#Election Spending

[wausaupilot]

The Milwaukee Teachers Union, a sitting state senator, and Scott Walker – The Top Campaign Finance Violators in Wisconsin

Political candidates and interest groups have paid tens of thousands of dollars in penalties since the 2016 launch of the Wisconsin Ethics Commission, which oversees political campaign finance reporting and lobbying.

By Peter Cameron and Hallie Claflin, THE BADGER PROJECT Political candidates and interest groups have paid tens of thousands of dollars in penalties since the 2016 launch of the Wisconsin Ethics Commission, which oversees political campaign finance reporting and lobbying. The Badger Project requested documents on all campaign finance penalties, which the commission calls negotiated “settlements,”…

[angelholme]

The most corrupt government in recent times has done something corrupt so it can try to stay in power.

Why are people surprised?

[reasonsforhope]

"The South Australian premier, Peter Malinauskas, has announced plans to ban political donations from state elections, paving the way for nation-leading electoral reforms.

The state’s electoral amendment bill announced on Wednesday [June 12, 2024] night will ban electoral donations and gifts to registered political parties, members of parliament and candidates. The state will provide funding to allow parties and candidates to contest elections, run campaigns and promote political ideas.

Malinauskas said his bill would put South Australia on the “cusp of becoming a world leader in ending the nexus between money and political power”.

“We want money out of politics. We know this is not easy. These reforms may well face legal challenge,” Malinauskas said.

“But we are determined to deliver them, with this bill to be introduced in the parliament in the near future.”

In a subtle challenge to his federal and state counterparts, the premier told Guardian Australia he thought it was “something that democracies everywhere should be pursuing”.

The Albanese government pledged to introduce spending and donation caps, and truth in political advertising laws, as revealed by Guardian Australia after the 2022 federal election and confirmed by a parliamentary inquiry that reported last July.

The special minister of state, Don Farrell, said last month an agreement between the major parties and the crossbench had not yet been reached. An amendment bill is still expected by the middle of the year.

In order to level the playing field for newly created parties and independent candidates, the South Australia bill will allow candidates to receive donations up to $2,700, although they will remain subject to campaign spending caps.

Those spending caps have been set at $100,000, multiplied by the number of candidates up to a maximum of $500,000.

If the bill is passed, a registered political party will be entitled to a one-off payment of $200,000 before 31 August 2026. Whichever is lower out of $700,000 or the number of party members of parliament multiplied by $47,000 will also be given to parties for operational funding.

Membership fees will be allowed to continue but will be capped at $100 or less a year.

To deter attempts to circumvent the proposed changes, a maximum penalty of $50,000 or 10 years’ imprisonment will apply.

The guide acknowledges the proposal would lead to a rise in the cost of South Australia’s electoral system, but says a tightening of expenditure and party registration rules will keep costs to a minimum.

The Albanese government is under crossbench pressure to introduce electoral reforms before the next federal election.

Lower house independents, including Kate Chaney, Zali Steggall, the Greens, David Pocock, Lidia Thorpe and the Jacqui Lambie Network, joined forces to introduce a bill for fair and transparent elections in March [2024].

The bill contained a suite of reforms including truth-in-political advertising, a ban on donations from socially harmful industries including fossil fuels, and tightening the definition of gifts to capture major party fundraisers, including dinners and business forums."

-via The Guardian, March 18, 2024

[pc-98s]

stop the count!!!!!!!!!

[yuwuta]

gojo would kill your work husband. but if he were the work husband, that's a different story

REAL!! he’s such a hypocrite because if someone mentioned you had a work husband, his entire world would stop and he wold devise the absolute worst plans to make sure that your co-worker, everyone at your job, and everyone in the next building over knew that he was happily committed to you 

but if he is the work husband, he’s very........ dutiful in his role. there’s a loose office/lawyer au in my head where satoru is your secretary, and for all intents and purposes, your personal assistant, and he’s good at his job, but mostly because he considers his job to be pleasing you. he has coffee for you when you arrive, he moves your schedule around without you asking, he has answers to questions before you can even ask them, he has fresh flowers on your desk weekly, pokes into your meetings to pretend to hand you a file that’s really just maybe a single document in a manilla folder with candy on top of it—he’s made himself your business, your partner; he’s made himself irreplaceable, and he loves to remind everybody of that fact. 

