What do "free elections" cost now?

[David Lockmiller]

from my thread titled "RE: It’s a Free Country. For How Much Longer?"

On November 10, 1864, in response to a serenade from his supporters, President Lincoln made in his short speech this observation:

[T]he election was a necessity.

We can not have free government without elections; and if the rebellion could force us to forego, or postpone a national election it might fairly claim to have already conquered and ruined us. The strife of the election is but human-nature practically applied to the facts of the case. What has occurred in this case, must ever recur in similar cases. Human-nature will not change. In any future great national trial, compared with the men of this, we shall have as weak, and as strong; as silly and as wise; as bad and good. Let us, therefore, study the incidents of this, as philosophy to learn wisdom from, and none of them as wrongs to be revenged.

In Lincoln's time, the cost of national elections were minimal. Candidates made speeches (oftentimes, debate speeches) to public audiences. And, then national newspapers and magazines reported those speeches to the American citizens.

Now, one hundred sixty years later: $16 Billion Will Be Spent in the 2024 Election. (November 1, 2024 headline in U. S. News and World Report.)

[Gene C]

(11-05-2024 11:27 AM)David Lockmiller Wrote:  from my thread titled "RE: It’s a Free Country. For How Much Longer?"

In Lincoln's time, the cost of national elections were minimal. Candidates made speeches (oftentimes, debate speeches) to public audiences. And, then national newspapers and magazines reported those speeches to the American citizens.

Now, one hundred sixty years later: $16 Billion Will Be Spent in the 2024 Election. (November 1, 2024 headline in U. S. News and World Report.)

That's a drop in the bucket compared to our national debt currently at $35 Trillion dollars +
National Debt Tracker: American taxpayers (you) are now on the hook for

$35,866,603,223,541.48 as of 11/4/24 according to Fox News
That's $35.8 Trillion dollars

[David Lockmiller]

(11-05-2024 12:30 PM)Gene C Wrote:  

(11-05-2024 11:27 AM)David Lockmiller Wrote:  from my thread titled "RE: It’s a Free Country. For How Much Longer?"

In Lincoln's time, the cost of national elections were minimal. Candidates made speeches (oftentimes, debate speeches) to public audiences. And, then national newspapers and magazines reported those speeches to the American citizens.

Now, one hundred sixty years later: $16 Billion Will Be Spent in the 2024 Election. (November 1, 2024 headline in U. S. News and World Report.)

That's a drop in the bucket compared to our national debt currently at $35 Trillion dollars +
National Debt Tracker: American taxpayers (you) are now on the hook for

$35,866,603,223,541.48 as of 11/4/24 according to Fox News
That's $35.8 Trillion dollars

Speaking of "drops in the bucket," the Pew Research Center reported five related "facts" regarding the National Debt:

1. For several years, the nation’s debt has been bigger than its gross domestic product, which was $26.13 trillion in the fourth quarter of 2022.The federal government’s total public debt stood at just under $31.46 trillion as of Feb. 10, 2024, according to the Treasury Department’s latest daily reckoning.
   

[David Lockmiller]

(11-05-2024 11:27 AM)David Lockmiller Wrote:  from my thread titled "RE: It’s a Free Country. For How Much Longer?"

On November 10, 1864, in response to a serenade from his supporters, President Lincoln made in his short speech this observation:

[T]he election was a necessity.

We can not have free government without elections; and if the rebellion could force us to forego, or postpone a national election it might fairly claim to have already conquered and ruined us. The strife of the election is but human-nature practically applied to the facts of the case. What has occurred in this case, must ever recur in similar cases. Human-nature will not change. In any future great national trial, compared with the men of this, we shall have as weak, and as strong; as silly and as wise; as bad and good. Let us, therefore, study the incidents of this, as philosophy to learn wisdom from, and none of them as wrongs to be revenged.

In Lincoln's time, the cost of national elections were minimal. Candidates made speeches (oftentimes, debate speeches) to public audiences. And, then national newspapers and magazines reported those speeches to the American citizens.

Now, one hundred sixty years later: $16 Billion Will Be Spent in the 2024 Election. (November 1, 2024 headline in U. S. News and World Report.)

Money equals influence is a universally accepted political axiom, I believe.

