this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2025
26 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10800 readers
109 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Republicans have been doing this for a long time and not a peep.
Democrats start doing it because they're sick of getting their teeth kick in at election time: OH MY GOD, HOW DASTEREDLY!!!
Y'all hypocrites.
yes...
[citation needed]
the most obvious counter-example that comes to my mind was the news, about a year ago, that Beanie Baby was getting paid $100k per episode by Russian-linked sources
that was reported by the AP, NPR, CNN, etc.
if you think people on the left weren't saying anything about that, pick your favorite "left-wing" news outlet and search their archive to see if they covered it. for example, this from the Daily Beast was on the first page of search results for "Tim Pool Russia". here is Mother Jones. here is them.us.
also, can you be more clear about what specifically you're saying? in other words, is it:
a) Republicans have been doing this for a long time, and that's OK, and Democrats are doing it, and that's also OK
b) Republicans have been doing this for a long time, and that's bad, and Democrats are doing it, and that's also bad
c) Republicans have been doing this for a long time, and that's bad, and Democrats are doing it, but that's OK
because when you say:
it makes me think you're saying it's OK when Democrats do it.
so are you also OK with Republicans doing it?
or are you, in the same post where you accuse other people of being hypocrites, saying it's bad when Republicans do it but OK when Democrats do it?
Beautiful reply. I reloaded to type a comment and you've said it much better than I.
thank you.
This is reductionist. Check your time server ... you don't seem to realize we're already in a fascist oligarchy (but I repeat myself). Your arguments work in the political context of 15 years ago; at this point you're trying to both-sides Nazis. At which time, the calculus changes.
uhhh...hwhut?
this is incoherent. what are you saying I'm doing?
You're saying Dems should not do everything in their power to stop a fascist junta because ... they need to play by the rules even though the Nazis are already burning the rulebook. That's certainly a take, but stop treating the GOP as interested in ongoing democracy in the first place.
nope. try again. this time without putting words in my mouth.
OK, then what are you saying?
in this specific thread: Banzai51, the person I originally responded to, said it's hypocritical to be upset about Democrats secretly funding influencers with dark money, because Republicans do it too. plus an allegation, with zero evidence, that when Republicans do it, there isn't a similar amount of criticism.
I gave a concrete counter-example (Tim Pool and Tenet Media) that no, when Republicans do it, there is plenty of criticism. from both centrist outlets as well as ones that have a clear left-wing slant.
and I tried to make the point that Banzai51's argument is itself hypocritical, even as they're accusing others of hypocrisy. because if they're saying it's fine when Democrats do it, they should also be explicit about saying it's fine when Republicans do it. or, be explicit about saying it's bad when Republicans do it, but fine when Democrats do it - because that makes the hypocrisy (or double standard, if you want to call it that) explicit.
somehow, from that, you concluded I'm "trying to both-sides Nazis".
on this topic more broadly: if Democrats want to fund left-of-center influencers, I broadly speaking don't have any problem with that...as long as the funding, and the constraints placed on the influencers, is publicly disclosed (I'm guessing not understanding that is where you got "You’re saying Dems should not do everything in their power..." from?)
the attempted secrecy and control is the real problem here, both in terms of not disclosing who Chorus is funding, and in requiring those people to not disclose the strings that come attached to the funding.
and it's more than just an abstract ethical standard I want to uphold here - influencers who accept secret funding like this will ultimately do more harm than good for Democrats, because the secrets will be exposed sooner or later. it causes a loss of trust in all left-of-center content, even from creators that don't accept dark money. this blog that I linked to in another comment makes that point really well.
Thanks for the reply. Given this context, we essentially agree. It's not the action, it's the obfuscation that's the issue. The GOP has this nailed, while Dems are now taking a stupid route to join them.