8 ms·

Corruption in the US isn't new, but it's never been done as openly as it has been recently. I don't think it's a good thing. It shows that the government isn't

Corruption in the US isn't new, but it's never been done as openly as it has been recently. I don't think it's a good thing. It shows that the government isn't concerned about what the public thinks, which suggests that they believe they no longer have to be. That's not a healthy sign for what's supposed to be a democracy.

iAMkenough 28d ago
Sucks seeing the federal government weaponize the U.S. Postal Service to prevent legitimate ballots from being counted.
- mrtesthah 28d ago
  It doesn't just "suck" -- it's a path to dictatorship that threatens the freedoms and lives of its citizens.
  - iAMkenough 28d ago
    It's not a path, it's a result. That sucks.
- BLKNSLVR 28d ago
  Also gives an idea as to how desperate and paranoid they are.
- vkou 28d ago
  What would anyone expect to happen when people are stupid enough to elect someone who tried, with multiple parallel methods, including an attack on Congress, to steal one election already.
- imthatsteve 27d ago
  Okay so now that everyone has been shown how they can cheat the election with mail in ballots. How do you propose to stop the republicans from using mail in ballots to steal the next election? Since clearly you cant use the feds to weaponize the post office. How do the democrats secure an election? Do you just make sure you stuff the box with more mail in ballots than the other guy? You already made it illegal to show id when casting a ballot so if the republicans want to play the same game as the democrats how do you stop em? Do you just claim that its okay when we do it?
  - mrtesthah 27d ago
    Our election protocols are secure and past elections have been secure[1][2]. And mail ballots have never been shown in any significant way to constitute "cheating". Mail ballots are only issued to registered voters and cannot be "stuffed"[3]. You need to cite some actual sources behind the question loaded in your comment. 1. https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/imo/media/doc/Testimony-Krebs-2020-12-16.pdf https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/imo/media/do... 2. https://statesuniteddemocracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/000A-Myths-and-Facts-of-the-2020-Presidential-Election-20210113-FINAL.pdf https://statesuniteddemocracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01... 3. https://www.snopes.com/collections/mail-in-ballots-rumors-collection/ https://www.snopes.com/collections/mail-in-ballots-rumors-co...
  - iAMkenough 27d ago
    Republicans want to prevent legitimate ballots from being counted and make it harder to vote in person. Democrats want all legitimate ballots counted and to make it easier to vote in person. Only one party cares about defending democracy.
estearum 28d ago
Well it’s almost certainly not just more open. But also more common and more intense. There is 100% absolutely no possible comparison to Trump’s personal acts of corruption in any prior White House ever.
- shimman 28d ago
  Trump is bad, but please let's not excuse corporate neoliberal dems that are totally fine with insider trading, legalized bribes, and are quite proud that their consultant campaign workers get lucrative gigs at corporations/boards due to insider access. I mean we have people like Gillibrand that are openly in bed with the crypto industry while somehow decrying what Trump is doing. Feels like they're upset that Trump exposed how rotten this game has gotten. At some point you realize there is a game that you were never playing and it becomes a bipartisan issue.
  - estearum 28d ago
    All of that is several orders of magnitude less bad than a normal Tuesday in the Trump administration. For evidence, refer to TFA.
    - shimman 28d ago
      Okay and how do you think it helps the democratic candidate's ability to win elections when they are part of the same party that supports corporations over people? In the not so recent past the democratic party controlled Congress for 60+ years on the new deal coalition alone, now look what the party has morphed into... I read the article too, in what sane world is it okay if 70% of citizens thought their governments + corporations are corrupt over a 20 year time span here. Society apparently has get quite bad for the last 20% to realize the state of things. The only thing I got out of this article is that both parties + the F500 need to be destroyed.
      - estearum 28d ago
        Did I say it was okay? If you think I (or virtually anyone else) am a fan of the two-party system, you probably aren't paying very close attention to... anything. Things can be varying levels of imperfect. Things can be imperfect and acceptable, imperfect and bad, or imperfect and extremely extremely bad. It's not a sign of intelligence not to be able to discern between them.
jeffbee 28d ago
Implying that it's always been this way is part of the reason we are now here. For my entire life, bad faith commentators insinuated that the federal government was rife with corruption. When under Democratic control, of course. The time that Al Gore made one long-distance telephone call from his official desk, using his own personal calling card, birthed over 200 New York Times articles, 30 of them on the front page. We just had to get to the bottom of all that corruption!
