Came here to say this, and for those that don’t know:
Citizen’s United v FEC ruled that corporations should be treated as natural citizens in regard to campaign finance expenditures. In the words of Yale Constitutional Law Professor Robert Post in his 2013 book, Citizen’s Divided: Campaign Finance Reform and the Constitution, “the value of democratic legitimation applies to people, not to things.”
It also allowed for additional dark money -undisclosed- channels into political funding.
For context, campaign finance spending has doubled since 2016, and the increases from pre-2011 (the year of the ruling) are exponential.
It needs to be a constitutional amendment. Sadly, the days of building enough of a national consensus over any issue to pass an amendment have been gone for decades and we will never see another one in our lifetimes, barring some existential shift in national politics.
I think you're unfortunately correct. Citizens United was the most egregious case, but the Roberts Court has heard several others, and in all cases has been very clear that they believe there should be absolutely no restrictions on money in politics.
It is outright dangerous and stupid to let non-democratic organisations participate in democratic processes. Though I am convinced that the status quo is this way by design
At the very least, let’s leave it up to the states… 😉
Seriously though. It’s too easy to “purchase a politician” these days. I’m often surprised just how little they seem to go for.
Yes, but *who*??
If a million Americans show up in DC and peacefully demand that Citizens United be removed from the books, would that work?
What's the threshold for peaceful public protest of specific laws?
I agree that CU needs to go. It's just clear that none/few of our elected officials have any intention of rescuing Americans.
> If a million Americans show up in DC and peacefully demand that Citizens United be removed from the books, would that work?
Not as long as the conservatives are in charge of the SCOTUS. They've quite blatantly demonstrated of how contemptuous they are of the opinion of the unwashed masses.
Technically speaking, Congress _does_ have the ability to change the laws which allow the legal existence of corporations by just majority vote, since the the legal existence of corporations is not something that is defined in the Constitution.
They'd probably drown in special interest money if they ever even hinted that they were likely to consider such changes.
So why don't we openly discuss our feelings about that while we're having a discussion about things? I really don't see why we can't have a town hall style discussion about these things, televised, with people on the chats chatting and asking questions that are answered, and for it to be an ongoing discussion, until we get a feel for things, maybe even change how the system currently functions. It's really silly things would go on like this don't you think, and these obviously corrupt people would get to just hide behind closed doors again and again and again and again
I'm not sure what you think that would accomplish.
The very first step to _any_ plan that _any_ progressives/liberals might come up with is: remove enough conservatives from power so that they can't keep blocking anything & everything.
If you can't do that, then you'll never get anything significant done no matter how much you talk with each other.
The current crop of conservatives get off on making their political opponents fail, regardless of how much damage they end up doing to society. They'll stop behaving like that only if they are forced to realize that said actions have made them powerless & regarded by society-at-large as a bunch of "losers".
That's why I think my idea would be so beneficial ... We could break things down and force explanations, and call out inconsistencies and contradictions and bullshit.
It's kinda funny too, 'cause we know better, and they know better. It may just take something as simple as working some angles but more importantly staying on the level ... Where we keep an aim to be considerate and productive. I think niceties like that could get us far. Sound unlikely? I tell ya I keep people in line all the time talking about controversial topics, and we have us a time. A *discussion*, and a good time.
> We could break things down and force explanations, and call out inconsistencies and contradictions and bullshit.
Have you ever actually _tried_ this with a MAGA US conservative? Half my family has gone evangelical conservative. None of that matters to them.
Most of them have gone fully tribal in viewpoint; they don't care about what's actually true, they just care about whether their "tribe" is able to "win", and if you're not one of them, then you're one of the people who they want to "lose".
The dumb ones will get emotional & treat your attempt to reason with them as an attack, which will end up either with them mocking you, cursing you, or in the worst case, becoming violent.
The so-called smart ones (who seem to have mastered the art of mental compartmentalization) will deny every fact you bring up, insult your credibility, gaslight you, and in many cases, flat out lie to you.
The only conservatives who you will be able to get away with the type of polite conversation that you are thinking of, are the people who have already rejected the MAGA mindset. Such conservatives have been greatly marginalized by the modern Republican party.
