this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2024
238 points (96.5% liked)

politics

19149 readers
4270 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
all 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jordanlund 76 points 8 months ago (1 children)

"When CNBC asked a Trump spokesperson precisely how much Trump had raised, the campaign did not reply."

Well, they're going to have to go public in 2 days and that's going to be interesting.

[–] psmgx 23 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They have to go public in 2 days? Explain.

[–] dhork 52 points 8 months ago (2 children)
[–] Bbbbbbbbbbb 28 points 8 months ago (2 children)

What if they just dont? What happens then?

[–] surewhynotlem 51 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Then we ask politely a second time. Maybe a strongly worded letter.

[–] KnightontheSun 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Whoa, whoa....it's a sternly worded memo THEN a strongly worded letter.

That's like jumping immediately to the triple-dog dare!

[–] meco03211 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

And if they ignore the triple-dog dare you ask? Then it's straight to the quadruple-dog dare!

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago

Wake me up when they are threatening to put a committee together.

[–] ilinamorato 17 points 8 months ago (2 children)

There's a fine, apparently.

Not that Trump pays those, either.

[–] kescusay 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Do that too long, and judges start doing things like seizing assets.

[–] ilinamorato 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'll believe that when I see it, but it would be nice.

[–] kescusay 3 points 8 months ago

Agreed, but we'll find out soon. Deadline's in just six days.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Can’t pay if you’re broke.

[–] ilinamorato 5 points 8 months ago

Here's hoping.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago
[–] [email protected] 52 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The saddest thing is that the same people who would give Trump the shirt of their back will ignore homeless veterans

[–] HootinNHollerin 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 48 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Their reluctance stems, in part, from concerns that the RNC will use the money not to help elect Republicans, but to pay for Trump's extensive legal fees, sources said.

Ding ding ding!

Republican leaders insist they have no such plans.

Well, that's believable. Republicans are known for their honesty.

[–] agent_flounder 3 points 8 months ago

They may not but are they running the RNC now?

[–] partial_accumen 31 points 8 months ago

I'm shocked, SHOCKED, that donors are no longer interested in paying for the ever growing legal judgments against Trump. The whole "stable billionaire" narrative takes a bit of a hit when you always have your hand out asking for someone else to pay the bills from you breaking the rules.

[–] eran_morad 26 points 8 months ago

Pony up, idiots, trump has to pay hookers and legal fees.

[–] LEDZeppelin 21 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Small donor fatigue = already sucked them bone dry

[–] pacology 3 points 8 months ago

/s

That’s binenomics for you right there. 4 years ago I was able to donate thousands to Trumps campaign but this year I can only donate tens. My gas and food bills are just too much. That’s why I’m continuing to donate and voting for Trump.

/s in case it’s not clear.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm sure they could use a pair of fairly priced sneakers?

[–] LEDZeppelin 2 points 8 months ago

Between red hat and golden sneakers, morons all over the nation have been covered in shit from head to toe. Literally.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 8 months ago (1 children)

“Anybody that makes a ‘Contribution’ to [Haley] from this moment forth, will be permanently barred from the MAGA camp. We don’t want them, and will not accept them,” he wrote on Truth Social Jan. 24.

He probably felt Tough and Decisive while saying that, but now that the bridges have been burned and the fires are long since out, he might be second-guessing that statement. He’ll die before admitting he made a mistake, though.

[–] agent_flounder 4 points 8 months ago

He’ll die before admitting he made a mistake, though.

Stop getting my hopes up.

[–] MisterNeon 19 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I wonder how many of those small donors from 2016 & 2020 are now dead from COVID given the shortfall.

[–] kescusay 12 points 8 months ago

A not insignificant number. COVID-19 probably impacted the 2020 election and 2021 special elections.

[–] Orbituary 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

3-4%. The statistics don't care about politics.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

But your lifestyle does impact how likely it is you die from covid. Poorer Trump voters are probably more likely to have a relatively unhealthy lifestyle; maybe more likely to smoke, perhaps less likely to do exercise, perhaps older? And I'm fairly certain that Republican voters are less likely to be vaccinated against covid.

Not sure what your point was exactly, but wanted to point out people absolutely did not die at the same rate across the board and political affiliation (and therefore the likelihood of being vaccinated) could definitely be a factor.

[–] Orbituary 2 points 8 months ago

3-4% is higher than the global average by a nominal amount.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 8 months ago

It’s equivalent to burning money 🔥

He can’t keep his yap shut and the money is just sailing West and neatly settling into E. Jean’s coffers. Over and over 🙌🏻😆😂

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago

He has done so many scams on "small America," eventually they will be tapped out. When your base is underpaid and uneducated, they don't have a stable income.

The million- and billionaires will back a stable candidate. In 16' they didn't back him until he got in the White house. There is a reason people don't bet on the Charges to win the Superbowl.

[–] TheJims 5 points 8 months ago

Maybe donors could convince him to stop committing crimes?