- netsharc 28d ago
  "Both sides are just as bad" is copium for when the guy from "your side" is revealed to be a corrupt piece of shit. You don't like it, so you justify to yourself that the other party is also full of creeps and assholes and thieves, so you can continue to support your guy guilt free... Of course the supporters of one particular political party is much more better at gymnastics of the mental kind than the other side. Having no spine makes it quite easier...
  - rozal 28d ago
    [dead]
  - chronc7403 28d ago
    [flagged]
  - deleted 28d ago
    [deleted]
  - imthatsteve 27d ago
    Thats just party politics operating as it was designed. You only have one real party just like communists and fascists. The democrats control everything in the country via bribes from their super pacs and "charitable" foundations and fundraisers.thats why they were so upset when us-aids got suppressed. Thats why people give millions to the clintons for haiti and the Haitians never see a single penny. The corrupt take that tax money and give it to their friends who give it to charities which are owned and operated by their friends who then donate that money to campaigns or other charities who do the same thing. The republicans are just as corrupt but their power comes from the dems pissing people off so instead they vote against the dems but the reps are the only other option so the reps do the exact same thing as the dems and steal tax payer money and set up laws that make it more difficult for small business to compete with government sponsored monopolies. The left and right parties are like a left and right hand they wont get in each others way or fight each other they cooperate to screw the american people over and the stupid americans keep pretending they have a choice between the left slap or the right slap. The only way to take control of the country is to root out the corruption but the corruption is perpetuated by party politics and stupid americans are more loyal to their stupid corrupt parties than their nation or neighbors.
Terr_ 28d ago
> It shows that the government isn't concerned about what the public thinks Similar to the "Death of a Euphemism" [0], where some politicians decide they don't have to cloak their proposal in the trappings of reasonability any more. I highly recommend the whole series, as it has renewed relevance today. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dBJIkp7qIg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dBJIkp7qIg
yongjik 28d ago
I think it's worse. It's not that the government doesn't care that the public hates it; it's more like the government is doing whatever it wants and half the public is going wild absolutely loving it. Well, maybe a bit less than half these days.
- Loughla 28d ago
  The half that supports this nonsense genuinely believes this level of corruption has always existed. They're just happy it's their team this time. I simply do not understand American politics.
  - esafak 28d ago
    It's a very banana republicy thing and not uniquely American.
    - subarctic 28d ago
      Well, banana republics are run by American companies from what i understand
    - Sl1mb0 28d ago
      Lol do you know how the term "Banana Republic" originated
      - esafak 28d ago
        Yes, of course. There's a whole wikipedia article on it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic Modern usage is not about fruit companies.
  - irishcoffee 28d ago
    Nobody does. The amount of teenage angst posted in this forum about the current admin is amusingly pathetic. None of it matters. Congress constantly gets a free pass while we focus on a figurehead largely enabled by a passive and embarrassing congressional electorate. “We found the scapegoat, blame that guy!” It’s really embarrassing
BLKNSLVR 28d ago
Part of the problem with the open brazenness of the corruption is that the populace of the country will follow the lead. The rot will spread far and wide if it is seen that there is no consequence.
- cucumber3732842 28d ago
  What rots will fall down. Now, if you had some grand master plan to use some part of the federal government to stomp some people in some state for doing it wrong this is probably bad for you. But on a 30-40yr timeline it'll probably just mean a cycle of the feds doing less and the states doing more and the diversity that comes with that. Like we'll all screech about the EPA revoking this or the DOT ceasing to do that but whatever those policies are, if people want them they will be picked up by the states. In most cases it'll probably be 40-something states continuing to do whatever it was or 40-something states saying that was stupid all along and stopping immediately. Basically the sky isn't falling.
  - autoexec 28d ago
    The EPA is a good example of why this is so bad. Even if 90% of the states pass rules to protect the air and water it takes only a small number of states not following environmental regulations to cause a massive amount of harm to air and water quality and the effects of that can be felt in other states. It also hurts businesses when they suddenly find themselves forced to follow an inconsistent/conflicting patchwork of state laws instead of a single federal law. That said, it's still encouraging to see states picking up the slack and passing laws to protect their residents, even though I can't help but feel bad for people who become stuck in states where the government doesn't care about them. I hope that people will be begin to flee states where the government chooses to put corporate profits above the well-being of the public or wants to strip them of their rights, but realistically there will be many people who can't afford to move or who feel compelled to stay because of ties to their friends, family, and community.