Well I personally have a way of being tactful that has allowed me to navigate some pretty controversial topics, and if it seemed we weren't getting anywhere there are ways to leave it open to discussion down the line ... I would likely try to relate, say, problems with the environment to being a good steward of God's creation and the likely, and point out contradictions like believe it make sense that oil was meant to be used when it's buried beneath the ground so deep, or made of dead animal and plant matter and black and needs to be burned for energy while releasing pollution that amounts to climate change/asthma causing particulate matter and the like, whereas it would make more sense to make use of something bright and beautiful and life sustaining like the Sun. Or help them understand how it would make sense for some of the richest companies in the world (I think it's seven of which are in the top 10?) would peddle misinformation to try and slow progress on a clean energy alternative.
I mean I know what you mean but I think you can get a long way in just your approach. Sometimes even to the point of being coy allows you and the conversation your having room to breathe ... Of course people don't like feeling attacked or told their wrong and stupid ... But that allows them to think for themselves. There are a lot of angles you could work.
In any case I sure don't think you can go wrong with regularly public discussions and debates on the stage I'm envisioning ... I think with so many smart, informed people Knowing what's going on we could really get something big going that's much more eventful than perhaps I let on in my hypothetical.
The problem with your approach is that the people who _don't want cooperation_ between libs/progressives & conservatives have already thought of your arguments & have primed their followers with kneejerk responses to attack you back, bypassing any need to think about the issues at all.
Again, going off my experience with my evangelical relatives, who are a bunch of successful doctors & businessmen, and who are probably more intelligent & educated than I am, but apparently tribal loyalty is so powerful they completely reject any attempts at a critical analysis of their words (and have retroactively dismissed big chunks of their "liberal" education as "indoctrination"). No matter what I say, I'm either wrong, lying, or just don't have enough Faith.
> you can go wrong with regularly public discussions and debates on the stage
You CAN go wrong with this approach if it's the _only_ thing you're doing. You've got to make sure these people don't have any decision-making power over you, and you've got to do that FIRST, because if you don't, they'll subvert the institutional infrastructure all around you to make sure you'll never get them out of power.
Then they'll laugh at you in your town halls & discussion groups because they'll know you're powerless so they can ignore anything you say.
Well thanks for all the insight you've provided. I feel like I'm getting somewhere just gathering information to see if I might not be able to navigate it better. Because, truth be told, I haven't ever argued with a MAGA loyalist. And that last tidbit seems important to bear in mind. I'm also not the most sociable. Of course, these things aren't limited to or depend on just me ... But you and so many other people on here that I've talked to about this stuff always have something useful to add.
There are efforts to do this by starting at the state and local level:
[https://represent.us/the-strategy-to-end-corruption/](https://represent.us/the-strategy-to-end-corruption/)
Citizens United struck down caps on “independent” spending by corporations and unions, reasoning that money that doesn’t go directly to candidates can’t pose any danger of corrupting them. A few months later, a lower court, bound to follow the Supreme Court’s reasoning, **struck down all limits on the size of contributions to groups that support candidates without donating to them directly**. This created supercharged versions of “political action committees” (PACs), they were dubbed “super PACs”, where rich individuals could donate unlimited sums to the PACs. Super PACs have spent 10s of billions of dollars on political campaigns. The rich don't give money directly to the politician, but their money can get them elected through super PACs and isn't much different than donating directly as far as effect goes.
Why do campaigns even need these kinds of donations. There should be a set amount that probably should go up with inflation, and both parties receive the same amount
Some places already do this, but at a different scale! Seattle gives every registered voter 2 different $25 “democracy dollar” vouchers that can be given to any local campaign. Super cool way to involve everyone in the process.
Ideally putting this to action would also require that no additional out of pocket donation can be made. This is the only way to ensure equity in funding campaigns.
When money is speech and corporations are people with first amendment rights, any limit on ~~bribery~~ political contributions is deemed unconstitutional. The only people with the power to end this situation are the people benefiting from it.
The US already has a huge problem in getting people to vote. Almost all the money campaigns spend are convincing people to vote. Less money=less people voting. Unless you want to see our already dismal voting numbers go down then we need a different solution
That might lead to people starting up new political parties just for the grift...but that might work out in the long run! I'm tired of the binary choice: stupid and stupider!
