30% are uneducated. That sounds about right.
this post was submitted on 11 May 2026
358 points (100.0% liked)
politics
29715 readers
2643 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Campaign Finance Reform is the issue from which ALL other issues flow.
-
Limit presidential campaigns to 90 days, reducing the amount of money required.
-
Presidential campaigns are funded by the Federal government, with strict regulations on how the money is spent, including tight regulations on political speech. Outright lies will get a candidate disqualified, even if it means leaving a single candidate on the ballot.
-
It will be illegal to spend private money of any kind, from any source, on a political campaign, with harsh penalties.
-
All lobbying through campaign donations of any kind is strongly prohibited.
When money is removed from politics, the only thing of value is a Citizen's single vote, and the candidate must battle to get that single vote, instead of money.
A Citizen is automatically registered to vote at birth, and that registration automatically validates on their 18th birthday. That vote is sacrosanct, and cannot be removed for ANY reason, including a felony conviction. Even incarcerated prisoners can vote. Even the suggestion that the vote should be removed from any group violates the law.
Eh, I'd say rank choice voting and lowering the barrier of entry to get on a ballot is more important.
You only need a few hundred bucks to make a decent website with an outline of your issues
And the reason you can't get that is because the opponents pour zillions into campaigns to keep that from happening.
If you want Ranked Choice Voting, then you have to get money out of campaigns first.
I'll say it again: Campaign Finance Reform is the issue from which ALL other issues flow.
Eh, nah. Chicken and egg argument, but I think the rank choice goes first.
From Berkeley to Maine, there's a lot of places where we still have billionaires pouring into elections but we already have rank choice voting.
Once we have rank choice, it's easier to actually elect non corporate candidates and resolve the citizens united issues.
Trump has had THREE (so far) Supreme Court picks. That institution has become permanently tainted by political partisanship, while continuing to erode away voter’s rights at an ever increasing pace.
But go ahead, argue how “both sides are equally bad”.
I used to think we should add 4 seats to SCOTUS. Now I think we should add 20. SCOTUS shouldn't be so small that one bad faith president can negatively affect the country for the next 50 years.
With term limits, so every president gets a chance to add a few.
No shit?
Citizens United 2010 has been called out for 16 years now. It remains as damaging then as now.
There is no fix until corporations aren't considered people. Fucking wild.
2010
26 years
We did it, Marty! We travelled to the future!
Ah fuck. Yeah, 16. Fixed. Feels like more than 26.
28% are part of politics and/or are capitalists that findom those in politics.
And/or the indoctrinated who believe they can be billionaires if they save enough of their minimum wages.....
Citizens United is one of the pieces of legislature that has to be overturned to head towards an equitable future.
I really try to avoid fatalism, but I struggle to think of how we put citizens united back in the bottle (other than, of course, violent revolution.)
All I can come up with is a sufficiently powerful populist executive who can get people to the primaries in unheard of numbers and has the conviction to not only turn down infinite bribes but also to bully congress into voting themselves poorer. They also will need the courage and cunning to avoid being assassinated by the wealthy powers that be. Shouldn't be hard to find.
Buckley v Valeo would like a word.
“Buckley v. Valeo is a landmark 1976 Supreme Court case that ruled limits on campaign expenditures are unconstitutional under the First Amendment, while upholding limits on contributions to candidates. The decision significantly shaped campaign finance laws in the United States.”
28% have been paid to say there isn't too much money in politics.
Don’t worry — our Supreme Court overlords know what’s best for them … I mean us.
I mean it’s not like they’ve been taking improper gifts from billionaires for years…
And 28% are wrong
No, they just spend a lot of time on K Street
It's pretty obvious. But I don't necessarily have a solution. It's a hard, hard problem to solve.
Overturning Citizens United would go a long way.
I have serious doubt that anyone on Capitol Hill is altruistic enough to vote themselves to a position of diminished financial security. The end result is easy but the solution as the other commenter said, not so easy.
It’s not altruism if everyone else is also affected. They would just need to act quickly.
They don't have to vote on anything. Each state has the power to dismantle and neutralize it, as proposed in the Transparent Election Initiative ("The Montana Plan").
It's kind of a breakthrough and would be a game changer if many states could pass it.
Citizens united was a bullshit ruling that allowed unlimited money to get funneled into politics. It’s not a solvable problem anymore. The US stopped being even a semblance of a free country the moment it happened
The only way to solve it at this point starts with “gui” and ends with “llotine”. We are well and truly fucked, and the billionaires are now starting on Europe
Someone needs to read A Peoples History of the United States. This is who this country has always been and this is who SCOTUS has always been. Theyve ruled several times in the past that corporations are people and are protected by the 14th
Hence my “semblance” part of the comment
Starting on? Europe is where it all began, it's the source of all of the "old money". Some of these banks have been around since the slavery days. Deutsch bankrolled Trump for many years.
I was mostly talking about the billionaire tech bros but yea, you’re 100% correct
The solution is for Americans to primary incumbent politicians regularly. Literally how the founding fathers designed the country to work.
The founding fathers didn't intend for parties to exist, let alone primaries, or for there to be such a split in the interests of the ruling class as for the 2nd place candidate not being opposed to the winner's agenda, hence when the vp used to go to 2nd place.
They also didn't intend the SCOTUS to rule on the legality of laws.
Really not sure that makes sense as a solution. If people like their politician, why primary them? If politicians know they'll just be primaried anyway then it really doesn't matter if they enact the will of the people or that of corporations in the first place. That's one of the big concerns with term limits too. If the incumbent is there due to corporate funding, the next one likely will be too. We need to stop corporations from funding elections and have strict laws that we actually follow around insider trading. Complete divestment for anyone in elected office.
Yeah, I think the idea that we need to “primary candidates” is technically right, but that’s got nothing to do with this. The issue is THAT money rules American Politics in a way different from other nations (people get mad at me for saying that, but you can go watch Johnny Harris talk about the role money plays in American Politics, or Philip Defranco, or BoyBoy). The issue isn’t “primaries,” the issue is that Congress greatly control who gets to even run prior to the primaries. And even during the primaries they choose who to put money behind. And we do primary incumbents? Like, when did anyone say we didn’t (not you, the other commenter). Otherwise we wouldn’t have the RNC/DNC or the literal primary elections.
Oh, and outside of money the issue is Gerrymandering. Before anyone shits on me, go look up how effective gerrymandering is. It decides elections. More than votes and more than money.
Look at Hawaii. They're making strides right now
eating the rich might help
We are way past eating them. I recommend an industrial wood chipper.
Tax the extremely wealthy until they can’t afford to buy politicians. Don’t know how we get there when the wealthy already own all the politicians. But if people with too much money can’t be trusted to play well with others, taking away their money seems like the obvious solution.
Well I may not have the solution but I sure gotta couple of freakin’ todos.
Only 78%?
I must believe the other 22% responded sarcastically, it's such an absurd question. "Yeah, right, there's not ENOUGH money in politics! Dumbass."
172%*
27% didn't understand the question because they're stupid MAGAt hicks. The other 1% are the rich parasite bastards who want us to continue our culture war instead of shifting to class war.
The oligarchy doesnt believe theres enough
Is there? Shocker.