    - cucumber3732842 28d ago
      You're only looking at the glass half empty side of things. The environment in the US is very diverse so why is it federally regulated to the degree it is? Not having to put up with rules that make sense in the arid plains or western deserts is gonna be a huge boon to everyone east of the Mississippi. The "consistency" argument is like 99% red herring. There's already a huge patchwork because the way federal agencies work is the states do most of the enforcing so you have 50 states worth of precedents and political whims to keep track of. If we're gonna suffer that patchwork it should at least work for the state as they want it rather than just be various flavors of spin on federal rules nobody fully agrees with. You can run this sort of exercise with just about every federal agency. Stuff like the FRA, DOT and other things where the literal subject matter is flagrantly interstate are where this sort of thing is least true.
dfxm12 28d ago
This is putting mildly. The most damning bit might just be that Republican voters saw all the corruption of Trump I and decided they wanted more.
- dabinat 28d ago
  More than that, in 2020 Trump got a record number of votes for any Republican or sitting president ever. In other circumstances he would have won. It’s just that Biden also got a record number of votes.
mc32 28d ago
When Congress people enrich themselves while serving in office[1] and there's a revolving door from public service into private and we have billions in unaccounted spending, fraud everywhere you look (especially since Covid), it's no surprise people feel upset by corruption. My hope is we will, one day, have an administration that roots it out using modern fraud detection, gets rid of waste, shuts down non-profits that funnel monies to their founders (anything where "overheard" is over 50%), stops insider trading amongst politicians and government workers, but I don't see them voting against their greed. [1]https://ballotpedia.org/Changes_in_Net_Worth_of_U.S._Senators_and_Representatives_(Personal_Gain_Index) https://ballotpedia.org/Changes_in_Net_Worth_of_U.S._Senator...
- ipython 26d ago
  It will be difficult to do so in the current administration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_allegations_during_the_second_Trump_presidency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_allegations_during_...
dangjc 28d ago
The Supreme Court opened the doors to this with Citizens United. You can’t expect one party to unilaterally disarm while another rakes in hundreds of millions. We all just need to come together and agree on a constitutional amendment to end this.
DivingForGold 28d ago
The US has moved down to 29th. I can recall when they were 16th. https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2025 https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2025
hakunin 28d ago
Saying “US corruption isn’t new” is a truism. There are probably isolated incidents, and many unproven theories, but everyone is quick to agree with this statement because it’s a common feeling everyone has now for some reason. The reality of corruption is likely much smaller and more boring than people think. What we’re witnessing now is what should be called corruption. That corruption that everyone has been screaming for years. But finally real. Remember, the job of these people’s propaganda is not to say that they’re better than the other side. It’s to say that they’re all the same. That’s it. And when you claim that this corruption is just a continuation of previous corruption, just bigger, and not a difference between essentially not having and having corruption (there’s always some small percentage of corruption, just like any crime) is essentially sweeping for them. It’s repeating their talking points.
- colordrops 28d ago
  You haven't been paying attention and digging into unfiltered sources if you think significant corruption is a new thing in the US.
  - hatsix 28d ago
    You haven't read his comment if you think that's what he said
  - dd8601fn 28d ago
    It’s so, so much worse now. Like everyone here said, they just don’t even care about being “caught”. Not ten years ago most of this stuff would likely end a career or land you in prison. Now it’s just, “So what? Nobody can do anything.” It’s not better that the corruption is blatant. They’re rubbing our faces in it, and not the least bit concerned about consequences. The message is clear… there aren’t any, anymore. And the most insulting was how they telegraphed it all. Accuse people of things they clearly didn’t do… and then actually do all those things.
    - cindyllm 28d ago
      [dead]
LastTrain 28d ago
You are partially right. We used to collectively throw people out when they were exposed as corrupt. Now it works like this: Republicans get called out by Democrats, Democrats get called out by Republicans and Democrats. And if that goes on long enough Democrats will start overlooking their own transgressions, I see that starting already.
- FireBeyond 27d ago
