Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
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
Ken Martin, the chair of the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor (DFL) Party, said that as DNC chair, he would ensure the party does not accept contributions from billionaires that Biden was referencing while not swearing off wealthy donors entirely.
“Don’t get me wrong, there are a lot of good billionaires out there that have been with Democrats, who share our values, and we will take their money,” Martin said. “But we’re not taking money from the bad billionaires.”
"Good billionaires." this party will never change.
Moving to the right counts as change.
As long as they stay attached to the billionaires their policy of only promising real change when they lose will continue. When dems win they deliever nothing, when they lose they make promises they can't keep. Round and round we go as if the climate has time to spare.
Oligarchs embracing anti-oligarchy? Sounds honest and effective. \s
Lol “good and bad billionaires” rhetoric can fuck right off. What a clown.
Nordic Dem here. I'm not opposed. Until you're in a position to actually change the rules of the game it would be dreadfully fucking stupid to limit your supply for the war effort hinged on an overgeneralization when there are billionaires who seek to change the system for the better.
Does anyone truly believe Dems can win without big money of their own in the face of players like Musk dumping $70 million into PA on a whim? Fuck no.
If you disagree then you better have a very fucking solid, tangible plan to take make media and advertising without $, post-citizens united no less.
Sanders ran on a zero corporate donations campaign and got out tons of advertising just fine. Idk why y’all like to pretend that didn’t happen so that we can justify having politicians that owe the elite favours. Like I can’t even fathom why you would try and look for reasons as to why that’s a good thing.
...and he lost.
He didn’t lose for lack of advertising. Biden outfunded trump and he lost. What’s your point exactly here within the context of what we’re talking about? You seem to think that funding inherently wins elections and you cannot have advertising unless billionaires help you. This is patently and demonstrably not true and is disingenuous to imply here.
You're saying "it's possible to not take funding from major donors and still win" snd your example is a guy who lost.
It's possible to sell out and still lose, like Biden/Harris did. Like Clinton did.
Fair point
No, what im saying is it’s possible to run a campaign that rivals ones funded by billionaires without stooping to that level. You’re trying to twist what I’m saying to justify government corruption and the reign of oligarchy. You’re wrong, and that should be good news to you.
It isn't when the vast majority of media and social media is controlled by the Right.
Democrats need to overperform in fundraising not only to offset dark money & SuperPACs, but to offset the free attack ads coming from Fox News in every lunch room and doctor waiting room in the country.
Your argument is contingent on the notion that all money taken from billionaires means the candidate themselves must become corrupted; that's simply not true. Whether someone like Bernie takes money from billionaires or not doesn't change Bernie's platform. If those billionaires choose to believe in universal Healthcare then so be it. If they like Buffett and Gates believe in higher taxes for the rich then go for it.
But Logistically it's war. And the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Can't do purity tests if you want to fight fascists.
It's amazing to publicly admit that we live in an oligarchy and not a democracy.
And still fucking Democrats are sitting in their comfy enclaves with the "good" billionaires, wringing their hands over how they just can't seem to find the right "messaging" to convince the sweaty plebes that they know what's best for them.
All it would take to start winning elections is for them to get up off of their soft, pampered asses and get out there and actually listen to some ordinary people for a change, find out what they want, then fucking well set about actually delivering it for them.
“Don’t get me wrong, there are a lot of good billionaires out there that have been with Democrats, who share our values, and we will take their money,” Martin said. “But we’re not taking money from the bad billionaires.”
The Dems are so out of touch, they think the problem is “bad” billionaires and not the destruction of the democratic process that billionaires buying politics is.
The DNC needs to be thrown out and replaced with something less corrupted.
Only the bad billionaires? Are there any good billionaires?
Are there any good billionaires?
No. Dead people no longer have assets.
Maybe the people who won a jackpot, then proceeded to binge spend and lose it all within a year.
And what are they gonna do about it?
Hire the same consultants they do every election to collect their six and seven figure payments to elect oligarch-approved candidates.
Same as it ever was.
Same as it ever was...
Same as it. Ever was.
... "Press X to doubt"
*Bad billionaire is defined as one that does not want to donate to us anyway.
Dickheads are more worried about fundraising than actually winning. Nothing but internal bickering and wild assumptions about demographics and taking people for granted.
