this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2025
476 points (98.8% liked)

politics

23970 readers
3412 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Donald Trump on Saturday said there would be “serious consequences” if tech mogul Elon Musk funds Democratic candidates to run against Republicans who vote in favor of the GOP’s sweeping budget bill.

“If he does, he’ll have to pay the consequences for that,” Trump told NBC News in a phone interview, but declined to share what those consequences would be.

“He’ll have to pay very serious consequences if he does that,” he added.

Trump also said he has no desire to repair his relationship with Musk after a feud between the two men erupted into public view earlier this week.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 123 points 1 day ago (5 children)

I would have a very difficult time voting for someone who received funding from musk.

[–] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 55 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Any Dem funded by a Nazi won't get my vote for sure.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 9 points 15 hours ago

If a guy has a vote record of regulating industries, taxing the rich, expanding welfare, etc then he's got my vote even if David Duke endorses him. Let's clarify this for all the morons who think this is only effects the headlines they have to see for the next 4 years; we're voting for legislators not personalities.

[–] Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 41 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I would rather vote for someone who got spite funding by a nazi than to vote for an anti-America, nazi/terrorist. And that's anyone supporting the current regime.

[–] fluxion@lemmy.world 11 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I would too, but I'd rather vote for people willing to tell them both to go fuck themselves

[–] Soulg@ani.social 7 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Vote for that person in the primary and hope he musk money person loses there.

But if they don't, little choice after that.

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 points 19 minutes ago

Exactly, primaries are when you vote your conscience. General elections don't benefit from anything but strategic voting.

[–] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 13 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

You got a lot of angsty democrats responding here with basically "c'mon bro, please, bro, you don't understand, if we don't take the money to do the Hitler, then the Republicans will do it completely for free, please, bro, be reasonable!"

Fuck that. I'm normally a pretty practical person, but if the dude who's directly financing neo-nazism parties around the world like a one man CIA starts dumping cash into the democrats, it's because he means to turn them into the neo neo Nazis, and they will not be getting my vote. Will the country burn? Yeah, but it's going to do that because the democrats think fundraising is more important than having literally any principles or strong policy positions at all, regardless of whether I vote for them or not.

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 12 points 23 hours ago

Exactly. American liberals have lost their fucking minds already sticking up for this guy after what he’s been doing.

[–] evenglow@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (3 children)

And this is exactly why Trump won. Twice.

[–] shiroininja@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (23 children)

Do you have no principles? Like look what Musk has done. And you want democratic candidates in debt and aligned with him? He’s just going to continue what he started, he’s not going to do an about face.

We should be incriminating millionaires putting money into campaigns, not accepting them

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 5 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Liberals will never admit that their lack of principals is a large part of why the USA is what it is right now.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Taking Musk’s money and influence to make the world a better place isn’t a problem.

Letting him pick a direction for the party or make policies would be my red line.

[–] shiroininja@lemmy.world 11 points 23 hours ago

People don’t give money without expecting something in return. And these spineless democrats will 100% let him run circles around them if he promised to keep them in office.

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 4 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Those who side with nazis are no better than the nazis themselves.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world -2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

There’s so much wrong with your little thought terminating sentence there.

Taking Musk’s money to get power isn’t siding with Nazis.

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 5 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

The level of naivety you have to have to think people give campaign donations while expecting absolutely nothing in return is just crazy man. I don’t even know where this logic line could even be coming from.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world -3 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Start a party where you only accept donations from ideologically pure sources and see how far it gets you.

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 4 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

You’re justifying taking donations from nazis right now, just so we’re clear. What would it take for you to actually draw a line?

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 0 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Taking Musk’s money and influence to make the world a better place isn’t a problem.

Letting him pick a direction for the party or make policies would be my red line.

Just like I said a couple comments ago.

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 3 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Yes but you disproved that almost immediately. So what I asked was what would it take for you to actually draw a line. It was more rhetorical than an actual question because we know now that you have no line that’s meaningful in any way bud.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world -2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Considering he hasn’t made policies for the DNC or picked a direction for them it seems you’re just arguing things you’re making up.

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 3 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

We’ve been talking hypotheticals this whole time genius.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world -2 points 4 hours ago

Pretty impressive that I’m able to disprove a hypothetical then I guess.

[–] Soulg@ani.social -1 points 22 hours ago

Written as someone with truly no idea what the fuck they're talking about

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)

Welp, that commits my mental map of the next 8 years, here comes a Musk-funded Democrat to divide all of us again for another Conservanazi win. Yippee.

[–] ijedi1234@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Which is why I favor succession through usurpation.

[–] match@pawb.social 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] ijedi1234@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I have insufficient resources.

[–] match@pawb.social 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

insufficient to find some group to join?

[–] Vanilla_PuddinFudge@infosec.pub 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The left doesn't have armed militias.

...wait, why don't we? The skinhead neo-nazis do.

[–] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 4 points 23 hours ago

Mostly it's because our intelligence agencies have been running aggressive counter-intelligence operations against the domestic left for seventy or eighty years. If they can't harass them into quitting or discredit them (see COINTELPRO), then they get them assassinated (MLK Jr). The CIA specialized in launching reactionary coups across the global south to destroy democratically elected and peaceful left wing governments (see: The Jakarta Method) and there's no evidence that they ever really stopped. To be honest, much of 2016 and on has reminded me a lot of the Jakarta Method; I wouldn't be surprised if the CIA has turned inward on the US.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Deflated0ne@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Who was it? Ro Khanna I think is already out there on socmed kissing his ass.

Why do they have to suck so goddamn much?

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 4 points 1 day ago

I’m not surprised, just irritated. That’s way too fast.