  It's amazing that in a discussion about how bad corruption has become or is perceived to have become under this particular Republican administration, that there's several people hand-wringing about the Democrats and how they've been corrupt, or they're worse, or now "what if they get hypothetically get worse as a result of this?". Anything to avoid having to take direct action against those currently in power, currently openly selling pardons, shitcoins, and government contracts.
  - LastTrain 27d ago
    I think if you re-read my comment we are basically in agreement, I just think if we continue on the current trajectory of not holding people accountable, it will spread to both parties. Ask yourself this, in a two party system, how bad would a Democratic nominee have to be before you’d vote for Trump? He has created a lot of runway for his opponents to be corrupt.
ozgrakkurt 28d ago
It is perplexing how similar it looks when a stupid person who is elected by a stupid base is directing a country. The difference between people doing corruption before and Trump is that the other people had a "legit" lifestyle and worldview but did corruption as a side thing. An ignorant business person like Trump has corruption/intimidation/coercion/deception etc. as a lifestyle because someone like him can't live in the world that he is living in without this lifestyle. Trump isn't really corrupt in the same sense as Obama because they are fundamentally different. You could even say more educated politicians that are able to understand what is going on are more evil. People won't tolerate evil politicians anymore because they understand they are being robbed by the financial system and aren't getting their piece of the pie. It has to be a break to democracy (war?) or economic reform or Mamdani/Trump style government from now, it is really unthinkable people will keep electing Biden/Hilary/Harris/JD Vance kind of politicians anymore unless there is a big breakthrough in brainwashing
jakobnissen 28d ago
I don’t think that’s right. The US government cares a lot about what the public thinks about them. They propagandize actively on social media, the president puts his personal name onceverything, they are extremely persistent in their messaging to loyal reporters and so on. I think they have discovered that what the public thinks simply no longer tracks what they actually do: "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters“
- huhtenberg 27d ago
  > The US government cares a lot about what the public thinks about them ... only because the elections aren't completely rigged yet and they still need some votes to cling to the power.
anovikov 27d ago
Problem is, public thinks that the government is corrupt but it doesn't impact their voting choices. Public is OK with corruption. If you look at many deeply corrupt countries, corruption is beneficial for majority of population there. As people in Belarus used to complain to Russians some 20 years ago, "in Belarus we live very poorly because Lukashenka does not allow us to steal unlike your bosses", and they were right.
znpy 27d ago
It is concerned, but not in the way one would think. From what i hear politicians like Gavin Newsom from California are passing bills to prevent independent journalists like Nick Shirley from exposing fraud and corruption. That signals that they (government officials) are extremely concerned with what the public thinks, but mainly in the sense that they don’t want the public to have the information that would put them in a thought spot. On the other hand, the fact that fraud and corruption is only reported by some early-twenty-something independent youtuber/journalist should really tell you a lot on the state of mass media in the USA (in the sense that the mass media are essentially colluding with politicians). (Downvote me if you want, I don’t care)
badgersnake 27d ago
All they have to do is persuade the public that all politicians are corrupt, then they can be as corrupt as they like. It’s the populist playbook the world over.
pavlov 27d ago
The purpose of DOGE was to get rid of everyone in government who was concerned about what the public thinks.
CGMthrowaway 27d ago
>Corruption in the US isn't new, but it's never been done as openly as it has been recently. It's been open a long time. Patriot Act/Snowden/Assange, JFK coverup, shutting churches to keep Walmart open, social media censorship, gerrymandering, immigration enforcement, etc
- NeutralCrane 27d ago
  Corruption does not mean bad policy. It’s government officials breaking the law to empower and enrich themselves. To the extent the items on your list even exist outside of the addled minds of conspiracy theorists, they aren’t corruption.
Melatonic 27d ago
It's also possible that we have better tools now to expose corruption and communicate it to each other. The level of corruption could be the same but we are just much more aware I agree though it's concerning that now it seems to be done without care to the visibility
laughing_man 27d ago
Part of the problem is we've essentially made corruption legal, at least for Congress. In the past if you gave a million dollars in cash to your Congressman, he stood a good chance of getting caught and arrested. But these days it's just normal for wealthy people, companies, and pressure groups to donate large sums of money to political campaigns. Then the money gets laundered through book sales. We're all supposed to pretend that money isn't affecting votes, but come on.

