Previous posts in this discussion:
Post$200 Million Spent on Losing Candidates--Already (Bienvenido Macario, USA, 03/21/16 4:13 am)
As of March 16, 2016 donors have spent $200 million on US presidential candidates who have already withdrawn, according to the Federal Election Commission. The report doesn't say how much the remaining contenders have spent so far.
Reading the election-related comments in WAIS, I seem to get the impression that liberals or those for the Democrats prefer a one-party system like China, Cuba and Russia. This way no party will lose.
See: Rich donors have blown $200 million on failed candidates so far
Yahoo Finance By Rick Newman--March 16, 2016
JE comments: Perhaps there's something comforting here: You do not always get the best government money can buy. Jeb Bush alone burned through $94 million of Super PAC gravy, in addition to $30+ million from the campaign itself. This dollar-per-vote yield in the primaries must be a record. Bush could have tried the direct method: vote for me, get $500, and he still would have come out ahead.
I don't follow Bienvenido's point about a one-party system in the US. Nor is Russia a one-party state.