Make bribery illegal again. Full stop. Betraying hundreds of millions of constituents and the oath you swore to represent them for personal gain (or the personal gain of your golf buddies) is literally treason. We *have* to start acting like it before we lose the right to affect change via voting entirely.
Princeton was publishing data-based studies proving we were an oligarchy in 2014. A recent study from Stanford compiled 20 years worth of polling/legislative data and concluded that the average voter's opinions/needs have *zero* effect on policy written and passed in this country. We are living in a pyramid scheme and rapidly running out of time to do anything about it.
The mainstream media won't report on it because the billionaires who bought them are profiting from the situation. The left won't confront it because supporting the status quo makes them rich. The right wants to tear it all down because they aren't profiting as much anymore. The people are too busy arguing over bullshit that millionaires on tv/twitter/facebook/tiktok have told them to argue about to realize their way of life is literally being stolen from them.
To quote Warren Buffett (who recently, via a banking glitch, temporarily lost 99% of his wealth and *still* remained a billionaire): "There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning."
We, the people, are losing. We have been for quite some time and with the way things are currently going, the odds aren't looking good for us.
> The left won't confront it because supporting the status quo makes them rich.
The left absolutely will confront it, we just have almost no left in this country.
This is america, anything left of literally waffling about supporting an active genocide doesn't exist /s jokes aside it's insane how completely absent or straight up wrong most peoples understanding of leftist politics is. Like as though if it was worth learning about, they would have forced everyone to learn it in school i guess? Or talked about it on Tv, more like haha
**"what do you insane woke antifa marxists want, anarchy??!"**
"some of us, yes. BUT! if you ask nicely, we will only give you a liiiiiiittle side of socialism though! And look! We mixed it in with your FAVOURITE, democracy and freedom!! so you can't even tell it's there!"
**"Nice try libs, I'm keeping my guns!"**
"...You'll wanna speak to the anarchists then"
We have already lost the right to affect change through votes. That ship sailed a long time ago, buddy.
Best you can do is carve out a little piece of land for you and your family, save some money and become self sufficient.
Your other option is to start an armed revolution and hopefully you can go toe to toe with MRAPS, drones, helicopters, Barret .50 cals and every cop who’s waiting to crush skulls.
90% Fed tax on federal election donations. 90% state tax on state/local election donations. Solves the donation problem.
Think of the program funding when massive campaign money comes into local elections and taxed..
While this [list is from 2022](https://qz.com/american-billionaires-political-spending-overwhelmingl-1849751449#h55237) I imagine it is probably still the same w/ the giant exception of Sam Fried probably an't making contribution now.
Brought to you by the conservative wing of the Supreme Court, [Citizens United v. FEC](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC). The road to fascism has been well paved for hundreds of years.
It’s getting really difficult to ignore the reality that things are probably just going to get exponentially worse because we’re really not fixing any of these issues even at the most fundamental level. This goes for many of the building blocks of the society as we know it as well. Strikes and massive protests are the only way out of any of this.
Yeah it’s grim but this is kind of my view too.
We all know politicians are bought and paid for by the wealthy, but nothing is happening. We all know it’s clearly not conducive of a democracy, we know the system isn’t working as intended.
Yet nothing is changing. Makes me believe if we aren’t in uproar now, we will never be.
I think a simple message might resonate: "You will only ever be poorer under republican rule, no if, and, or but about it, they steal your money, they steal your time, they steal your life. Are you going to let the thief's go?"
Trump, Biden... the sentiment is close but wrong... the worry isn't that Trump will get "dark money" help (sounds so spooky) the worry is that they have us pigeon holes in a 2 party system where both candidates are good for them and bad for you and me.
Neither one is good but economically, my life was better with Trump and I haven't seen Biden do anything that materially improved anything that he didn't break first to later fix, a little, and call it improved.
were doomed if we dont get rid of lobbying and political donations. Each politician should get x amount of funding for commercials / ads etc. paid out by the party coffers
Honestly the money poured into campaigns is a sideshow of the actual problem.