iAMkenough 28d ago

Sucks seeing the federal government weaponize the U.S. Postal Service to prevent legitimate ballots from being counted.

mrtesthah 28d ago
It doesn't just "suck" -- it's a path to dictatorship that threatens the freedoms and lives of its citizens.
- iAMkenough 28d ago
  It's not a path, it's a result. That sucks.
BLKNSLVR 28d ago
Also gives an idea as to how desperate and paranoid they are.
vkou 28d ago
What would anyone expect to happen when people are stupid enough to elect someone who tried, with multiple parallel methods, including an attack on Congress, to steal one election already.
imthatsteve 27d ago
Okay so now that everyone has been shown how they can cheat the election with mail in ballots. How do you propose to stop the republicans from using mail in ballots to steal the next election? Since clearly you cant use the feds to weaponize the post office. How do the democrats secure an election? Do you just make sure you stuff the box with more mail in ballots than the other guy? You already made it illegal to show id when casting a ballot so if the republicans want to play the same game as the democrats how do you stop em? Do you just claim that its okay when we do it?
- mrtesthah 27d ago
  Our election protocols are secure and past elections have been secure[1][2]. And mail ballots have never been shown in any significant way to constitute "cheating". Mail ballots are only issued to registered voters and cannot be "stuffed"[3]. You need to cite some actual sources behind the question loaded in your comment. 1. https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/imo/media/doc/Testimony-Krebs-2020-12-16.pdf https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/imo/media/do... 2. https://statesuniteddemocracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/000A-Myths-and-Facts-of-the-2020-Presidential-Election-20210113-FINAL.pdf https://statesuniteddemocracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01... 3. https://www.snopes.com/collections/mail-in-ballots-rumors-collection/ https://www.snopes.com/collections/mail-in-ballots-rumors-co...
- iAMkenough 27d ago
  Republicans want to prevent legitimate ballots from being counted and make it harder to vote in person. Democrats want all legitimate ballots counted and to make it easier to vote in person. Only one party cares about defending democracy.

estearum 28d ago

Well it’s almost certainly not just more open. But also more common and more intense. There is 100% absolutely no possible comparison to Trump’s personal acts of corruption in any prior White House ever.

shimman 28d ago
Trump is bad, but please let's not excuse corporate neoliberal dems that are totally fine with insider trading, legalized bribes, and are quite proud that their consultant campaign workers get lucrative gigs at corporations/boards due to insider access. I mean we have people like Gillibrand that are openly in bed with the crypto industry while somehow decrying what Trump is doing. Feels like they're upset that Trump exposed how rotten this game has gotten. At some point you realize there is a game that you were never playing and it becomes a bipartisan issue.
- estearum 28d ago
  All of that is several orders of magnitude less bad than a normal Tuesday in the Trump administration. For evidence, refer to TFA.
  - shimman 28d ago
    Okay and how do you think it helps the democratic candidate's ability to win elections when they are part of the same party that supports corporations over people? In the not so recent past the democratic party controlled Congress for 60+ years on the new deal coalition alone, now look what the party has morphed into... I read the article too, in what sane world is it okay if 70% of citizens thought their governments + corporations are corrupt over a 20 year time span here. Society apparently has get quite bad for the last 20% to realize the state of things. The only thing I got out of this article is that both parties + the F500 need to be destroyed.
    - estearum 28d ago
      Did I say it was okay? If you think I (or virtually anyone else) am a fan of the two-party system, you probably aren't paying very close attention to... anything. Things can be varying levels of imperfect. Things can be imperfect and acceptable, imperfect and bad, or imperfect and extremely extremely bad. It's not a sign of intelligence not to be able to discern between them.

jeffbee 28d ago

Implying that it's always been this way is part of the reason we are now here. For my entire life, bad faith commentators insinuated that the federal government was rife with corruption. When under Democratic control, of course. The time that Al Gore made one long-distance telephone call from his official desk, using his own personal calling card, birthed over 200 New York Times articles, 30 of them on the front page. We just had to get to the bottom of all that corruption!

