this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2024
480 points (99.0% liked)

politics

18852 readers
4470 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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
all 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 117 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 85 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Just gonna leave this here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_(organization)

The current president, David Bossie… served in executive positions for President Donald Trump's and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's reelection campaigns.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

As I always say;
The rivers of ruin run deep.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

More swampy than a river imo

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

The swamps of stupidity run derp

[–] [email protected] 46 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Thanks a lot John Roberts and Sam Alito for fucking up our politics. Citizens United may be the worst Supreme Court decision since the Civil War

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 weeks ago

There's a conservative group trying to use Dred Scott as a precedent to disqualify Kamala Harris. The civil war never ended, it just went cold.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Imagine this money put into public healthcare...

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Every drop helps, but the US spends around $4.5 trillion annually on healthcare. If we changed to single-payer, cut out the middle-man multi-pipeline network of private insurers thereby also lowering administrative overhead that last I checked was around 30%... We would likely achieve what most other nations are achieving at half the per-capita cost we pay now.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Citizens United.

But just a few, incredibly rich ones. So it’s like the opposite of what the name seems to imply.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

"We The People" never included the peasants.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

They always give these draconian laws positive sounding names. Also, all that disposable money could've be used for social programs through taxation

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What law are you referring to?

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

They appear to be mistaking the shorthand for the Supreme Court ruling to be the name of a law. In fairness, bills do often have overly patriotic names that hide their paradoxical purposes.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 weeks ago

The ministry of Truth would never lie! It's right there in the name!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 weeks ago

Well the same principle is at play here, since Citizens United is a deceitful name for an astroturfed, billionaire-funded organization that had absolutely no involvement from ordinary citizens.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Typically, the collection of judicial opinions are referred to as "case law" if one wanted to be generous.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

If we don't turn over the institutions of government to the highest bidder, all the ads on TV say we'll get something way worse

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago

Like healthcare for everyone 👻

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

that is a lot of school lunches

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

So many out of work hookers and piles of cocaine disappearimg in the morning dew.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Are there other western countries that have a similar rule regarding money in politics? I'm not familiar with rules regarding political donations in other countries

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Not really. Most actually have very strict rules about who can donate

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Are the rules around who can donate or around how much they can donate? My understanding is that in the US, most people can donate directly to a candidate (within a limit) but you can donate unlimited amounts "indirectly" to the candidate

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago

Most have rules stipulating who can, and how much and where.

In the US, that’s how it works. The caveat is that the people who fund it are supposed to be know. This is why we have PACs that act as a buffer between the actual donors and the public.

Ken griffin (the idiot billionaire in the photograph… of Citadel Securities infamy,) recently dropped millions to defeat a measure that would have seen taxed “enough” that it was profitable to do that.

Do you think it would have worked if the scare-ads said “this message brought to you by a rich fuck you all hate”?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

After a certain point, they're just going to cut out the middle-man and say Money = Votes and allow you to bid or hold shares in the office of the President.

Citizens United and SpeechNow fucked us. Until these are overturned, along with the Electoral College and FPTP abolished, dark days are ahead for our Democracy.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

At which point we the people would be morally and legally obligated to make that office uninhabitable.

There is always an answer. Just not always a civilized one.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

”Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest…”

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

~hysterical laughter with a backing track of Ominous Latin Chanting~

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago

They're all begging for the guillotine. Why keep them waiting?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

y'all come on now, just cause they donated a couple billion bucks does not mean their opinion matters more than an average citizen does it?

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

Republicans don't want to get rid of it because it helps them against Democrats. Democrats don't want to get rid of it because it helps them lock out progressives. We're stuck with it.

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

Yeah, I keep reading that as "Megaboners"

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Is one of them Israel and other foreign governments? Also Pfizer?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

This is how we get rid of the Deep State! Thank you Trump's Supreme Court (who has been doing the Same Things as Citizen United but for our OTHER Rights!)!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So let's see Kamala's plan to end this bullshit... Obviously Trump wouldn't, but Kamala might if we push enough

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Lmao this take that Kamala is somehow immune to the realities of our political financing structures makes no sense to me

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

Not immune, and not calling for her to abstain... But she could easily say she wants to change the system and how. It's not even controversial and would get her plenty of points from the left to the center.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

Pretty sure I might be on this list. Gave $20 not too long ago, so I'm about to buy some laws.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

It is their country after all we are just guest/the help at this point.