cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/42369507
this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2026
207 points (80.5% liked)
Political Memes
10661 readers
3226 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
They've banned PAC funding before, they'd do it again if we gave them the chance.
What does that even mean? I'm not physically restraining them. They run their own party. Their party platform has never been put up to a vote directly for me where I mandated they use PAC funding. Individual candidates have declined PAC funding and I've contributed to them, but the DNC can do whatever it wants and it clearly doesn't want to ban PAC funding. I've now helped vote in multiple democratic presidents along with democratic congresspeople. What chance am I not giving them?
We have not given the DNC more than 48 senate seats in over 13 years. We collectively haven't given them power. We need to give them power to create any progress at all.
They run their own party. They can ban PAC funding whenever they want. If they wanted to reject PAC money there is nothing stopping them. Plenty of Dems have run and won without it. If they legitimately think it's a bad thing they can do something about it right now.
Your solution is to just defund the campaigns of only Democrats? Thats how you're going to defeat Republicans?
You've gotta be astroturfing or some shit.
Obama did no PACs in 08. AOC and even Kamala ended up rejecting PAC money. 52 sitting reps ran a PAC free campaign. My solution is to actually have a coherent platform. If we believe PAC money is compromising, why should we elect people we believe to be compromised? People have proven PAC free campaigns can be done, often by mobilizing grassroots support. The thing about elections is that money doesn't actually win them, votes do. Candidates that engage with the people they represent can drum up support in the form of votes, regardless of ad spend.
People have come to believe the Dems don't actually believe in the things they supposedly support. I think they'd gain a lot of traction if they actually committed to a single ideal. Corpos are now all in on the republicans anyway. Now would be a great time to make rejection of PAC money a core part of the party. People want to vote for people who are honest about their beliefs. It's hard to believe they care about getting money out of politics when they're beneficiaries of PACs too. Let's see them put their money where their mouth is. Or literally on any of their positions since they're willing to cave for anything, happy Charlie Kirk day of remembrance.
You're mad that we haven't had any progress or the DNC passing any of their stated goals, lately?
WE HAVE NOT ELECTED MORE THAN 48 DNC IN OVER 13 YEARS. CURRENTLY ONLY 45.
I never said I was mad, much less than I was mad that they didn't pass anything. I said people don't believe they support their stated goals. My Democratic rep, who I voted for, voted in favor for the Charlie Kirk day of remembrance and are currently soliciting donations to help "fight fascism." If you don't see the inherent contradiction in claiming to fight fascism while voting to honor a propagandist mouthpiece for the fascists, there's nothing I can do to help you. It's one thing to be unable to garner support for policies I want, it's another thing completely to openly capitulate.
I also think Charlie Kirk was a piece of shit nazi, and contacted my reps telling them not to honor him, but the DNC stance on Charlie Kirk really just boils down to "this action was wrong and political violence needs to be avoided" which kind of makes sense given their vulnerability in the tense political and socioeconomic climate we live in.
You have no reason to think they won't pass the laws they say they will.
SuperPACs became a thing because they couldn't even handle PACs.
Is the problem with your whole idea. They don't have an incentive to change anything, and they certainly won't pass a constitutional amendment without a significant amount of pressure from constituents.
The whole point of voting Biden was to undo what Trump did. and ensure he was properly prosecuted for his crimes. He half assed both and then refused to step down for a primary despite being unpopular.
They didn't have any incentive to change anything in 2003, either, then. So why did they? And the DNC today is further left than those 1995 assholes were, too.
The thing about democracy is that when we all work to create a better world then we all benefit from living in one. Greed only creates suffering, even for the people who hoard wealth.
I mean the last election pretty clearly showed how greed from the democrats not wanting to upset the AIPAC cost them the election. But yea sure they'll surely do the right thing next time, right?
I don't know what you're smoking but sure seems like copium.
Biden did not do nearly enough to stop Israel, and far more DNC voted to pass weapons sales to them than I am comfortable with, but he and the DNC as a whole were negotiating for lasting peace, even withholding large ordinances that Israel had already payed for, although hardly anybody believes that because of propaganda by Israel, China, and Russia who all favored Trump winning the election.
That said, anybody who actually cared about a single palestinian life should have been out on the streets begging people to support Harris' election as POTUS, because the alternative is the Trump Admin whose official stance is according to Department of War's Pete Hegseth: Death or Exodus of every Palestinian.
The so-called USA is the only state I know that has PACs and it's by far not the only where capital manipulates politics.
You can't "get money out of politics" in a capitalist system.
You realize you just made conflicting statements, yes?
Where, exactly?
Every system is a capitalist system, but the USA is the only one with PACs, but you can't get money out of politics in a capitalist system.
So... where's the contradiction?
You said the USA is the only one with [Specific Type of Corruption] because other countries removed [Specific Type of Corruption] but you said cannot remove a [Specific Type of Corruption] in a country which is in a [System that Encompasses Every Country].
You're saying the thing that doesn't exist elsewhere has to exist everywhere.
I never said anything about other contries removing said corruption.
No, I said that you can't remove corruption in a capitalist system.
That's a weird way of putting it, but yeah: Capitalism has to go, if you want to eradicate corruption. (Or a surviving biosphere, for that matter)