netsharc 28d ago
"Both sides are just as bad" is copium for when the guy from "your side" is revealed to be a corrupt piece of shit. You don't like it, so you justify to yourself that the other party is also full of creeps and assholes and thieves, so you can continue to support your guy guilt free... Of course the supporters of one particular political party is much more better at gymnastics of the mental kind than the other side. Having no spine makes it quite easier...
- rozal 28d ago
  [dead]
- chronc7403 28d ago
  [flagged]
- deleted 28d ago
  [deleted]
- imthatsteve 27d ago
  Thats just party politics operating as it was designed. You only have one real party just like communists and fascists. The democrats control everything in the country via bribes from their super pacs and "charitable" foundations and fundraisers.thats why they were so upset when us-aids got suppressed. Thats why people give millions to the clintons for haiti and the Haitians never see a single penny. The corrupt take that tax money and give it to their friends who give it to charities which are owned and operated by their friends who then donate that money to campaigns or other charities who do the same thing. The republicans are just as corrupt but their power comes from the dems pissing people off so instead they vote against the dems but the reps are the only other option so the reps do the exact same thing as the dems and steal tax payer money and set up laws that make it more difficult for small business to compete with government sponsored monopolies. The left and right parties are like a left and right hand they wont get in each others way or fight each other they cooperate to screw the american people over and the stupid americans keep pretending they have a choice between the left slap or the right slap. The only way to take control of the country is to root out the corruption but the corruption is perpetuated by party politics and stupid americans are more loyal to their stupid corrupt parties than their nation or neighbors.

Terr_ 28d ago

> It shows that the government isn't concerned about what the public thinks Similar to the "Death of a Euphemism" [0], where some politicians decide they don't have to cloak their proposal in the trappings of reasonability any more. I highly recommend the whole series, as it has renewed relevance today. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dBJIkp7qIg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dBJIkp7qIg

yongjik 28d ago

I think it's worse. It's not that the government doesn't care that the public hates it; it's more like the government is doing whatever it wants and half the public is going wild absolutely loving it. Well, maybe a bit less than half these days.

Loughla 28d ago
The half that supports this nonsense genuinely believes this level of corruption has always existed. They're just happy it's their team this time. I simply do not understand American politics.
- esafak 28d ago
  It's a very banana republicy thing and not uniquely American.
  - subarctic 28d ago
    Well, banana republics are run by American companies from what i understand
  - Sl1mb0 28d ago
    Lol do you know how the term "Banana Republic" originated
    - esafak 28d ago
      Yes, of course. There's a whole wikipedia article on it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic Modern usage is not about fruit companies.
- irishcoffee 28d ago
  Nobody does. The amount of teenage angst posted in this forum about the current admin is amusingly pathetic. None of it matters. Congress constantly gets a free pass while we focus on a figurehead largely enabled by a passive and embarrassing congressional electorate. “We found the scapegoat, blame that guy!” It’s really embarrassing

BLKNSLVR 28d ago

Part of the problem with the open brazenness of the corruption is that the populace of the country will follow the lead. The rot will spread far and wide if it is seen that there is no consequence.

cucumber3732842 28d ago
What rots will fall down. Now, if you had some grand master plan to use some part of the federal government to stomp some people in some state for doing it wrong this is probably bad for you. But on a 30-40yr timeline it'll probably just mean a cycle of the feds doing less and the states doing more and the diversity that comes with that. Like we'll all screech about the EPA revoking this or the DOT ceasing to do that but whatever those policies are, if people want them they will be picked up by the states. In most cases it'll probably be 40-something states continuing to do whatever it was or 40-something states saying that was stupid all along and stopping immediately. Basically the sky isn't falling.
- autoexec 28d ago
  The EPA is a good example of why this is so bad. Even if 90% of the states pass rules to protect the air and water it takes only a small number of states not following environmental regulations to cause a massive amount of harm to air and water quality and the effects of that can be felt in other states. It also hurts businesses when they suddenly find themselves forced to follow an inconsistent/conflicting patchwork of state laws instead of a single federal law. That said, it's still encouraging to see states picking up the slack and passing laws to protect their residents, even though I can't help but feel bad for people who become stuck in states where the government doesn't care about them. I hope that people will be begin to flee states where the government chooses to put corporate profits above the well-being of the public or wants to strip them of their rights, but realistically there will be many people who can't afford to move or who feel compelled to stay because of ties to their friends, family, and community.
  - cucumber3732842 28d ago
    You're only looking at the glass half empty side of things. The environment in the US is very diverse so why is it federally regulated to the degree it is? Not having to put up with rules that make sense in the arid plains or western deserts is gonna be a huge boon to everyone east of the Mississippi. The "consistency" argument is like 99% red herring. There's already a huge patchwork because the way federal agencies work is the states do most of the enforcing so you have 50 states worth of precedents and political whims to keep track of. If we're gonna suffer that patchwork it should at least work for the state as they want it rather than just be various flavors of spin on federal rules nobody fully agrees with. You can run this sort of exercise with just about every federal agency. Stuff like the FRA, DOT and other things where the literal subject matter is flagrantly interstate are where this sort of thing is least true.