Dictionary.com defines "axiom" in three ways:

1) a self-evident truth that requires no proof.
2) a universally accepted principle or rule.
and 3) Logic, Mathematics. a proposition that is assumed without proof for the sake of studying the consequences that follow from it.

I would argue that excessive money in the democratic election process has extremely adverse consequences.

[David Lockmiller]

The Daily Beast published on Nov. 4, 2024 a story titled “Elon Musk Admits My Million Dollar MAGA Lottery Isn’t Actually a Lottery”

Musk‘s America PAC has posted the ‘winners’ on X daily but now says they’re paid spokespeople.

Elon Musk‘s lawyer revealed in a Pennsylvania court Monday that the winners of his $1 million-a-day giveaway are not picked by chance.

Musk‘s lawyer, Chris Gober, made the shocking admission during a hearing in the lawsuit that Philadelphia’s district attorney filed to stop the sweepstakes, which has awarded $1 million a day through his super PAC America to registered voters in swing states, according to Bloomberg.

Musk appeared on Joe Rogan‘s podcast on Monday defending the petition.
“We organized this petition in support of the Constitution,” Musk said. “We want to send a message to the politicians to say that the people care about the Constitution.”
In order to be entered, participants must be a registered voter in a swing state. They then must sign a petition supporting free speech and the right to bear arms.

A lot of those people might not have signed the petition had they known the “lottery” was a contest and not a lottery. And, a lot of those same people may have voted for Trump in return for a free One Million Lottery drawing awarded by Trump’s good friend, Elon Musk. These voters who were duped in this manner should have the constitutional right to retract their vote in whatever swing state that they voted. In total numbers, it may have effected the outcome of the election.

Every vote counts, you know!

[RJNorton]

(11-06-2024 04:16 PM)David Lockmiller Wrote:  These voters who were duped in this manner should have the constitutional right to retract their vote in whatever swing state that they voted.

David, I do not understand how this would work.

[David Lockmiller]

(11-06-2024 05:35 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  

(11-06-2024 04:16 PM)David Lockmiller Wrote:  These voters who were duped in this manner should have the constitutional right to retract their vote in whatever swing state that they voted.

David, I do not understand how this would work.

In order to be entered in the "lottery," participants must be a registered voter in a swing state. Musk has the information to locate the individual "lottery" winner.

The individual voting information is available from the local voting records.

A sworn statement from the voter so duped should be sufficient basis for retracting their ill begotten vote for Donald Trump to be President of the United States.

Musk should be required by the court to do all of this lawsuit notification work to every single lottery participant and he should include a generous reimbursement payment for their efforts to "correct" their vote.

[AussieMick]

So ... I suggest to have been duped, voters must have lost something of value? What? They in fact were encouraged to register and thus vote.... so maybe that was something of value that they gained?
Of course simply registering and signing the petition doesn't mean they voted for Trump. OK, they could swear that they did.... and swear that they did so only because of the 'lottery '.
So .... how many people are going to take the time to do this? Would there be sufficient numbers to have any effect on the result?

[David Lockmiller]

(11-07-2024 03:05 PM)AussieMick Wrote:  So ... I suggest to have been duped, voters must have lost something of value? What? They in fact were encouraged to register and thus vote.... so maybe that was something of value that they gained?
Of course simply registering and signing the petition doesn't mean they voted for Trump. OK, they could swear that they did.... and swear that they did so only because of the 'lottery '.
So .... how many people are going to take the time to do this? Would there be sufficient numbers to have any effect on the result?

Would you like to be made a fool by a phenomenally wealthy smart guy that is trying to determine the outcome of an election in a democracy? And, this smart guy is doing this to tens of thousands of voters. A number of state elections in the only important "battleground states" were too close to call by the experts for quite some time.

Is it important who is President of the United States? I wrote in the name of Senator Bernie Sanders to be President. My vote was not counted but I made a symbolic statement for myself that I did not want either major party candidate to be President of the United States on one issue.

And, there is one other factor that is important. If an egomaniac multi-billionaire goes to prison (before President Trump's pardon), this will say something grand about the importance of the election process in this democracy.

