re: #68 Dark_Falcon

If Mitt wants to win he cannot just sit on the sidelines, he must act. Action will be costly, but it must be done.

You didn’t answer my question. Why should he do this? Is it a responsibility of the rich to do this, to pitch in monetarily when society is damaged? Is this your view of how economics should be? Or do you purely mean this as a soulless attempt to politically capitalize on this by spending money on people to win the election?

Even if he did do some huge donation, it really should be a donation, don’t you think, rather than some overnight competing relief movement?