dfxm12 28d ago

This is putting mildly. The most damning bit might just be that Republican voters saw all the corruption of Trump I and decided they wanted more.

dabinat 28d ago
More than that, in 2020 Trump got a record number of votes for any Republican or sitting president ever. In other circumstances he would have won. It’s just that Biden also got a record number of votes.

mc32 28d ago

When Congress people enrich themselves while serving in office[1] and there's a revolving door from public service into private and we have billions in unaccounted spending, fraud everywhere you look (especially since Covid), it's no surprise people feel upset by corruption. My hope is we will, one day, have an administration that roots it out using modern fraud detection, gets rid of waste, shuts down non-profits that funnel monies to their founders (anything where "overheard" is over 50%), stops insider trading amongst politicians and government workers, but I don't see them voting against their greed. [1]https://ballotpedia.org/Changes_in_Net_Worth_of_U.S._Senators_and_Representatives_(Personal_Gain_Index) https://ballotpedia.org/Changes_in_Net_Worth_of_U.S._Senator...

ipython 26d ago
It will be difficult to do so in the current administration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_allegations_during_the_second_Trump_presidency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_allegations_during_...

dangjc 28d ago

The Supreme Court opened the doors to this with Citizens United. You can’t expect one party to unilaterally disarm while another rakes in hundreds of millions. We all just need to come together and agree on a constitutional amendment to end this.

DivingForGold 28d ago

The US has moved down to 29th. I can recall when they were 16th. https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2025 https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2025

hakunin 28d ago

Saying “US corruption isn’t new” is a truism. There are probably isolated incidents, and many unproven theories, but everyone is quick to agree with this statement because it’s a common feeling everyone has now for some reason. The reality of corruption is likely much smaller and more boring than people think. What we’re witnessing now is what should be called corruption. That corruption that everyone has been screaming for years. But finally real. Remember, the job of these people’s propaganda is not to say that they’re better than the other side. It’s to say that they’re all the same. That’s it. And when you claim that this corruption is just a continuation of previous corruption, just bigger, and not a difference between essentially not having and having corruption (there’s always some small percentage of corruption, just like any crime) is essentially sweeping for them. It’s repeating their talking points.

colordrops 28d ago
You haven't been paying attention and digging into unfiltered sources if you think significant corruption is a new thing in the US.
- hatsix 28d ago
  You haven't read his comment if you think that's what he said
- dd8601fn 28d ago
  It’s so, so much worse now. Like everyone here said, they just don’t even care about being “caught”. Not ten years ago most of this stuff would likely end a career or land you in prison. Now it’s just, “So what? Nobody can do anything.” It’s not better that the corruption is blatant. They’re rubbing our faces in it, and not the least bit concerned about consequences. The message is clear… there aren’t any, anymore. And the most insulting was how they telegraphed it all. Accuse people of things they clearly didn’t do… and then actually do all those things.
  - cindyllm 28d ago
    [dead]

LastTrain 28d ago

You are partially right. We used to collectively throw people out when they were exposed as corrupt. Now it works like this: Republicans get called out by Democrats, Democrats get called out by Republicans and Democrats. And if that goes on long enough Democrats will start overlooking their own transgressions, I see that starting already.