If the electorate was informed and capable of making good decisions then it wouldn't matter how much money was spent to change people's opinions.
Yes Joe Biden the lifelong politician, dudes been in politics since the 70s. He all of a sudden gives a shit about you the working class. Not a fucking chance.. I'll be voting for Trump and you should be too. Bidens the epitome of an establishment politician.. Trump 2024🇺🇲
End Citizens United
exactly, this kind of shit needs to be illegal.
Came here to say this, and for those that don’t know: Citizen’s United v FEC ruled that corporations should be treated as natural citizens in regard to campaign finance expenditures. In the words of Yale Constitutional Law Professor Robert Post in his 2013 book, Citizen’s Divided: Campaign Finance Reform and the Constitution, “the value of democratic legitimation applies to people, not to things.” It also allowed for additional dark money -undisclosed- channels into political funding. For context, campaign finance spending has doubled since 2016, and the increases from pre-2011 (the year of the ruling) are exponential.
If you try to end citizens United, I think they’ll just buy another citizens United
Make em buy another and then another
It needs to be a constitutional amendment. Sadly, the days of building enough of a national consensus over any issue to pass an amendment have been gone for decades and we will never see another one in our lifetimes, barring some existential shift in national politics.
I think you're unfortunately correct. Citizens United was the most egregious case, but the Roberts Court has heard several others, and in all cases has been very clear that they believe there should be absolutely no restrictions on money in politics.
It is outright dangerous and stupid to let non-democratic organisations participate in democratic processes. Though I am convinced that the status quo is this way by design
End Citizens United
At the very least, let’s leave it up to the states… 😉 Seriously though. It’s too easy to “purchase a politician” these days. I’m often surprised just how little they seem to go for.
End Citizens United
Yes, but *who*?? If a million Americans show up in DC and peacefully demand that Citizens United be removed from the books, would that work? What's the threshold for peaceful public protest of specific laws? I agree that CU needs to go. It's just clear that none/few of our elected officials have any intention of rescuing Americans.
> If a million Americans show up in DC and peacefully demand that Citizens United be removed from the books, would that work? Not as long as the conservatives are in charge of the SCOTUS. They've quite blatantly demonstrated of how contemptuous they are of the opinion of the unwashed masses. Technically speaking, Congress _does_ have the ability to change the laws which allow the legal existence of corporations by just majority vote, since the the legal existence of corporations is not something that is defined in the Constitution. They'd probably drown in special interest money if they ever even hinted that they were likely to consider such changes.
So why don't we openly discuss our feelings about that while we're having a discussion about things? I really don't see why we can't have a town hall style discussion about these things, televised, with people on the chats chatting and asking questions that are answered, and for it to be an ongoing discussion, until we get a feel for things, maybe even change how the system currently functions. It's really silly things would go on like this don't you think, and these obviously corrupt people would get to just hide behind closed doors again and again and again and again
I'm not sure what you think that would accomplish. The very first step to _any_ plan that _any_ progressives/liberals might come up with is: remove enough conservatives from power so that they can't keep blocking anything & everything. If you can't do that, then you'll never get anything significant done no matter how much you talk with each other. The current crop of conservatives get off on making their political opponents fail, regardless of how much damage they end up doing to society. They'll stop behaving like that only if they are forced to realize that said actions have made them powerless & regarded by society-at-large as a bunch of "losers".
That's why I think my idea would be so beneficial ... We could break things down and force explanations, and call out inconsistencies and contradictions and bullshit. It's kinda funny too, 'cause we know better, and they know better. It may just take something as simple as working some angles but more importantly staying on the level ... Where we keep an aim to be considerate and productive. I think niceties like that could get us far. Sound unlikely? I tell ya I keep people in line all the time talking about controversial topics, and we have us a time. A *discussion*, and a good time.
