Actually, the amount of money spent by the Obama campaign points out exactly what's wrong with our election system (if not our political system in general). Money is everything, especially when there is little or no accounting of where it came from and what was asked for in return for it.

McCain has been a Senator for what, 20+ years? You think money can buy that kind of exposure to the voting public? C'mon.....

I didn't for a second say there weren't misguided voters. They exist on both sides, in no thanks to "conservative" radio, ****ty mass media reporting form every major outlet, and peoples inability to let go of party and indulge in propaganda. If we're giving silly examples, think of the woman who McCain had to correct after she told him that Obama was a Muslim. I was simply remarking that for you to say the young/first time vote was totally misguided is, well, totally misguided. Not to mention kind of "You damn kids get off my lawn"ish.

---Having said that, I DO agree that there is a big problem with they way we elect our officials, and campaign money. I agree. I just don't agree that money played any role in Obama's win. You can hardly blame him for receiving more donations than the next guy....

@ Enigma I can certainly agree that there was "cluelessness" and partisanship on both sides. If the demographics that I've seen are correct (a large if), then an argument could be made that money did indeed play a part in the election, but, given the fact that the election is over, it's not worth arguing (which I wish I had remembered before I posted my response to the original question). I basically wished to point out that bad Presidents do, indeed, get elected for all the wrong reasons (plenty of examples on both sides).

As far as blaming the candidate because they received more contributions than the other, no blame can be placed on the candidate (unless they did something shady to facilitate those contributions). The problem lies in the system, IMO.