FireBeyond 27d ago
It's amazing that in a discussion about how bad corruption has become or is perceived to have become under this particular Republican administration, that there's several people hand-wringing about the Democrats and how they've been corrupt, or they're worse, or now "what if they get hypothetically get worse as a result of this?". Anything to avoid having to take direct action against those currently in power, currently openly selling pardons, shitcoins, and government contracts.
- LastTrain 27d ago
  I think if you re-read my comment we are basically in agreement, I just think if we continue on the current trajectory of not holding people accountable, it will spread to both parties. Ask yourself this, in a two party system, how bad would a Democratic nominee have to be before you’d vote for Trump? He has created a lot of runway for his opponents to be corrupt.

ozgrakkurt 28d ago

It is perplexing how similar it looks when a stupid person who is elected by a stupid base is directing a country. The difference between people doing corruption before and Trump is that the other people had a "legit" lifestyle and worldview but did corruption as a side thing. An ignorant business person like Trump has corruption/intimidation/coercion/deception etc. as a lifestyle because someone like him can't live in the world that he is living in without this lifestyle. Trump isn't really corrupt in the same sense as Obama because they are fundamentally different. You could even say more educated politicians that are able to understand what is going on are more evil. People won't tolerate evil politicians anymore because they understand they are being robbed by the financial system and aren't getting their piece of the pie. It has to be a break to democracy (war?) or economic reform or Mamdani/Trump style government from now, it is really unthinkable people will keep electing Biden/Hilary/Harris/JD Vance kind of politicians anymore unless there is a big breakthrough in brainwashing

jakobnissen 28d ago

I don’t think that’s right. The US government cares a lot about what the public thinks about them. They propagandize actively on social media, the president puts his personal name onceverything, they are extremely persistent in their messaging to loyal reporters and so on. I think they have discovered that what the public thinks simply no longer tracks what they actually do: "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters“

huhtenberg 27d ago
> The US government cares a lot about what the public thinks about them ... only because the elections aren't completely rigged yet and they still need some votes to cling to the power.

anovikov 27d ago

Problem is, public thinks that the government is corrupt but it doesn't impact their voting choices. Public is OK with corruption. If you look at many deeply corrupt countries, corruption is beneficial for majority of population there. As people in Belarus used to complain to Russians some 20 years ago, "in Belarus we live very poorly because Lukashenka does not allow us to steal unlike your bosses", and they were right.

znpy 27d ago

It is concerned, but not in the way one would think. From what i hear politicians like Gavin Newsom from California are passing bills to prevent independent journalists like Nick Shirley from exposing fraud and corruption. That signals that they (government officials) are extremely concerned with what the public thinks, but mainly in the sense that they don’t want the public to have the information that would put them in a thought spot. On the other hand, the fact that fraud and corruption is only reported by some early-twenty-something independent youtuber/journalist should really tell you a lot on the state of mass media in the USA (in the sense that the mass media are essentially colluding with politicians). (Downvote me if you want, I don’t care)

badgersnake 27d ago

All they have to do is persuade the public that all politicians are corrupt, then they can be as corrupt as they like. It’s the populist playbook the world over.

pavlov 27d ago

The purpose of DOGE was to get rid of everyone in government who was concerned about what the public thinks.

CGMthrowaway 27d ago

>Corruption in the US isn't new, but it's never been done as openly as it has been recently. It's been open a long time. Patriot Act/Snowden/Assange, JFK coverup, shutting churches to keep Walmart open, social media censorship, gerrymandering, immigration enforcement, etc

NeutralCrane 27d ago
Corruption does not mean bad policy. It’s government officials breaking the law to empower and enrich themselves. To the extent the items on your list even exist outside of the addled minds of conspiracy theorists, they aren’t corruption.

Melatonic 27d ago

It's also possible that we have better tools now to expose corruption and communicate it to each other. The level of corruption could be the same but we are just much more aware I agree though it's concerning that now it seems to be done without care to the visibility

laughing_man 27d ago

Part of the problem is we've essentially made corruption legal, at least for Congress. In the past if you gave a million dollars in cash to your Congressman, he stood a good chance of getting caught and arrested. But these days it's just normal for wealthy people, companies, and pressure groups to donate large sums of money to political campaigns. Then the money gets laundered through book sales. We're all supposed to pretend that money isn't affecting votes, but come on.