he’s also extremely loyal. sure, he could day a week’s worth of work done in about a day, but that doesn’t mean he’ll just use his talents for anybody. he’s your secretary, so he’s at your beck and call, and everyone knows it. they know he’s the best, but also that he’s off limits—not because you won’t share him, but because satoru won’t let himself be shared. 

he also extends his duties beyond work, of course. when he hands you a print out of your schedule for the day and you’re confused by the three-hour block of time you have in the middle of the day, satoru just helps you shrug your coat of your shoulders and smiles, “that’s for the lunch date you have with me, of course!” hanging up your coat in your closet for you, “i’m paying, see you soon, sweets.” and because you’re great at your job, and satoru helps you be great, nobody really questions when the two of you have time for a 13-course tasting menu at 1pm on a tuesday afternoon. and if they did, all satoru would say that you two had a lovely date 

[onebizarrekai]

I don't remember if you answered this question, but did you go to art school or are you self-taught? Have you studied from YouTube videos?

nah, I never did art school. I learned a few things from books when I was a kid and got signed up for a short summer art class one time, since I was thinking about being a professional artist and my parents were trying to help me along. I learned how to use digital art programs from tutorials when I was a teenager, but I haven't used tutorials much besides that. pretty much everything I know has been from observing other artists online and experimenting. so yeah, I guess that means I'm self-taught, haha.

I went to school for music and vocal performance, but I could tell a long story about the university I went to, how they weren't really qualified to train musicians and how I dropped out. I've already been working professionally as a performer for 7 years, working with a private teacher and as a teacher myself, and I have tons of experience that I never would've gotten at school, so it's all working out really well.

[darkwood-sleddog]

once again i am asking tumblr to hold public polls for users to vote on potential changes. imagine if you were the 'respect our users opinion website'. like that could be us but apparently not.

[queen-mabs-revenge]

general suggestion for US liberals this year:

every time you're about to make yet another post lecturing people for refusing to give biden their vote, spend whatever time you were about to devote to that to instead contacting the democratic party establishment and demanding that they stop funding, enabling, and commiting genocide. spend that time asking the democratic party establishment where the fuck their project 2025 is. spend time asking them why ice detention population has doubled in the past 3 years.

spend time putting all your scolding energy towards the people in power who are offering nothing but continued active participation in ethnic cleaning, instead of towards everyday ppl who have decided they can't endorse genocide.

[but-a-humble-goon]

Thing I would put into a hypothetical new Batgirl solo: Cassandra adopts a cat. She rushes into the Clocktower one night distraught and panicking with a starving, freezing stray cat wrapped up in her cape and asks Barbara for help because she doesn't know what to do. Once the crisis is averted the cat becomes Cass' project. She begins offhandedly asking every other pet owning superhero she knows for advice on how to look after it. She starts going to the store regularly for pet food and eventually the cashier (who you can probably just make Brenda Miller) takes notice of her and begins striking up conversations. She buys one of those treehouse tower climbing frames and a variety of plush playthings for it to gnaw on that give her otherwise totally spartan room some much needed life and color. One day she's watching TV and the cat hops up on the sofa and curls up in her lap and starts purring. Having no idea how to respond, Cass simply freezes up like a deer in headlights and stares at it for several entire minutes before hesitantly scratching its ears. Later that night while Cass is out as Batgirl she jumps in front of yet another gun for a stranger. She's fine as always but at that moment she's struck with the terrifying realization that if that bullet were a few inches closer to home the cat would have been left alone in the world. She has a tiny life that depends on her now, she can no longer afford to throw her own life away. It's sunrise before she arrives home and the cat greets her by rubbing against her shin. She's left pondering who it was who saved who in this relationship.

[zoey-angel]

Okay, now vote for her.

For months US pro-pals have been protesting. Now you have a presidential candidate on your side! Trump expressed his strong support of Israel, Kamala hadn't, so don't fiddle up and vote for her!!