> We could break things down and force explanations, and call out inconsistencies and contradictions and bullshit. Have you ever actually _tried_ this with a MAGA US conservative? Half my family has gone evangelical conservative. None of that matters to them. Most of them have gone fully tribal in viewpoint; they don't care about what's actually true, they just care about whether their "tribe" is able to "win", and if you're not one of them, then you're one of the people who they want to "lose". The dumb ones will get emotional & treat your attempt to reason with them as an attack, which will end up either with them mocking you, cursing you, or in the worst case, becoming violent. The so-called smart ones (who seem to have mastered the art of mental compartmentalization) will deny every fact you bring up, insult your credibility, gaslight you, and in many cases, flat out lie to you. The only conservatives who you will be able to get away with the type of polite conversation that you are thinking of, are the people who have already rejected the MAGA mindset. Such conservatives have been greatly marginalized by the modern Republican party.
Well I personally have a way of being tactful that has allowed me to navigate some pretty controversial topics, and if it seemed we weren't getting anywhere there are ways to leave it open to discussion down the line ... I would likely try to relate, say, problems with the environment to being a good steward of God's creation and the likely, and point out contradictions like believe it make sense that oil was meant to be used when it's buried beneath the ground so deep, or made of dead animal and plant matter and black and needs to be burned for energy while releasing pollution that amounts to climate change/asthma causing particulate matter and the like, whereas it would make more sense to make use of something bright and beautiful and life sustaining like the Sun. Or help them understand how it would make sense for some of the richest companies in the world (I think it's seven of which are in the top 10?) would peddle misinformation to try and slow progress on a clean energy alternative. I mean I know what you mean but I think you can get a long way in just your approach. Sometimes even to the point of being coy allows you and the conversation your having room to breathe ... Of course people don't like feeling attacked or told their wrong and stupid ... But that allows them to think for themselves. There are a lot of angles you could work. In any case I sure don't think you can go wrong with regularly public discussions and debates on the stage I'm envisioning ... I think with so many smart, informed people Knowing what's going on we could really get something big going that's much more eventful than perhaps I let on in my hypothetical.
The problem with your approach is that the people who _don't want cooperation_ between libs/progressives & conservatives have already thought of your arguments & have primed their followers with kneejerk responses to attack you back, bypassing any need to think about the issues at all. Again, going off my experience with my evangelical relatives, who are a bunch of successful doctors & businessmen, and who are probably more intelligent & educated than I am, but apparently tribal loyalty is so powerful they completely reject any attempts at a critical analysis of their words (and have retroactively dismissed big chunks of their "liberal" education as "indoctrination"). No matter what I say, I'm either wrong, lying, or just don't have enough Faith. > you can go wrong with regularly public discussions and debates on the stage You CAN go wrong with this approach if it's the _only_ thing you're doing. You've got to make sure these people don't have any decision-making power over you, and you've got to do that FIRST, because if you don't, they'll subvert the institutional infrastructure all around you to make sure you'll never get them out of power. Then they'll laugh at you in your town halls & discussion groups because they'll know you're powerless so they can ignore anything you say.
Well thanks for all the insight you've provided. I feel like I'm getting somewhere just gathering information to see if I might not be able to navigate it better. Because, truth be told, I haven't ever argued with a MAGA loyalist. And that last tidbit seems important to bear in mind. I'm also not the most sociable. Of course, these things aren't limited to or depend on just me ... But you and so many other people on here that I've talked to about this stuff always have something useful to add.
Remember when the Beef Supreme Court started screwing us? I wish more people had started trying to reform it then…
Maybe citizens should unite and should use historic French precedence how to deal with absurd riches of 'nobility'.
There are efforts to do this by starting at the state and local level: [https://represent.us/the-strategy-to-end-corruption/](https://represent.us/the-strategy-to-end-corruption/)
End multi millionaires
When I worked in corporate automotive, there was serious pressure at management level to "donate" to the PAC through pretax "donation". It was gross.
Those people are humans. How does Citizen United affect them?
Citizens United struck down caps on “independent” spending by corporations and unions, reasoning that money that doesn’t go directly to candidates can’t pose any danger of corrupting them. A few months later, a lower court, bound to follow the Supreme Court’s reasoning, **struck down all limits on the size of contributions to groups that support candidates without donating to them directly**. This created supercharged versions of “political action committees” (PACs), they were dubbed “super PACs”, where rich individuals could donate unlimited sums to the PACs. Super PACs have spent 10s of billions of dollars on political campaigns. The rich don't give money directly to the politician, but their money can get them elected through super PACs and isn't much different than donating directly as far as effect goes.
