• danc4498
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    4 days ago

    This is just what our politics needed!

    • jpreston2005
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      4 days ago

      more money, more bribery, longer campaigns, more ads, whoopeee! Nobody but billionaires and their political lapdogs want this! hoorayy!

    • AzellBanneddeleted by creator
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Removed by mod

      • danc4498
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        Many of them voted for gun rights and had no idea about the rest. If only they knew they already had gun rights.

    • Macchi_the_Slime@piefed.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      4 days ago

      Kind of. The PAC could spend as much money as it wanted, but it couldn’t give above a certain amount directly to the candidate. Which they took issue with now because the candidate themselves gets a discounted rate for ad buys and the Democrats were getting more and more of their money from small dollar donations.

      So the Republican PACs would spend say 100m and get the same amount of ads a Democratic candidate could buy with like 25m (those almost certainly aren’t the actual numbers, idk the actual discounted rate the candidates actually get. That’s just an example to illustrate the concept)

        • Macchi_the_Slime@piefed.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          It’s part of the FCC guidelines. It’s called the Lowest Unit Charge Rule, and it says that for the 45 days before a Primary and 60 days before a General Election TV broadcasters and radio stations must offer qualified political candidates the lowest rate they can possibly offer to an entity for a similar slot.

          It’s meant to be so a station can’t like play favorites and charge one candidate a much higher rate than the other. Thereby putting their thumb on the scale for the candidate they give the cheaper rate to. The guidelines just only apply to the candidate directly and not to private ads done on behalf of the candidate.

  • jpreston2005
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 days ago

    Won’t let me read the article because it “suspects I’m a robot.”

    jesus fucking christ do I despise you, new york times.