Campaign finance laws are the lamest thing about elections. Either let the money control the outcome or ban it entirely. These half-measures are worse than either option.

Listen to Kinzinger & look to WinRed. Why isn't that being investigated? Do both if you're going to bring the hammer down on this type of activity. Otherwise brazenly partisan suppression.

Anonymous wrote:Any crap that is happening on ActBlue is also happening on WinRed and also privately controlled dark money PACs with zero obligation to report donors.

And this is why folks are saying, Yes, let’s investigate it all. And so do mean ALL. Campaigns Finance a reform for All. Right along with Term Limit.

Anonymous wrote:Understand what is happening, ActBlue is collecting illegal donations. either from foreign donors, or people giving over the max.
Then these donations are listed as small donations by other people. Perhaps someone like the grandfather described above, or someone who hasn't donated at all.
Take a $100,000 donation or million dollar donation and list it as a bunch of $2 donations from thousands of people, some of them on a weekly or monthly basis.

There is zero proof of this. And ActBlue is merely a payment processing platform and database. The individual campaigns and PACs are the ones who have to comply with state, federal and local election laws.

Oh, and I bet you have no issue with the new millionaires club created by the Trumps over the weekend or the Trump meme-coin that has reaped in 9-10 figures of graft for the president.

I am so glad Trump has open a way of going after Fox News!

Any crap that is happening on ActBlue is also happening on WinRed and also privately controlled dark money PACs with zero obligation to report donors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Understand what is happening, ActBlue is collecting illegal donations. either from foreign donors, or people giving over the max.
Then these donations are listed as small donations by other people. Perhaps someone like the grandfather described above, or someone who hasn't donated at all.
Take a $100,000 donation or million dollar donation and list it as a bunch of $2 donations from thousands of people, some of them on a weekly or monthly basis.

That is the allegation of its adversary. Nothing has proven that true. And the focus should be on all campaign and fundraising platforms.

I've seen people on Twiiter listing their own donations, saying they never made them.

Well if a rando on twitter says it, it must be true

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Understand what is happening, ActBlue is collecting illegal donations. either from foreign donors, or people giving over the max.
Then these donations are listed as small donations by other people. Perhaps someone like the grandfather described above, or someone who hasn't donated at all.
Take a $100,000 donation or million dollar donation and list it as a bunch of $2 donations from thousands of people, some of them on a weekly or monthly basis.

That is the allegation of its adversary. Nothing has proven that true. And the focus should be on all campaign and fundraising platforms.

I've seen people on Twiiter listing their own donations, saying they never made them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Act Blue should just set up a meme coin that they control, and take a cut of every transaction, and then announce the biggest purchasers will get meetings and other goodies from politicians.

Sure, works for Trump, right?

Sure does. Rules for thee, not for me

Anonymous wrote:Act Blue should just set up a meme coin that they control, and take a cut of every transaction, and then announce the biggest purchasers will get meetings and other goodies from politicians.

Sure, works for Trump, right?

Look, I'm in favor of campaign finance reform but it has to be across the board. For all the handwringing over ActBlue there are millions flowing via sketchy PACs and dark money.

My proposal would be a strict limit of $50 per candidate, per cycle. And if you chose to give to a PAC, it would be $200 to a single PAC, BUT you could then not be allowed to give to individual candidates in addition to that. Why those numbers? Because those are realistic numbers of what an average donor could give. If the numbers were higher it would drown out the majority of contributors.

Every donation would have to be validated somehow - for example an electronic system that validates citizenship of the donor, and which validates that contribution limits for that individual. that candidate, and that cycle have not been exceeded.

And after that, every penny that someone tries to spend outside of those limits is then criminalized and harshly prosecuted, no ifs ands or buts.

Act Blue should just set up a meme coin that they control, and take a cut of every transaction, and then announce the biggest purchasers will get meetings and other goodies from politicians.

Anonymous wrote:Understand what is happening, ActBlue is collecting illegal donations. either from foreign donors, or people giving over the max.
Then these donations are listed as small donations by other people. Perhaps someone like the grandfather described above, or someone who hasn't donated at all.
Take a $100,000 donation or million dollar donation and list it as a bunch of $2 donations from thousands of people, some of them on a weekly or monthly basis.

Uh huh, sure. Are these big moneybags individuals here in the room with you right now?

Anonymous wrote:Understand what is happening, ActBlue is collecting illegal donations. either from foreign donors, or people giving over the max.
Then these donations are listed as small donations by other people. Perhaps someone like the grandfather described above, or someone who hasn't donated at all.
Take a $100,000 donation or million dollar donation and list it as a bunch of $2 donations from thousands of people, some of them on a weekly or monthly basis.

At this point I’m fine with it. After decades of Republican corruption Democrats are fighting fire with fire.