• rhacer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Have you read their schtick? $100 to swing state voters who jump through some hoops. You can parse that however you like, but they’re buying votes for the blue team.

    • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Yes, but musk started doing that at $47, then they one uped him to $100 while being very explicit how fucked up it is that they can do this, and now hes one uped them to $100 plus 1 million/day lottery until the election for Pennsylvania voters that sign it. He already gave 1 million away at his recent solo rally.

      Musk started this shit and escalated it.

        • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Agree that cards against humanity, in direct response to Musk’s action, are using donations to point out how fucked up it is that the richest man in the US is trying to buy votes? Yes.

          Agree that musk escalated his attempt to buy votes again? Yes.

          • rhacer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 day ago

            Musk is paying people to sign a petition. How is that any different from what CAH is doing?

            If Musks behavior is shitty, then CAH behavior is equally shitty. If CAH behavior is not shitty, then Musk’s behavior is not shitty.

            • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              I’m not sure if you’re obtuse or trolling, but here we go:

              Party A, a shithead trying to buy votes in a way that is unique in our democracy, does shitty behavior.

              Party B, a group of satirists and comedians, doubles down and repeats the shitty behavior while jumping up and down with cymbals and horns, calling out the person who started it and the fact that it may not be illegal. Party B is engaged in performance art to raise an issue.

              Party A then escalates the shitty behavior with more money and a new lottery twist. This escalates the shittiness to new levels, hereto unseen in our nations history.

              Party B, the satirists, having made their point initially, do not engage in any new satire.

              Clear? The person who starts doing something shitty and then makes it shittier is indeed shittier than the people outright mocking that behavior by imitating it and loudly shouting about how shitty it is.

              Put another way:

              Nazis marching down a street and chanting are shitty. Clowns, playing tubas and doing cartwheels in makeup around the Nazis to make them look even more stupid, are not shitty even though they too are marching and making noise.

              Intent matters. Musks is to steal an election through outright bribery. CAH intent is to raise the profile of this bribery, to make it an issue that has to be addressed.

    • PenguinMage@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Hadn’t read their schpeal eh? They may be motivated against trump but they are literally telling people to vote.