this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2024
683 points (98.4% liked)

politics

19126 readers
3006 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] givesomefucks 223 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (7 children)

"Endorsement" meaning the ~~25~~ 45 million a month to a PAC...

How the fuck are we not going after them for this?

The PAC system is incredibly fucked, but outside of a handful of progressives no politicians want to admit it's legal bribery

[–] big_slap 53 points 3 months ago (2 children)

maybe this is the straw that breaks the camels back. hoping this admission changes things

[–] givesomefucks 30 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It won't.

Biden inherited the HVF, and called it the BVF but it did the same thing.

A big part of the discussion of Kamala taking over, was if she got the BVF.

I don't know what she's calling it now, but she has it.

It's the thing Hillary did that took all the money from state parties, that coordinated with the DNC during the primary. Giant shit show.

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/dnc-leak-clinton-team-deflected-state-cash-concerns-226191

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/donors-can-now-give-620600-to-biden-and-dnc-expanding-democratic-big-money-fundraising/2020/05/16/d2bf51cc-978a-11ea-82b4-c8db161ff6e5_story.html

https://www.npr.org/2024/07/23/g-s1-12807/harris-biden-fec-campaign-finance

Neither party will do shit about it, because they all benefit from it

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-64-million-mystery-anonymous-donations-2024-presidential-campaign/

[–] WhatAmLemmy 5 points 3 months ago

Democracy™️

[–] nutsack 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)
[–] big_slap 1 points 3 months ago

nope. I lfeel like I've read a lot of news headlines recently that lean towards my political bias. I was feeling the blue wave for a bit before I snapped back to reality lol

[–] [email protected] 45 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No it’s not bribery. He changed his stance for Musk’s endorsement. Musk then exercised his free speech into a Trump PAC. There was no coordination. Besides, even if there was coordination, it was a just a gratuity after the service!

[–] squidman 28 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Just a little bit of corruption, as a treat!

[–] cheese_greater 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] Fedizen 5 points 3 months ago

Really thick, pasty corruption, generously applied.

[–] CaptainSpaceman 19 points 3 months ago

Because they all take super PAC money and dont want the flows to stop.

Except ofc Bernie and a handful of others

[–] [email protected] 17 points 3 months ago

“Endorsement” meaning the 25 million a month to a PAC…

Oh, I can see the problem here - you thought he was giving his pro-Trump PAC $25 million. That's just not true. $25 million? That would be crazy.

No, no, it was $45 million.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Every ad should be a clip of Trump raging against electric cars, then the Musk tweet, then a clip of him praising electric cars. End with: do you really think he works for you?

I'm sure you can build more ads on this theme with the millions of other things he flip flopped on when someone promised him a bag of cash.

[–] Buddahriffic 3 points 3 months ago

That should be one ad. Another should be about him turning on every one of his supporters that he's turned on. Trump: on your side as long as it's still convenient for him.

[–] Guy_Fieris_Hair 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

"We" aren't going after them for this because they all do it, Trump just said it out loud. Welcome to American politics. This will never get fixed because the people in power stand to lose millions of dollars if it does. People will posture, pander, and pretend, but they will never get a majority willing to take the pay cut and actually fix it. It's ~~the~~ a glitch in a capitalist republic.

[–] Sanctus 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Oh it can totally be fixed. People change their tune really quick when they can't put food in their mouths, and others change faster within close proximity to wood chippers.

[–] ericjmorey 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The most recent group of people that acted on their emotional desires in this vain did so in support of the man who is taking money from a billionaire (hundred-billionare?) to stay in power in exchange for changing their policy position to favor the donor. This group failed and many were convicted of federal crimes.

[–] Sanctus 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

When did people attack billionaires? I'm not talking about the government.