As one of the "riddels of economics" that wer posted
recently there was the following one:
- Why do presidential candidates spent so little on
campaigns in view of the size of the prize.
An explanation might be that candidates spent what they
think is necessary, or that some form of "gentlemans
agreement"[1] prevents them from making the race to costly for
all parties.
Now both parties in the American Election find themselves in
the situation that not the electoral process, but litigation
may determine who gets the prize. So they find themselves
now playing a new game, one where the rules have not yet
been set by tradition or law. And so they open all
registers, showing to what length they are willing to go to
get the prize. Neither side going to give in easily.
This in might indicate that both camps are fully aware of
the prize they might be missing, and are spending
accordingly.
Krist
[1] I am here supposing that laws limitting the expenditure
of money during campains are in reality easily bypassed...
So any limmits on spending are followed more or less voluntary.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Krist van Besien
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
