We all know politicians a) Don’t stay in office forever, and b) are fickle – both points are rather salient today. President G W Bush won’t be in office much longer and Mitt Romney is raising funds to run for office. Everyone can change their mind, but for a politician it seems almost second nature to take a diametrically opposite viewpoint.
You’re probably wondering what this has to do with eBay… well The Washington Post reports Romney raised $6.5 million towards his presidential politicking campaign in a single day. Those dialling for dollars included none other than eBay Chief Exec Meg Whitman.
Now the thing is should or shouldn’t Meg publicly support a politician? After all every individual has the right to their private political persuasions don’t they? Next was she wise to do so in such a public manner, especially with such a controversial character.
As Kevin Madden, Romney’s spokes person said “In a presidential campaign, it’s one thing to talk about your organizational strength but it’s another to showcase it” and equally it’s one thing to have political affiliations and another to have them publicised.
3 Responses
Valleywag has some background on this, which does explain it a little.
Presumably even if the donation was motivated by personal associations &/or keeping wolves from the door, she would have had the option to keep the donation out of the public eye?
Appropriate or not, celebrity endorsements of candidates have always been a feature of the US presidential elections. However, I hold the very British view that it’s more likely to backfire than succeed.
Why not, she’s been kissing up to politicians for a long time. Go google her political contributions.