I hate that this is effective. We need money out of politics. But it's probably nudging towards an accidentally correct decision in this case.
this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2024
8 points (58.3% liked)
politics
19104 readers
3108 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
If money is speech, it becomes the only speech.
Agreed. These shouldn't be the decision makers, but we all kind of know they are. If the donors were with him, they'd just keep moving along and then the regular people would eventually just have to accept their choice.
There was another article asking why regular Democrats weren't marching in the streets, and apart from that being a kind of weird thing to expect for an intra-party decision, regular people also just don't think they have that much influence on politicians. Like maybe if there were 100,000 people protesting, but there's no way it would get that big, and 10,000 people marching wouldn't have the impact of one Clooney.
We had the largest and longest protest movement in American history and the end result was that Biden called for MORE money to police. A bunch of kids camping on college campuses were turned into public enemy #1 because the politicians and the people who could call up newspaper editors thought they were a problem. Polling commonly show 70% of Democrats are in favor of positions that get little traction with their elected officials. We feel trapped by whatever they decide is the policy of the party, not like we're actually driving it.
Its like I said previously, Biden doesn't have a base. He doesn't have a wide, grass-roots support network that provides him the kind of independence that Bernie or any Justice Democrats had.
Biden relies extremely heavily on big money donors. Clooney pulling his support so widely and loudly was a bell that simply can-not be un-rung. Clooney is a "bundler" in that he organizes other big money donors into things like Biden's 40 million dollar dinner. That was all Clooney.
Simply put, Biden can't win without 6 figure plus donations. This is a very very big deal. Where holes were being poked in the outside of this ship from the outside prior to the debate, things like this are the hull fracturing.
I agree. This is big, and this will cause another shift in the electoral calculus.
Biden said he would drop out if the Lord Almighty told him to.
Every corpodem's god has spoken.
Lord SuperPac has spoken.
Another “The gardener of the cousin of the mechanic of the uncle of an aide to a staffer for a satellite office of the Democratic Party says” article.
It’s manipulative, and I don’t understand how so many people can be okay with what this means for the world.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Some major Democratic donors have told the largest pro-Biden super PAC, Future Forward, that pledges worth roughly $90 million are now on hold if President Biden remains atop the ticket, according to two people who have been briefed on the conversations.
It was not clear how much of the pledged money was earmarked for Future Forward’s super PAC versus its nonprofit arm, which has also been running advertising in key battleground states.
The super PAC has been shying away from making major strategic decisions until it gets clarity on who will be atop the ticket, according to a separate person close to the group.
The potential shortfall in super PAC cash comes as the campaign itself is bracing for a rough July fund-raising period as major donors question Mr. Biden’s viability to win in November.
Future Forward was anointed by Mr. Biden’s campaign as its leading super PAC in the early stages of the 2024 race, and it has already announced $250 million in television and digital advertising reservations set to begin at the end of the Democratic National Convention next month.
A leaked poll from a group closely linked with Future Forward after the debate showed that the super PAC had tested the strength of potential Biden alternatives, including Ms. Harris, Gov.
The original article contains 671 words, the summary contains 213 words. Saved 68%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Wild that I cant see any of the comments because all the commenters have been blocked for spouting some dumb ass shit elsewhere on lemmy. I log out, and of course, every comment results in Biden-bad, and hence, for trump to be proxy-elected. Funny. cause my anonymous sources told me that fundraising is up.
Also, the DNC reports it's already hit it's 85mil dollar goal.
When the Blue MAGA hits so hard you can't see any comments because everyone criticizing Biden must be a Russian bot.
everyone is pushing for trump to be proxy-elected.
You mean with Biden as nominee right?
Because the only way Trump wins is if Biden stays the nominee.
Trump wants Biden as nominee. Bannon wants Biden as nominee. Heritage Foundation wants Biden as nominee.
So if you are advocating or insisting on Biden as nominee, thats your team.