this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2024
352 points (98.4% liked)

News

23287 readers
3615 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Democrats have poured more than $100m (£77m) in donations into Vice-President Kamala Harris' presidential bid since President Joe Biden dropped out of the race on Sunday, her campaign says.

The tally was boosted by what her team calls a record 24-hour period of fundraising - $81m raised.

During that timeframe, more than 888,000 people donated sums of up to $200 each, according to progressive donation platform ActBlue. 

Donors who had pulled back their funding over concerns about Mr Biden’s age have said they now intend to resume their support for the party.

The surge in donations in the 24-hour period after Mr Biden quit the race was the single biggest for online contributions to Democrats since 2020, according to the New York Times.

all 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] JoShmoe@ani.social 63 points 3 months ago (3 children)

I think I have a new found respect for Biden. This is easily one of the best power plays of all time. Stepping down must have been tough, especially if he couldn’t remember why he should step down.

[–] hoanbridgetroll@midwest.social 31 points 3 months ago

The mind and body may go, but the heart remains. He sacrificed his own aspirations to give Kamala the best possible chance of burying Trump. Legendary final chapter, 10/10, would vote Dem again.

[–] rayyy@lemmy.world 21 points 3 months ago

Oh, Joe Biden still knows what he is doing, unlike the orange felon/rapist who spews bullshit and lies non-stop.

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 44 points 3 months ago (6 children)

It's kinda insane to me that any presidential candidate is pulling in 81 million dollars. Why do they possibly need that much money for campaigning? It seems absurd.

[–] ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com 35 points 3 months ago (1 children)

America is huge, and the sheer number of media - social media, cable, network TV, streaming, radio, newspaper, magazines, internet, and so on - means that if you want to reach people, a little more money will always reach additional audiences.

From there, it's just an arm's race with no upper limit, since each party is desperate to not let the other out-message them.

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 13 points 3 months ago

Perhaps there should be an upper limit.

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 23 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

American campaigns are so long

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

They needn't be, and even considering that, I can't fathom justifying 81 million dollars for a presidential campaign. It's actually unconscionable to me.

[–] Cort@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

To be fair kamala's is relatively short with this late of a start.

[–] TunaCowboy@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago

Please think of the media owner billionaires enjoying the most privileged and luxurious life that earth has to offer.

They need that money desperately, because it's not enough for them to win, they require that everyone else be as miserable as they are.

[–] dan@upvote.au 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It seems crazy to me too. The limits on spending for election campaigns are far smaller in some other countries, even after adjusting for population size.

[–] wjrii@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Without passing judgment on whether it's wise or not (though... clearly the current paradigm is not), the legal rationale is that the free speech implications of the US Constitution's first amendment are extremely broad and permissive, even more so for explicitly political speech, and that money spent on political campaigns is effectively money spent to disseminate political speech. Restrictions therefore are very few, very light, and even where they exist they are very easy to effectively work around while remaining legal.

[–] taiyang@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

To add to others, they also have to run field offices in so many places, especially battlegrounds. It's not just ads, you need locals.

Imagine opening up 50+ offices in each major European nation, staffed with both volunteers and paid folk.

[–] cybervseas@lemmy.world 35 points 3 months ago
[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Aw heck, maybe I'll even kick in a couple bucks

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 14 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

You know, someone out there is counting the number of donators as well as the total, so your little chip has value there. Mine's in.

[–] rayyy@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

Democracy and decency thanks you.

[–] rayyy@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

maybe I’ll even kick in a couple bucks

musk is kicking in millions so millions need to kick in a few bucks or musk will rule you.

[–] Cuttlefish1111@lemmy.world 11 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Why did the media so quickly forget Trumps quid pro quo with the oil industry for a billion dollars. IANAL but isn’t that a blatant crime?

[–] skeezix@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

Rakin’ in da bux.