cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/16955018
“Jamaal and our movement were such a threat to right-wing power, to GOP megadonors, and to AIPAC’s influence in Congress that they had to spend $15 million to defeat us,” said one progressive organizer.
No mention of Hillary Clinton endorsing the AIPAC candidate.
Money can’t buy happiness but it can buy you the American government.
It’s the best government money can buy!
Lattimer looks like he has brain worms
The precedent was the Citizens United ruling. This is just a case in point.
Remember when the DCCC was mad at AOC and said any consultants who work with candidates trying to unseat incumbents would be blacklisted? https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/democratic-leaders-stand-firm-on-incumbent-favor-rule-rebuff-liberal-cries-of-blacklist/2019/04/02/117a7714-54bd-11e9-8ef3-fbd41a2ce4d5_story.html
I remember when the party threw its weight behind Henry Cuellar because his opponent was a progressive, and claimed it was because he was an incumbent.
Almost like the dnc goal is to always do what fucks over those wanting to move the party left
Precedent? I don’t even know why they bother when they can simply legally and openly bribe whomever wins anyway
Right? I was about to say, this can’t be the first politician AIPAC has bought and placed into our government.
How is this not foreign interference? It should be doubly so if money is free speech. They are directly influencing our lives, at all.90 winning, I’d even say those tinfoil hat jyoo conspiracy theorists have some credence, its just Israel not the Jewish people.
How is this not foreign interference?
Oh, it absolutely is, but it’s ok because it was used against a progressive. Which party is gonna do something about it? The one that hates progressives, or the other one that really hates progressives?
How is this not foreign interference?
Because AIPAC doesn’t take any foreign money, it’s funded entirely from within the U.S.
Foreign funding and domestic funding with the express purpose of gaining advantage for a foreign nation is a distinction without any practical difference.
The only response I have is money needs to be removed from politics.
Oh I completely agree, just wanted to point out that AIPAC is homegrown interventionism, not foreign like people tend to think.
Israel definitely has to have some form of contact though. There’s absolutely no way they dont.
classic emotional response disconnected from reality. AIPAC is not Israel. Take your crying about Jews and apply it to Citizens United please.
You fucken think Israel has no contact with AIPAC? Really?
Yes, it’s a dangerous precedent to have someone in office who calls rape and sexual violence “propaganda”.
Eli5: How does record AIPAC spending prevent people from voting? It still comes down to people voting so isn’t it safe to say more people voted for the person who won than people who voted for the losing candidate?
Edit: come on this isn’t reddit. I’m not concerned with this question of who was running and what they are in favor of. As far as I have been attentive to politics there has always been campaign contributions from lobbyists with the intent to have their interests protected. I do not understand why or how that would affect the outcome of the election unless one candidates total campaign funds were a pot more than the others. I also don’t understand why is thes any new precedent? Hopefully with this added clarity the down votes won’t burry the comment and further discussion can be had.
Do you think that people are pouring millions of dollars into elections because they are stupid and wasting it? This seems like a bad faith question.
But how does that keep people from voting? I’m not being a dick it’s a genuine question. Corporations dump trillions into advertising but that doesn’t prevent me from comparing products and choosing the product that best fits my needs. Matter of fact, there was a post today I saw that was about the futility of targeted ads having no better results than traditional marketing.
It does not prevent people from voting.
It may, however, amplify distortions of the truth or bold-face lies.
With regards to AIPAC it amplifies the voice of a group that is ONLY concerned with the advancement of Israeli interests.
Sorry you’re getting downvoted to hell. You’re right. Sometimes people want everything to be a conspiracy or something aside from the simpler truth which is that voters just wanted somebody different.
Well said and good point.
Organization trumps money. The problem is that a lot of progressive organizations aren’t able to mobilize voters for elections like this.
Organising requires funds, though.
It doesn’t. But it puts their agenda up front and center for those that can be manipulated by it a whole lot easier.
Sort of similar to how people here will urge you to not vote for Biden. Most people will see this as people essentially just shitting into a fan, but at its core, it’s really a way to circumvent having to directly show support for Trump on a left-leaning social media platform where they’d get banned.
So where did all the pro-Isreal propaganda get pushed to? The anti-Isreal propaganda is everywhere. (I don’t know a better word than propaganda to use here but I don’t mean it as any sense of invalidating or dismissing eirher the anti-Isreal/pro-Isreal sentiment)
TV, Facebook, Instagram, radio ads, billboards, etc. Basically all the places where boomers bask
Personally, I think there’s a fuck-ton of nuance to the issue and I find that it’s best not to listen to a bunch of high-school kids lecturing everyone on who to vote for based on foreign affairs that they weren’t even aware were happening less than a year ago.
Where the others went?
This is lemmy. You’re not allowed to accept that the situation is nuance led as fuck. Even if you mostly agree with the hive.
high-school kids
“Anyone who disagrees with me on anything must be younger than me and therefore wrong.” - Boomer logic.
Yawn…. Is there anything that doesn’t offend you? Seriously man. I’m not engaging with you on this anymore.
You said you were gonna ignore me last time you spewed your hatred for the anti-genocide left.
That does not obligate me to ignore you.
I said I was ignoring you then. And I did. And now I’m ignoring your current nonsense now. You see, it’s a thing that can be activated at will. And don’t mistake my responding to you as some form of hypocrisy. Or that your little trolling attempt was successful. I’m fully allowed to respond to whatever bullshit you bring me. That is my right. I will however choose when I wish- to ignore discussing whatever dumb shit you try and bring up as a means to distract from the point to create a straw man as is pretty much ALL you do.
And considering that you’re incapable of stopping yourself from mouthing off at anyone who dares to disagree with your little agenda, it’s pretty easy to do.
You should probably get used to it. I have seen that I’m not the only one that does it.
Oh, and for the record- and on the topic of ignoring things… As I’ve said and you’ve ignored before- I don’t have a problem with the far left.
I have a huge problem with the “far left.” And you should too.
^Holds finger right near your eyeball and says, but i’m not touching you, see, i’m not touching you.
Are you implying that by spending more money they are blocking you from seeing the opposition? That’s absolutely not the case.
It would be more like people raising hands around you and you see mostly green hands and only a few blue hands and thus less-informed people will be more likely to lean towards the majority.
That’s an awfully… interesting way of saying he lost his primary, which as an incumbent is not a particularly easy to do. Blame foreign money all you want, your voters voted for who they wanted. Primary voters are the most politically aware kind of voters, most people don’t vote, even fewer take the time to vote in primaries. Apparently those voters wanted somebody new.
Then why did they spend $15 million on a primary campaign? Why does a campaign for President costs $1 billion now? Maybe 🤔 they just like spending money.