[AussieMick]

"If an egomaniac multi-billionaire goes to prison" ... it would say a lot about the justice system.

I must admit I was surprised when I heard about the 'lottery' cunning (?) idea and wondered about legality.

I would have , similar to you, voted for neither . I think it important that people who dislike or disapprove of the main candidates make their views known and that these views are reported.

I would like to know how many people took the lottery 'offer' ... I doubt if this is assessable or reported. I dont think it did much for Musk's reputation ... not that he'd care and it may be that he'll get an influential job in the Administration.

[David Lockmiller]

(11-07-2024 06:31 PM)AussieMick Wrote:  I would like to know how many people took the lottery 'offer' ... I doubt if this is assessable or reported.

The Washington Post reported yesterday in a story headline: Elon Musk’s $1M voter giveaways were fixed lotteries, lawsuits say

Elon Musk said recipients of his daily $1 million lottery would be selected randomly. Two lawsuits accuse America PAC of pre-selecting winners.

The petition stated that it sought to “get 1 million registered voters in swing states to sign in support of the Constitution, especially freedom of speech and the right to bear arms.” It asked people to enter personal information, including their addresses and phone numbers.

[AussieMick]

Thanks, David. Obviously I've not much knowledge of US laws, but was this really a Lottery ( I would imagine these are legally defined), because the people were not wagering or paying out any $ ?

I can see that the personal information such as name, address and phone number might have been collected under false pretences.

The lawsuits, if they proceed, will be interesting.

[Rob Wick]

In Pennsylvania lotteries are illegal and have been for hundreds of years. In fact, Ida Tarbell's family was the beneficiary of that law when Ida was a youth. In the oil boomtown of Pithole James W. Bonta had built a luxury hotel that tanked almost immediately after opening. He spent $60,000 in building the hotel. He tried to raffle things off in an attempt to raise money. He had very few takers and eventually his scheme was shut down because lotteries were illegal. Tarbell's father Franklin was moving his family from Rouseville to Titusville and was going to build a house. Seeing an opportunity, Franklin offered Bonta $60 for the demolition rights which would allow him to take whatever materials he chose. Needing money Bonta had no choice but to agree. Franklin's Titusville home, which still stands today (although in a different form than Ida would recognize) cost only $60 in materials, many of which would have gone for much higher had Bonta not tried to use an illegal lottery to raise money.

Best
Rob

[David Lockmiller]

(11-08-2024 06:39 AM)AussieMick Wrote:  Thanks, David. Obviously I've not much knowledge of US laws, but was this really a Lottery ( I would imagine these are legally defined), because the people were not wagering or paying out any $ ?

I can see that the personal information such as name, address and phone number might have been collected under false pretences.

The lawsuits, if they proceed, will be interesting.

It was not a lottery. A lottery is a matter of random choice. Musk, through his attorney, admitted in court that the winner was selected on the basis of their pro-Trump social media posts (as I recall).

There were 12 drawings. The cost for Musk to obtain the voter information of one million previously unregistered voters in the contested swing states was $12 million. He now had the voter information of one million potential voters in all of the battleground states, who by means of this information could be contacted individually by phone, mailings, and knocks-on-the-door.

And, the beauty of the whole scheme was that no one would know how he was able to interfere in this manner in the 2024 free elections for the President of the United States.

However, there was a fatal flaw that entered this scheme. As previously stated: "Musk, through his attorney, [had to admit] in court that the winner was selected on the basis of their pro-Trump social media posts (as I recall)." The voter information of every "lottery" participant was obtained by criminal fraud.

In addition, the $12 million "lottery pay-out's" all went to Trump supporters as a matter of fact.

[David Lockmiller]

Musk Said $1 Million Lottery Would Be Random. His Lawyers Say It’s Not

Rolling Stone, by Miles Klee

November 4, 2024

On the eve of the election, the billionaire's Super PAC is defending its cash giveaways to registered voters in swing states.

Elon Musk, the most important mega-donor of the 2024 presidential election, has spent the final stretch of the campaign awarding $1 million from his Super PAC to a different swing state voters daily in order to boost his favored candidate, Donald Trump. Such a giveaway is unprecedented in American politics, for a very important reason: It may well be illegal, as the Department of Justice has warned Musk.