Make no mistake, I am Israeli and I know Trump would support my country more strongly, yet I feel undoubtedly in favor of Kamala. I'm still the me who grew up leftist on tumblr with american friends, I care for the US, I care for people's lives generally, and whatever good Trump would do for me, he would ruin doubly for you. The damage he did in one run to the western world...

If hating Israel is what it takes to get dumbasses to vote for the candidate who would care about the environment, provide healthcare and promote human rights, then so be it! Just stand up for your values and fucking vote, because if trump wins this round, to me, that would be so pathetic.

[wausaupilot]

Analysis: Tsunami of late spending from Democrats not enough to save Rosenberg

In the last two weeks of the campaign, the Democratic Party of Wisconsin spent nearly $250,000 running advertising on radio, TV, online and with mailings promoting their preferred candidate and attacking Diny. The final contribution reports are now in.

By Peter Cameron State Democrats made massive, last-minute advertising purchases as they unsuccessfully tried to rescue the incumbent mayor in the spring election, according to an analysis of campaign finance records by Wausau Pilot & Review. The Republican-supported candidate, then-Dist. 4 Alder Doug Diny, went on to defeat incumbent Mayor Katie Rosenberg, a rising progressive star in state…

[stopthatfool]

also what are some of your favourite mav headcanons? Or just thoughts about top gun in general your opinions are so correct

another one! YAAAAAAA! thank u cal i will now yap. (warning all my headcanons stick really close to canon and aren't very like.. "fun." they're more or less just crazed character analyses)

thinking about THE mav is not a twink post i made like a month ago. i saw someone call it the "twink mav discourse" and honestly it's my magnum opus. my friend took a pic of me holding up a sign that said "I started top gun tumblr discourse" it was great.

other than that, I definitely think mav has adhd. I mean that's how i write his thought processes at least. I always think of him skipping over words when reading, not due to "inattention" but just because he's eager to get to the point, or he just automatically thinks the smaller words are less important, therefore can be skipped. (I do this all the time. I'm really terrible at reading out loud because of it.) Plus the classic mav acting without thinking is straight out of the adhd diagnosis. and the "appearing to be unable to listen to or carry out instructions."

That being said, i don't think mav would ever consider himself to have adhd or even think of it as an option. I'm very much on that "mav and ice are middle aged men who were in the military during the reagan administration therefore they definitely have some questionable beliefs and understandings of the world because and the environment of which they were trained." like mav is the type of guy to be like "ok you have adhd, that's fine i guess. but I don't. what r u talking about. like sure all these symptoms apply to me but i am the outlier i don't have a disability." Same with Ice and him reading all the OCD symptoms, my guy would literally just take it as proof that he's a really good soldier and further perpetuate his own OCD habits (no, ice! don't do that same movement over and over again until it feels right! ur spiraling ice! someone help him!)

I also have lots of feelings of how Ice and Mav would/wouldn't show physical affection. like i don't think they hold hands in public and I think it's a mix of DADT, internalized homophobia, and honestly wanting to keep their relationship as private as possible (which one could argue is another effect of DADT and simply being queer and in the american military in the 80s. like how did they not kill themselves, they're stronger than me). idk this is already getting long and convoluted so i will now stop.

[bloodydeanwinchester]

actually i think that maybe next tuesday is gonna kill me

[reasonsforhope]

I keep seeing news about charges and what-not being piled onto Trump, and all I can keep saying to myself is "but is he going to experience one (1) single consequence of this?" So... is there any iota of a hope that something could come of this circus that will make the slightest ding in his capacity to run in 2024?

So, the answer to this is a bit complicated - partly because there are a lot of factors and a long time scale, and partly because it depends on how you define "consequences"

If you mean "any serious consequences at all," good news, that has already happened!

If you need to catch up on the whole "cases against Trump" situation, read this: The Cases Against Trump: A Guide. Via The Atlantic, November 1, 2023

1. The New York Fraud Case

A judge has ordered that the Trump Organization must be dissolved in a ruling that is being widely described as a "corporate death penalty." This is an incredibly rare ruling, and a huge deal.

The details will take a while to hash out - currently, Trump's kids are in the middle of testifying in a trial for this fraud case, but it's not to determine whether he's guilty - only the extent of the damages and the outline of how the org will be dissolved. It's extraordinarily unlikely Trump will be able to get out of this one. And high up on the list of things he's probably going to lose? Trump Tower itself.

