this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2024
237 points (98.8% liked)

politics

19298 readers
2422 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

There’s deeply cynical and then there’s things which might be illegal. In the first category we have an Elon Musk-funded PAC microtargeting Jewish and Arab communities with diametrically opposed ads about Kamala Harris’s support for Israel or Palestine. Amazingly cynical.

But then you have what I’m going to describe next which comes from another Musk-funded dark money operation. They have set up fake sites impersonating the Harris campaign using fake policy positions and then sending out text messages also impersonating the campaign which aim to drive voters to the fake site. (A lot of potential legal and regulatory questions turns on word like “fake” and “impersonating”, which we’ll return to in a moment.)


🗳️ Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Myxomatosis 42 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I hope Kamala wins and then starts canceling contracts with his companies. He deserves to be ostracized from society for this and many other things.

[–] brucethemoose 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

I hope not. It would be a shame to dump SpaceX in particular for purely political reasons, when (so far) they've been the best contracter by far.

As the head of NASA said, they don't work with Elon Musk, they work with SpaceX, and the relationship has been good.

I do hope they leave X though, and just promote a Fediverse instance or something instead. That's more of Elon's pet project/playground now.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 months ago

Nationalize spacex.

Our supreme court is already showing us that laws and precedent don't mean anything anymore. Might as well use the chaos for some good.

[–] Myxomatosis 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

I didn’t realize that. Too bad Space X can’t divest from that turd.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Or Harris can just fund NASA to build the rockets themselves and steal all the talent from X.

[–] Spiralvortexisalie 10 points 2 months ago

She could literally nationalize all his interests, and he is so unlikeable even his investors would probably welcome a government buyout on the cheap.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

The thing about SpaceX and NASA is that their purposes aren't really the same. NASA does space exploration and science type work to a large extent, which requires them getting their equipment up into space, but since rocket launches themselves are no longer the frontier of space technology, they don't really want to be in charge of launching everything up the that people want launched (which is a lot these days), they want to focus their efforts on pushing the boundary. It would be like trying to solve the problems with Boeing by making the FAA build all the country's planes instead. Not to say that nationalization is necessarily bad, but more that if it were done, it would make more sense to keep SpaceX it's own entity as a state run corporation than to fold it's commercial rocket launching into NASA.

Alternatively, something else I could imagine threatening Musk with, if the government had the stomach for it, would be to seize SpaceX and then make it employee-owned, which avoids changing it's competitiveness in the launch industry (it has become so dominant because, for the moment, it has actually done a pretty good job at reducing launch costs and improving rocket technology, and doing anything too disruptive with it while it remains in that position might disrupt that), but takes away Elon's share of the money and decision making.

[–] brucethemoose 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Hopefully they can, some day. Maybe another entity will make Elon an offer he can't refuse when he needs cash, as the synergy with his other ventures doesn't seem huge.

[–] halcyoncmdr 2 points 2 months ago

Elon may be a face of the Company, he's not responsible for much other than general long term vision. Despite what he may claim, he isn't handling the engineering directly, and Gwynne Shotwell has been running operations for nearly it's entire existence.