5 ms·

Are we supposed to be up in arms about this? > 66 different federal political action campaigns (PACs), nearly half of which are supporting Republicans. Seems

by qwerpy 13d ago

Are we supposed to be up in arms about this? > 66 different federal political action campaigns (PACs), nearly half of which are supporting Republicans. Seems balanced to me.

heaney-555 13d ago
Wow, talk about a misleading headline!
manux 13d ago
Balanced, sure. Why is 50/50 ethically coherent?
- sghiassy 13d ago
  I’d also like to know the answer to this
- qwerpy 13d ago
  Didn’t say it was. But the headline is implying throwing money at this particular side is noteworthy. However, money is going to both sides. Why isn’t the headline “throwing money at various political candidates”?
  - sghiassy 13d ago
    Because for many people, and especially for the cohort that is HN readers, the current MAGA republican, doesn’t differ just on policy decisions like a Bush or Regan, but is undermining the institutions that keep our checks and balances in place P.S: I hope this wasn’t too political of a comment. I know we want to keep HN political free. But it does need to be said there’s a difference between policy differences and desecration. Example from today: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/18/trump-white-house-ban-msnow-cnn-politico.html https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/18/trump-white-house-ban-msnow-...
- xp84 13d ago
  One party does not have an indisputable claim on being ethical. Both of our political parties have done highly unethical things. Without getting into a bunch of hot-button political fights, I'll just say: Different people prioritize different issues and the parties (and their politicians) each have a lot to be ashamed of.
  - zetsurin 13d ago
    Maybe one party doesn't have the claim to being ethical, but one party (Republicans) have an indisputable claim on being unethical.
  - tzs 13d ago
    > One party does not have an indisputable claim on being ethical. No, but one party does have a disputable claim on being ethical. The other party doesn't even have a disputable claim any more.
- legitster 13d ago
  The goal is to get a seat at the table, not tip the scale. Even if the government is unethical, it's still a good idea to push for good policy (unless you're an accelerationist). Obviously we're talking about businesses here so what they are pushing for is probably ethically neutral in itself. But supporting everyone equally seems like the least bad option.
VCFundedGenYer 13d ago
Supporting fascists by 50% is pretty damn alarming to me.
- qwerpy 13d ago
  That would be terrible! However I don’t see evidence of that in the article.
  - delecti 13d ago
    The fact that the PAC donated to Pramila Jayapal shows that clearly supporting fascism isn't the point of the donations. But I would absolutely say that each of Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, and Lindsey Graham are (were in the Graham's case) fascistic in their positions. All of them support(ed) Trump, who readily accepted a description of "fascist" from Mamdani, on camera (if his status as such weren't already self-evident).
hn_throwaway_99 13d ago
While I agree, I still think it sucks that we are essentially now in a "pay-to-play" political environment. Any rich person who may be highly affected by government regulations (which is basically all of them) now is expected to donate a huge chunk of money if they even want to be listened to. This is why most of the money is going to incumbents (i.e. the people most likely to actually be in office in Jan). I'm not saying there haven't always been aspects of this but Citizens United really let this money explode exponentially. I really hope we can get a constitutional amendment overturning Citizens United once we return to sanity. Also, the rationale behind CU looks woefully stupid and weak now. I honestly believe it is the Dred Scott of our day. The USSC has always interpreted "free speech" with an eye to potential unfair harms (i.e. yelling fire in a crowded theater and all that), and the idea that rich people should be allowed to donate unlimited amounts of money to their preferred candidates certainly hits that level IMO.
tastyface 12d ago
Some news articles just from today: > The civil war in the far-right is coming down to Jews: https://forward.com/culture/851192/the-civil-war-in-the-far-right-is-coming-down-to-jews/ https://forward.com/culture/851192/the-civil-war-in-the-far-... > ‘Unforgivable Sin’: Pentagon Reportedly ‘Hiding’ US Deaths in Iran War: https://www.commondreams.org/news/pentagon-hiding-us-deaths-in-iran-war https://www.commondreams.org/news/pentagon-hiding-us-deaths-... > Trump ally Stephen Miller leads sweeping push to accelerate removal of migrant children: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/sep/19/stephen-miller-trump-migrant-children https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/sep/19/stephen-mill... > Trump says he’s banning MS NOW, CNN and Politico from White House: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/18/trump-white-house-ban-msnow-cnn-politico.html https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/18/trump-white-house-ban-msnow-... > Trump says his son’s wedding party being bankrolled by a Russian oligarch is ‘totally allowed’: https://apnews.com/article/trump-jr-wedding-oligarch-fbd62b7fec21f439762289a068f30e5e https://apnews.com/article/trump-jr-wedding-oligarch-fbd62b7... Human rights abuses, extrajudicial murders, egregious corruption, gutter racism, suppression of speech, erosion of democracy, and stupidity beyond any satire: same shit nonstop every single day for the past two years. Anyone who supports Republicans with full knowledge of what they've been doing is actively supporting evil. And yes, any informed person with an iota of morality should be up in arms about this.