Now, admittedly, this actually isn't because of, you know, the whole attempted coup thing. It's because the Trump Organization's finances were built on decades of absolutely massive fraud - including the very wealth that Trump lied about in order to explain why people should vote for him.

Oh, and let's not forget that in this case, Donald Trump spent weeks absolutely shit talking the judge to try to "poison the jury pool" (make sure that people on the jury would go in with a negative opinion of the judge already). ONLY TO FIND OUT THAT THERE IS NO JURY IN THIS CASE because his attorneys forgot to request one, so the sole arbiter of his fate is the judge he just spent weeks absolutely slandering in an attempt to win over the jury! And all else aside, judges very infamously do not like being insulted

Oh yeah, and the prosecutors are seeking a permanent ban on Trump doing business in the state of New York

Fraud trial explainer (New York Times, no paywall) Sources: x, x, x, x, x, x, x, x

2. 14th Amendment Lawsuit

Okay so I did all the other sections first, then came back and wrote this one. It's shorter because of that, and because this issue is a lot newer and doesn't have nearly as much legal stuff or investigations going on yet.

What's happening here is that several states have people who are filing petitions and lawsuits to try to get Trump taken off the ballot for the 2024 election, under the 14th Amendment, which was passed in the aftermath of the Civil War and bars anyone who has committed insurrection from holding office.

So far (as of the first week of November, there are cases to kick Trump off the ballot in about 20 states. Oral arguments have started in Colorado and Minnesota.

Basically, my take on the short version is that this could happen, but we'll have to wait at least a few more months to see how likely it is.

However, even if it does go through, Trump would only be kicked off the ballot on a state by state basis. So, if Colorado kicks him off the ballot, he'll still be on the ballot in the other 49 states, and the process would have to be repeated in each one. Still, even if it was just one state, that could be a big deal, voting-wise - and if he gets kicked off the ballot in more than a couple states, he might not end up being the Republican nominee anymore, given the size of that disadvantage.

Correction, 6 min after posting: It's expected that if Trump DOES get kicked off the ballot in any state, the Supreme Court will hear the case and weigh in. The decision would be binding for all states. Supreme Court probably unlikely to ban Trump from the ballot since they cheated their way into a conservative supermajority and 3 of them are Trump appointees

Explainer: Trial to kick Trump off the ballot in Colorado Explainer: Strengths and weaknesses of cases to kick Trump off the ballot Sources: x, x, x, x, x, x, x

3. The Classified Documents Case

So, the fraud case above is actually a civil case (that is, not a criminal case). The classified documents case, however, is a criminal case, and it's arguably the one most likely to lead to legal and political consequences for Trump, in large part because everything's very clear cut.

Like, Trump has literally admitted he retained classified documents on purpose - which is super against the law! Trump is just arguing a variety of nonexistent technicalities for why that law doesn't apply to him. But he did it! We know he did! We have photos of classified documents stored in the Mar-a-Lago bathroom! We have testimony from the employees he ordered to secretly move the boxes before the FBI probe. We have records proving he asked Mar-a-Lago's IT guy about erasing the surveillance footage of the move! We even have proof that a) he stole nuclear secrets, and b) a recording of him waving around the "plans of attack," bragging about them to other people!

All super damning.

(Post continues below, at length; sources at the end of each section.)

And another thing that's extremely key: Trump is charged in this case with violating the Espionage Act. And the Espionage Act explicitly does not give a single fuck about why you retained documents, or whether there's any proof you intended to show anyone. Any and all hoarding of national defense documents is illegal under the Espionage Act - EVEN if they're not classified, which is great since "I declassified them with my brain" (not how it works) is Trump's main defense here.

So, this case is basically the surest criminal conviction - and the most likely to have electoral consequences. Partly because Republicans, as few issues as they care about, generally are security hawks - "Trump stole nuclear secrets and showed them to people" is giving Repubs pause in a way that the insurrection just isn't, probably esp in the military and ex-military demographic.

Trump could also serve jail time if convicted in this case (which again he probably will be).

