By Richard Walrath

Michael Bloomberg hasn’t entered the presidential race yet. He has enough money so that he doesn’t have to raise any.  If we can’t get more than half of the people to vote, elections don’t mean much — they just go to the highest bidder. 

It’s easy to get lost in a sea of numbers, whatever the subject is.   Raising money from a larger base is always good.  Somebody who contributes $25 probably can do so, and will, when asked again.   And there are lots of $25 contributors.  But in the end, it comes down to votes, and you need votes in the millions.  Hundreds of thousands of contributors are good for fund-raising, but it’s doubtful that they will furnish enough votes to provide the margin for electing a candidate.

We could just keep score by seeing who either raises or has the most money.  Then we can choose whether we want someone who can buy the election all by himself, or someone who accepts bribes known as "fund-raising."

I’m not sure which is better — or worse.