Election law experts said over the weekend that billionaire Tesla CEO Elon Musk's latest ploy to entice voters in battleground states to sign his "petition in favor of free speech and the right to bear arms" appears to be flagrantly illegal.
OK… the exceptionally odd part of your response is that we’re commenting on a specific article speaking about this and you’ve linked to an entirely different web site. Do you work for the verge?
I would like to see some court cases related a requirement to be a registered voter to enter a sweepstakes.
Still, again, my point is regarding what is implied in this article which is that Musk is paying people to vote for Trump. You do agree that this is not the case, correct?
Edit: I think I get it. No one wants to hold the media accountable when they say something that enforces our existing opinions of people - even when it’s verifiably untrue.
So, while it’s readily apparent that Musk is not guilty of “Clearly Illegal Vote-Buying”, he has established something in which any registered voter in a handful of states can “pledge their support for the First and Second Amendments” and receive financial compensation. There is in fact no requirement to vote for either Trump or Harris nor to cast a vote in this coming election.
It would seem plausible, based on the US Code quoted in the article, that it’s not legal to require someone to be a registered voter to sign a petition and receive compensation. Frankly, I think people are grossly overlooking the fact that someone is paying someone to sign a petition to begin with. I would certainly hope that this is something law enforcement takes a look at.
However, the claim that Musk is paying people to vote for Trump is not at all factual. This would make this “Common Dreams” article misinformation - would it not?
Still, again, my point is regarding what is implied in this article which is that Musk is paying people to vote for Trump. You do agree that this is not the case, correct?
No. Musk goes to a rally and says vote for Trump to preserve your first amendment rights then offers money to people pledging to support first amendment rights. Stop playing dumb
I find it frustrating that people want to call me out for calling out the media but no one wants to hold the media accountable - especially when it supports your existing narrative.
It is a fact that Musk is not buying votes. There is no exchange of money for proof of voting for anyone. He is potentially illegally asking people to sign a petition which requires they be a registered voter and giving them money for signing a petition. That’s the story.
Every article posted across the internet is full of misinformation and lies to promote existing narratives and agendas. People need to wake up and hold each other accountable for this. Not just when it’s in opposition to your feelings but also when it supports them.
By this logic it’s historically impossible to buy votes since you can’t go into the polling location with them. Buying a view is an agreement about what a person has agreed to vote for. Musk has made a very clear offer to give money for someone who agrees to support the first amendment and that a vote for Trump is supporting the the first amendment. If the person doesn’t vote for Trump, by Musk’s stated beliefs, they are not supporting the first amendment and therefore disqualified from receiving the money. He is attempting to buy votes.
You could very easily take a photo to show proof of who you voted for in order to get paid. Plus, voting records aren’t 100% private.
Legally, the argument that he’s specifically trying to pay people to vote for Trump would get thrown out of court.
I would personally argue that Trump is very much opposed to, or in favor of restrictions to, the first and second amendments (as is Musk) while Harris intends to uphold them. So, from my perspective, I see this as enticement to vote for Harris.
No I don’t think you could take a picture of your ballet in the 19th century when it was ruled illegal. So if it was illegal when the exchange was entirely faith based, how are reasoning pictures changes anything? That’s not why the law was created and this exchange can absolutely be considered vote buying
Don’t pay them any mind. Theyre just random people on the internet. I’ve found lemmy to be a pretty hostle place for questions asked in good faith. I did figure out the answer though. So he’s only giving people in a specific state the ability to enter into his little raffle. I’m not eligible because I’m not a registered voter in a swing state. This is why it’s a federal crime.
OK… the exceptionally odd part of your response is that we’re commenting on a specific article speaking about this and you’ve linked to an entirely different web site. Do you work for the verge?
I would like to see some court cases related a requirement to be a registered voter to enter a sweepstakes.
Still, again, my point is regarding what is implied in this article which is that Musk is paying people to vote for Trump. You do agree that this is not the case, correct?
Edit: I think I get it. No one wants to hold the media accountable when they say something that enforces our existing opinions of people - even when it’s verifiably untrue.
So, while it’s readily apparent that Musk is not guilty of “Clearly Illegal Vote-Buying”, he has established something in which any registered voter in a handful of states can “pledge their support for the First and Second Amendments” and receive financial compensation. There is in fact no requirement to vote for either Trump or Harris nor to cast a vote in this coming election.
It would seem plausible, based on the US Code quoted in the article, that it’s not legal to require someone to be a registered voter to sign a petition and receive compensation. Frankly, I think people are grossly overlooking the fact that someone is paying someone to sign a petition to begin with. I would certainly hope that this is something law enforcement takes a look at.
However, the claim that Musk is paying people to vote for Trump is not at all factual. This would make this “Common Dreams” article misinformation - would it not?
No. Musk goes to a rally and says vote for Trump to preserve your first amendment rights then offers money to people pledging to support first amendment rights. Stop playing dumb
I find it frustrating that people want to call me out for calling out the media but no one wants to hold the media accountable - especially when it supports your existing narrative.
It is a fact that Musk is not buying votes. There is no exchange of money for proof of voting for anyone. He is potentially illegally asking people to sign a petition which requires they be a registered voter and giving them money for signing a petition. That’s the story.
Every article posted across the internet is full of misinformation and lies to promote existing narratives and agendas. People need to wake up and hold each other accountable for this. Not just when it’s in opposition to your feelings but also when it supports them.
By this logic it’s historically impossible to buy votes since you can’t go into the polling location with them. Buying a view is an agreement about what a person has agreed to vote for. Musk has made a very clear offer to give money for someone who agrees to support the first amendment and that a vote for Trump is supporting the the first amendment. If the person doesn’t vote for Trump, by Musk’s stated beliefs, they are not supporting the first amendment and therefore disqualified from receiving the money. He is attempting to buy votes.
You could very easily take a photo to show proof of who you voted for in order to get paid. Plus, voting records aren’t 100% private.
Legally, the argument that he’s specifically trying to pay people to vote for Trump would get thrown out of court.
I would personally argue that Trump is very much opposed to, or in favor of restrictions to, the first and second amendments (as is Musk) while Harris intends to uphold them. So, from my perspective, I see this as enticement to vote for Harris.
No I don’t think you could take a picture of your ballet in the 19th century when it was ruled illegal. So if it was illegal when the exchange was entirely faith based, how are reasoning pictures changes anything? That’s not why the law was created and this exchange can absolutely be considered vote buying
Don’t pay them any mind. Theyre just random people on the internet. I’ve found lemmy to be a pretty hostle place for questions asked in good faith. I did figure out the answer though. So he’s only giving people in a specific state the ability to enter into his little raffle. I’m not eligible because I’m not a registered voter in a swing state. This is why it’s a federal crime.
I would imagine that paying money to sign your petition is also problematic.