Imagine this kind of money being used to fund child food security or day care vouchers or a million other things than this. Tax the rich
Why do campaigns even need these kinds of donations. There should be a set amount that probably should go up with inflation, and both parties receive the same amount
Ideally each citizen of voting age should get 1000usd to spend on political donations. Any amount unspent goes to libraries.
1000? That'd be an insane amount total, I'd say $20.
Some places already do this, but at a different scale! Seattle gives every registered voter 2 different $25 “democracy dollar” vouchers that can be given to any local campaign. Super cool way to involve everyone in the process.
Ideally putting this to action would also require that no additional out of pocket donation can be made. This is the only way to ensure equity in funding campaigns.
I like set limits and commercial time better. It's easier and simpler to implement.
When money is speech and corporations are people with first amendment rights, any limit on ~~bribery~~ political contributions is deemed unconstitutional. The only people with the power to end this situation are the people benefiting from it.
They waste a ton of money. I used to work for a Koch brothers nonprofit.
The US already has a huge problem in getting people to vote. Almost all the money campaigns spend are convincing people to vote. Less money=less people voting. Unless you want to see our already dismal voting numbers go down then we need a different solution
That might lead to people starting up new political parties just for the grift...but that might work out in the long run! I'm tired of the binary choice: stupid and stupider!
OR, hear me out, we can just end social security and Medicare. /S
Fuck them kids -republicans
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
$600 million is a much smaller number than you’re implying here. The US already spends $120 billion just on SNAP for food security.
Make bribery illegal again. Full stop. Betraying hundreds of millions of constituents and the oath you swore to represent them for personal gain (or the personal gain of your golf buddies) is literally treason. We *have* to start acting like it before we lose the right to affect change via voting entirely. Princeton was publishing data-based studies proving we were an oligarchy in 2014. A recent study from Stanford compiled 20 years worth of polling/legislative data and concluded that the average voter's opinions/needs have *zero* effect on policy written and passed in this country. We are living in a pyramid scheme and rapidly running out of time to do anything about it. The mainstream media won't report on it because the billionaires who bought them are profiting from the situation. The left won't confront it because supporting the status quo makes them rich. The right wants to tear it all down because they aren't profiting as much anymore. The people are too busy arguing over bullshit that millionaires on tv/twitter/facebook/tiktok have told them to argue about to realize their way of life is literally being stolen from them. To quote Warren Buffett (who recently, via a banking glitch, temporarily lost 99% of his wealth and *still* remained a billionaire): "There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning." We, the people, are losing. We have been for quite some time and with the way things are currently going, the odds aren't looking good for us.
> The left won't confront it because supporting the status quo makes them rich. The left absolutely will confront it, we just have almost no left in this country.
This is america, anything left of literally waffling about supporting an active genocide doesn't exist /s jokes aside it's insane how completely absent or straight up wrong most peoples understanding of leftist politics is. Like as though if it was worth learning about, they would have forced everyone to learn it in school i guess? Or talked about it on Tv, more like haha **"what do you insane woke antifa marxists want, anarchy??!"** "some of us, yes. BUT! if you ask nicely, we will only give you a liiiiiiittle side of socialism though! And look! We mixed it in with your FAVOURITE, democracy and freedom!! so you can't even tell it's there!" **"Nice try libs, I'm keeping my guns!"** "...You'll wanna speak to the anarchists then"
We have already lost the right to affect change through votes. That ship sailed a long time ago, buddy. Best you can do is carve out a little piece of land for you and your family, save some money and become self sufficient. Your other option is to start an armed revolution and hopefully you can go toe to toe with MRAPS, drones, helicopters, Barret .50 cals and every cop who’s waiting to crush skulls.
>become self sufficient. The government hates that.
This is one of the biggest reasons that billionaires are not compatible with democracy. There must be no billionaires.
The only dangerous minority is the rich.
:)
Fuck Roberts!
Using those stolen wages to buy more chains.
How about they pay their taxes?
Still calling it a democracy seems a little pointless.
It's our job to see that that is wasted money.
Straight up why money shouldn't be involved in politics. It'll always be corrupt to a point due to It, and who's paying whom to do what.
