'm not sure.

__________________

DISCLAIMER: Extreme amounts of sarcasm can possibly result in inflammatory situations. Not responsible for keyboard violence, spittle on the monitor, irrational responses mistaken for momentary brilliance, one-sided rages against hypocrisy or individual members or unintended consequences such as poor personal hygiene and bad spelling. Please fasten your seatbelts and put your trays in an upright position.