However, violating the Espionage Act doesn't ban you from running for or holding public office, which imho seems like a pretty major oversight.

Classified documents case explainer Sources: x, x, x, x, x, x, x, x, x, x

4. The Insurrection

So, this is where things get really complicated, because the case is complicated and so many things about it are so unprecedented.

There are two different cases here: a criminal case in the state of Georgia and a federal criminal case (that's the one run by Special Counsel Jack Smith, who is also running the classified documents case).

I definitely can't summarize all of this huge situation here, but here's some key points re: whether there will be legal consequences:

I actually have a pretty high level of trust in Jack Smith, in large part due to his record: he's serving as special prosecutor while on sabbatical from his normal job of prosecuting war crimes at the Hague. And he's specifically been prosecuting war crimes from the wars and genocides in former Yugoslavia in the 80s and 90s. That specifically gives me a lot of confidence because - as someone whose family is from the region - I think it's a really strong demonstration of his abilities. It means he has a lot of experience prosecuting high-level government and army officials, in a complicated, multi-year, multi-war conflict, where there were way more sides and factions than we have, along with way less documentary evidence (bc 90s), and a lot of history of political corruption and coverups. I find that really reassuring, especially the "experience prosecuting high-level government and army officials" thing in a situation with, shall we say, extremely contested and variable national leadership, during the course of multiple civil wars

"Schwendiman compared it to prosecuting Kosovo’s equivalent of Benjamin Franklin and Alexander Hamilton. “If you indict these people, you’re saying, ‘The founding fathers of Kosovo have committed atrocities, and I’m ready to prove it, in an independent court, with independent judges and rules that apply to everyone.’” And that was Kosovo's founding president. So yeah, I think Jack Smith can handle Trump. Source

Okay now to the points you might have actually heard of lol

The Georgia case is a state level case, which means that no matter what, Trump can't pardon himself in that case

The Georgia case is also charging Trump under the RICO act - aka the rackeeting act, usually used to prosecute organized crime. And convictions under the Georgia RICO Act come with MANDATORY jail time

I think the evidence here is pretty compelling, see: the congressional Jan 6 hearings

There is a pretty high chance that, in a massively unusual step, filming will be allowed inside the trial/hearings. This is HUGE, especially because Trump supporters would actually be watching it too (unlike, generally, the congressional hearings), and that evidence all laid out looks really goddamn bad

Also, if yesterday's fraud trial testimony is any indication, Trump is likely to end up yelling and screaming at the judge, etc. in the trial, which is going to look wildly unprofessional

The federal trial will be taking place in Washington DC, where it should be very doable to get a jury that isn't stuffed with Trump cronies (unlike, say, if the case was brought in Florida)

Trump has attempted witness tampering on a lot of occasions, and tried to poison the jury pool, and he got caught so now he's under a gag order that restricts what he can say re: both of those.

Important note: Jack Smith has brought the narrower of two possible cases against Trump. He's filed against Trump with several conspiracy charges, including "conspiracy against rights," which was historically created to prosecute the KKK for racial terrorism

However, Jack Smith did not actually charge Trump with inciting an insurrection. There are a lot of possible reasons for this, but it mostly boils down to the fact that "inciting an insurrection" is significantly less objectively provable, in this case, esp since "insurrection" isn't actually defined in the relevant law

So, Jack Smith has traded a broader case (the one including insurrection charges) for a case that is much simpler and quicker to argue, and that he's sure he can prove

Jack Smith absolutely knows that he has an effective deadline of November 2024 (aka the next election, because a Republican president would shut down the investigation immediately), and he's planning accordingly

Look. Federal prosecutors - and the prosecutors in Georgia and the other NY case, for bribery of porn star Stormy Daniels - would not be bringing these charges if they did not feel sure they would win. Democracy aside, if any of them lose their cases? That is almost guaranteed to end their careers. So they have a very vested self-interest in only taking on what they are absolutely sure they can prove

The judge in the federal Jan 6 trial is the judge who has given the harshest sentences against any of the Jan 6 rioters, and she is the only judge to have sentenced rioters to more time than the prosecutors asked for

Jan 6 charges against Trump, explainer Sources: x, x, x, x, x, x, x, x

A Very Hot Take: It might not be a bad thing that Trump is still allowed to run

So, this is my personal take on the situation - I acknowledge that it's a very hot take on the Left, and that I might well be wrong about this. I might be totally misreading the field here. But I genuinely do think that Trump being the Republican candidate for president could be a good thing, and in fact I'll genuinely worry significantly more if Trump isn't the Republican nominee for president.