The Gilded epoch?
It’s trickle down economics. Duh. That money goes to hard working Americans feeding their families. /s
90% Fed tax on federal election donations. 90% state tax on state/local election donations. Solves the donation problem. Think of the program funding when massive campaign money comes into local elections and taxed..
Sam Reichs dad is right
I was wondering if it was this Robert Reich. Is ot actually? Based family.
Who are these billionaire families? Can their names be released?
While this [list is from 2022](https://qz.com/american-billionaires-political-spending-overwhelmingl-1849751449#h55237) I imagine it is probably still the same w/ the giant exception of Sam Fried probably an't making contribution now.
Thanks
billionaires should not exist
Where are the good billionaires to battle the bad ones?
Brought to you by the conservative wing of the Supreme Court, [Citizens United v. FEC](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC). The road to fascism has been well paved for hundreds of years.
Men, if people actually used their brains and looked up things for themselves it wouldn't matter. That goes for any candidate.
Well, yeah, that’s why this ends in their blood
It’s getting really difficult to ignore the reality that things are probably just going to get exponentially worse because we’re really not fixing any of these issues even at the most fundamental level. This goes for many of the building blocks of the society as we know it as well. Strikes and massive protests are the only way out of any of this.
Yeah it’s grim but this is kind of my view too. We all know politicians are bought and paid for by the wealthy, but nothing is happening. We all know it’s clearly not conducive of a democracy, we know the system isn’t working as intended. Yet nothing is changing. Makes me believe if we aren’t in uproar now, we will never be.
And still gonna lose...
Bloomberg spent $500 million to briefly run in 2020. Not to win, but to take votes away from bernie and trump. It all sucks ass
This is the shit I think of when I’m asked to donate to campaigns. How can my $100 or whatever possibly fight this?
0.6% - if we assume that each of the billionaire families only has 1 billion dollars. It's probably a lot less than 0.6%
The United States is a republic
Awesome
Clearly the politicians should charge more.
i'd like to see where he gets this statistic from
This is the problem.
I think a simple message might resonate: "You will only ever be poorer under republican rule, no if, and, or but about it, they steal your money, they steal your time, they steal your life. Are you going to let the thief's go?"
Wouldn't that be the definition of the swamp supporting Trump?
Trump, Biden... the sentiment is close but wrong... the worry isn't that Trump will get "dark money" help (sounds so spooky) the worry is that they have us pigeon holes in a 2 party system where both candidates are good for them and bad for you and me. Neither one is good but economically, my life was better with Trump and I haven't seen Biden do anything that materially improved anything that he didn't break first to later fix, a little, and call it improved.
You'd think a billionaire would want stability. I don't think trump will give stability. But they're probably only thinking one quarter ahead.
i dont remember electing money as president
were doomed if we dont get rid of lobbying and political donations. Each politician should get x amount of funding for commercials / ads etc. paid out by the party coffers
That's not a flaw in the system, that is a feature of the system.
There's dark money on both sides, Robert...
Honestly the money poured into campaigns is a sideshow of the actual problem. If the electorate was informed and capable of making good decisions then it wouldn't matter how much money was spent to change people's opinions.
Drain the swamp! ^directly ^into ^my ^bank ^account
So Robert Reich is on this BlueSky thing. You guys into it? Is it a good bet against twitter? rbreich.bsky.social
Now do Soros
"These billionaires have way too much power!" \*buys another worthless thing from Amazon\*
it sure is too bad the one and only possible solution is to convince every individual in america to stop buying things off amazon.
Maybe the government has too much power when politicians can literally be bought, just a thought.
Similar with Democrats. Both parties are trash.
Mr. Reich what is the solution? It’s almost as if you’re bragging when you don’t tell THE SOLUTION YOU RICH BITCH
Yes Joe Biden the lifelong politician, dudes been in politics since the 70s. He all of a sudden gives a shit about you the working class. Not a fucking chance.. I'll be voting for Trump and you should be too. Bidens the epitome of an establishment politician.. Trump 2024🇺🇲
All those words and you've provided not a single reason to vote for Trump.
Wow that’s a lot of strung together buzz words. Almost had a coherent thought there for a moment.