this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2024
537 points (97.2% liked)

Political Memes

5455 readers
3770 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes 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 misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Joncash2@lemmy.ml 67 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No one using this would be trying to "stick it to the man" by doing this. They're trying to get some scrapes from the man by doing this.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago (4 children)

But to fix the problem we need to regulate their trading and get donor money out of politics.

You're talking about a bandaid that stops the bleeding but not infection.

We need a long-term solution

[–] Chocrates@lemmy.world 21 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I don't think this is supposed to be a solution to anything, though there is no article to (not) read.

[–] YoFrodo@lemmy.world 14 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The method described in the post is more like the fish that follow sharks around. They aren't there to stop the shark, they are there to eat.

To stop the shark requires an entirely separate effort

[–] Joncash2@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago

I'm saying this is the farthest thing from a solution. It's the opposite of a solution. People doing these investments are increasing the problem.

[–] FreakinSteve@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The phrase "get money out of politics" has been repeated millions upon millions of times in public and private venues and nobody has defined what that phrase means and how to do it. It's vagueness makes it useless. Try "abolish corporate lobbyist bribery" or anything that more specifically points out that you are being taxed without representation because you can never give enough money to ever be heard by your representatives.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Just because you don't understand something, doesn't mean no one else does...

I googled this in 2 seconds...

https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/campaign-finance-reform

[–] FreakinSteve@lemmy.world -1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Is that supposed to be some sort of "own"?

You did not understand the assignment.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Good news!

I figured out why you think no one can explain it.

[–] FreakinSteve@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago

You linked to one dead campaign that was pledging not to accept campaign contributions and which calls for "meaningful reform" instead of abolition. "Reform" is just repackaging. She lost, btw.

What I am telling you is that the wording is wrong because it's cheap, vague, and ineffective. It's the kind of thing that rednecks say while leaning on their pickup trucks.