The why all basically comes down to this: I think Trump will be easier to defeat in the 2024 general election.

Again, look, I may totally be misreading this, and that would be really bad, but here are my thoughts:

Trump is super popular with the far right base - but that same strength makes him a huge liability in the general election. You CAN'T WIN a presidential election without the support of independents and moderates (including "moderates"). This is a really common problem for Republican candidates, actually: the more they move to the right to win the core Republican base, the more they risk hurting their chances in the general election

Independents and moderate Republicans - again, who Trump needs to win with to get the presidency - are significantly more likely to care about, you know, all the stealing classified documents and committing treason things

I can't think of anything that will guarantee people on the left get their asses to the polls better than "Vote or Trump is president again." A lot of the time, with someone who hasn't been president before, voters can lie to themselves and go "Oh it won't be that bad once he's in office," esp among moderates. But now we have proof that isn't the case!

Look, I don't know if Trump is getting dementia or what, but his faculties really do appear to be declining. They'll likely be significantly worse in another year - his speeches are already way worse than there were in 2016. He just can't track what he's saying well enough anymore. This makes it harder for him to make his case to the electorate

He's also the only actual Repub candidate that's about the same age as Biden - which will do a lot to stop the Right from using Biden's age as an effective weapon to get a Repub in office

Honestly, my biggest worry is that DeSantis will be the Republican nominee. I am way more scared of Biden vs. DeSantis than Biden vs. Trump.

Reasons I would absolutely rather Biden face Trump than DeSantis include: DeSantis is way younger and he has way less baggage. Because he hasn't been president yet, voters can do that self-delusion thing that he won't be that bad - that he'll be better than Trump - and that unlike Trump's, his plans will work. People on the left and in the center often don't know who he is yet, and there's not such a huge current of electoral energy to get them to the polls. And most of all - unlike Trump, DeSantis is actually smart. And as part of that, he is capable of a deep and absolutely premeditated cruelty that Trump just doesn't have the attention span or the patience for. Biggest example: actually literally kidnapping undocumented immigrants and sending them to Martha's Vineyard, and all the awfulness that went along with that, including the part where he started a goddamned trend.

Nikki Haley I'm less worried about because her core support base - conservatives - is also the country's core support base for misogyny. I hate to be glad about misogyny, but it genuinely would make it harder for her to turn out ultraconservative votes, especially evangelicals.

Sources: x, x, x, x, x, x, x, x, x, x, x, x

So, yeah, all told I don't actually have "Trump still gets to run for president" super high on the list of things I'm worried/mad about.

Also worth saying that we don't want just being indicted (aka charged with a crime) to disqualify people from running for office, because then all Republicans (or anyone) would have to do to disqualify an opposing candidate is find literally any excuse to charge them with something

But back to your original question! I genuinely DO think he'll face legal consequences, and I genuinely DO think he'll probably face jail time. Which obviously I am rooting for very hard

[ahalliance]

American-validated Frenchge 🥖

transcript below

[Video Transcript begins:

[Video starts mid-sentence]

Etoiles: —and you put this face— next to the camera! Like this!

Foolish: (laughing) You’re so French!

Etoiles: I’m so French, that’s my main problem. Like I’m so French, I try sometimes to nerf myself and be like, less French

Etoiles: But that feels good to hear this because you say I’m so French and like, some racist people in France think I’m not because I’m Arabic too, so—

Foolish: Ohhhh

Etoiles: —that feels good too, you know

Foolish: No dude, you seem like a French ass French person—

Etoiles: (laughing)

Foolish: I don’t know how else to put it. Simply put

Etoiles: That feels good, man. I was saying hello to Tarik and all his chat was saying like Frenchge, the emote they are putting—

Foolish: Oh yeah

Etoiles: —the emote they are putting. Yeah, yeah, yeah

Video Transcript ends.]