by qwerpy 13d ago

Are we supposed to be up in arms about this? > 66 different federal political action campaigns (PACs), nearly half of which are supporting Republicans. Seems balanced to me.

heaney-555 13d ago

Wow, talk about a misleading headline!

manux 13d ago

Balanced, sure. Why is 50/50 ethically coherent?

sghiassy 13d ago
I’d also like to know the answer to this
qwerpy 13d ago
Didn’t say it was. But the headline is implying throwing money at this particular side is noteworthy. However, money is going to both sides. Why isn’t the headline “throwing money at various political candidates”?
- sghiassy 13d ago
  Because for many people, and especially for the cohort that is HN readers, the current MAGA republican, doesn’t differ just on policy decisions like a Bush or Regan, but is undermining the institutions that keep our checks and balances in place P.S: I hope this wasn’t too political of a comment. I know we want to keep HN political free. But it does need to be said there’s a difference between policy differences and desecration. Example from today: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/18/trump-white-house-ban-msnow-cnn-politico.html https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/18/trump-white-house-ban-msnow-...
xp84 13d ago
One party does not have an indisputable claim on being ethical. Both of our political parties have done highly unethical things. Without getting into a bunch of hot-button political fights, I'll just say: Different people prioritize different issues and the parties (and their politicians) each have a lot to be ashamed of.
- zetsurin 13d ago
  Maybe one party doesn't have the claim to being ethical, but one party (Republicans) have an indisputable claim on being unethical.
- tzs 13d ago
  > One party does not have an indisputable claim on being ethical. No, but one party does have a disputable claim on being ethical. The other party doesn't even have a disputable claim any more.
legitster 13d ago
The goal is to get a seat at the table, not tip the scale. Even if the government is unethical, it's still a good idea to push for good policy (unless you're an accelerationist). Obviously we're talking about businesses here so what they are pushing for is probably ethically neutral in itself. But supporting everyone equally seems like the least bad option.

VCFundedGenYer 13d ago

Supporting fascists by 50% is pretty damn alarming to me.

qwerpy 13d ago
That would be terrible! However I don’t see evidence of that in the article.
- delecti 13d ago
  The fact that the PAC donated to Pramila Jayapal shows that clearly supporting fascism isn't the point of the donations. But I would absolutely say that each of Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, and Lindsey Graham are (were in the Graham's case) fascistic in their positions. All of them support(ed) Trump, who readily accepted a description of "fascist" from Mamdani, on camera (if his status as such weren't already self-evident).

hn_throwaway_99 13d ago

While I agree, I still think it sucks that we are essentially now in a "pay-to-play" political environment. Any rich person who may be highly affected by government regulations (which is basically all of them) now is expected to donate a huge chunk of money if they even want to be listened to. This is why most of the money is going to incumbents (i.e. the people most likely to actually be in office in Jan). I'm not saying there haven't always been aspects of this but Citizens United really let this money explode exponentially. I really hope we can get a constitutional amendment overturning Citizens United once we return to sanity. Also, the rationale behind CU looks woefully stupid and weak now. I honestly believe it is the Dred Scott of our day. The USSC has always interpreted "free speech" with an eye to potential unfair harms (i.e. yelling fire in a crowded theater and all that), and the idea that rich people should be allowed to donate unlimited amounts of money to their preferred candidates certainly hits that level IMO.

tastyface 12d ago

Some news articles just from today: > The civil war in the far-right is coming down to Jews: https://forward.com/culture/851192/the-civil-war-in-the-far-right-is-coming-down-to-jews/ https://forward.com/culture/851192/the-civil-war-in-the-far-... > ‘Unforgivable Sin’: Pentagon Reportedly ‘Hiding’ US Deaths in Iran War: https://www.commondreams.org/news/pentagon-hiding-us-deaths-in-iran-war https://www.commondreams.org/news/pentagon-hiding-us-deaths-... > Trump ally Stephen Miller leads sweeping push to accelerate removal of migrant children: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/sep/19/stephen-miller-trump-migrant-children https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/sep/19/stephen-mill... > Trump says he’s banning MS NOW, CNN and Politico from White House: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/18/trump-white-house-ban-msnow-cnn-politico.html https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/18/trump-white-house-ban-msnow-... > Trump says his son’s wedding party being bankrolled by a Russian oligarch is ‘totally allowed’: https://apnews.com/article/trump-jr-wedding-oligarch-fbd62b7fec21f439762289a068f30e5e https://apnews.com/article/trump-jr-wedding-oligarch-fbd62b7... Human rights abuses, extrajudicial murders, egregious corruption, gutter racism, suppression of speech, erosion of democracy, and stupidity beyond any satire: same shit nonstop every single day for the past two years. Anyone who supports Republicans with full knowledge of what they've been doing is actively supporting evil. And yes, any informed person with an iota of morality should be up in arms about this.