This is one reason why I don't think I could ever be president. Or in politics in general. Making ethical compromises almost becomes a necessity. At the minimum, you'll inevitably find yourself having to make decisions that involve choosing from a list of bad options. I have a hard enough time doing that in my personal life, much less for an entire country.
this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2024
-40 points (18.8% liked)
politics
18992 readers
2550 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.
- 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.
- 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
The Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United v. FEC decision — a development decades in the making — triggered the flood of dark money by ruling that politically active nonprofits such as 501(c)(4) “social welfare” organizations can spend unlimited amounts to influence elections. Such nonprofits are considered “dark” because they don’t have to disclose their donors, allowing them to bombard Americans with political ads and messages without revealing the identities or motives of the people funding them.
Both parties have come to rely on dark money, but critics say such behavior from Democrats is especially hypocritical. The party has repeatedly introduced legislation to stop anonymous political donations, including a 2019 bill co-sponsored by Harris, and its 2024 platform pledged to “end ‘dark money’ by requiring full disclosure of contributors and ban 501(c)(4) organizations from spending on elections.”
Money is kinda important when running a political campaign. Now that the floodgates are open, it'd be shooting yourself in the foot not to use it, even if it's not the "right thing to do". Is it somewhat ironic that one needs to accept dark money to have a chance at ending it? Absolutely. But that's simply the reality of the situation now.
How about we save the cries of "Hypocrite!" until she has the opportunity to end it, yet still doesn't.
The Lever - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for The Lever:
MBFC: Left - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source
Media Bias Fact Check | bot supportSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.levernews.com/harris-turn-to-the-dark-money-side/
Embraced by the people who laid the ground for Project 2025 and Dick Cheney. Taking Dark Money. "Joy." 🙄
Are the downvotes just because it's Kamala or because taking dark money is bad?
Because people don't understand the news is the news.
Thanks for contributing. Sorry for the down votes. Please keep contributing. Just because I do not like it, doesn't make it not news.
People trying to drown out news they don't want to see is some maga level shit, and I understand why they get called blue maga when they do this.
Thank you. I guess I should have added a disclosure?
Disclosure: Everybody still vote for Harris regardless of the dark money. Just be informed of what's going on.
Probably because Harris is the least-bad viable option. The other option is an overt authoritarian kleptocrat who is going to more or less let Nationalist Christians run the show.