“Because of tariffs, we are taking in hundreds of billions of dollars of profits,” he said. “It’s one of the reasons I can offer, if Republicans win the House and the Senate, $5,000 to every adult. And we can do it and the Democrats can’t, because the Democrats don’t have any income, and they’re gonna drive us in[to] a depression. They won’t have any money.”

Bitch you already promised us a tariff refund check.

  • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    54 minutes ago

    Ignoring everything else wrong with this, it’s government money. If it actually existed it wouldn’t just vanish when a democrat gets elected.

  • Darkbulb@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    92
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Maybe I’m misremembering but I could have sworn it was against the law to pay for votes.

    • Bakkoda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 minutes ago

      I’ve noticed that people keep using that reasoning. It doesn’t mean anything anymore. Is only illegal if you doing get away with it.

    • CIA_chatbot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Oh it’s specifically against the law, but that apparently doesn’t matter when the party in charge has no fucking morals

    • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      18 minutes ago

      Don’t shoot the messenger. Just paraphrasing the analysis done by Legal Eagle.

      So, technically speaking, this isnt actually illegal. It is illegal to pay someone in exchange for voting a specific way. As in, if you vote for X, I’ll pay you money. But it is not illegal to suggest you will implement a policy, including rewarding cash/a cash value item to everyone, in exchange for an outcome. If he offered only to pay republican voters, he would be buying votes. But since he is offering to pay everyone, regardless of how they voted, for the election outcome he wants, that is not actually illegal. In fact it has been litigated and protected by the SCOTUS before. It is not dissimilar in legal terms from campaign promises like “if I win, I’ll cut your taxes by X%.” Or “Vote for me if you want a Universal Basic Income.” That too is a promise of monetary reward, independent of your vote, in exchange for an election outcome. And you hear stuff like that all the time.

      • Darkbulb@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        20 minutes ago

        Interesting. Grey area for sure. Doesn’t make it better of course but explains how they are getting away with it. Thanks.

  • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    2 hours ago

    “Because of tariffs, we are taking in hundreds of billions of dollars of profits,” he said. “It’s one of the reasons I can offer, if Republicans win the House and the Senate, $5,000 to every adult. And we can do it and the Democrats can’t, because the Democrats don’t have any income, and they’re gonna drive us in[to] a depression. They won’t have any money.”

    His so-called logic is so bad it makes my head hurt.

    1. You already control both chambers. You could pass it now if it wasn’t an obvious bribe to get people to vote for your party.
    2. Nothing about the Dems winning midterms stops the tariffs being in place. Literally your entire legal argument is that you don’t need Congress to approve them, so logically the Dems controlling Congress wouldn’t stop them if that was true. So they’d still have the money.

    How do people actually fall for this shit? How?!

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    2 hours ago

    “Because of tariffs, we are taking in hundreds of billions of dollars of profits,” he said. “It’s one of the reasons I can offer, if Republicans win the House and the Senate, $5,000 to every adult. And we can do it and the Democrats can’t, because the Democrats don’t have any income, and they’re gonna drive us in[to] a depression. They won’t have any money.”

    He’s flat out saying he considers the tarrif money “his” if a Republican government has access to it but a democratic government wouldn’t…

    And obviously ignoring that the “profits” are from a tax on Americans buying shit

    • dmtalon@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 hours ago

      And obviously ignoring that the “profits” are from a tax on Americans buying shit

      Gotta remember who he’s trying to bamboozle… Not the bright lights, the dim ones

  • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    42 minutes ago

    Prediction market odds are 5% for this happening. You can double your $5k, by just betting $250 on it, if you believe.

  • ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    2 hours ago

    “They’re going to drive us into a depression”

    …Unlike the depression that’s already forming because of his fucking stupid and disastrous economic policies?

    Yeah, I’ll take my chances with the party that has consistently brought economic stability, rather than the party that is ruining the economy (again) and flagrantly trying to buy votes (after they’ve already made similar promises and failed to deliver).

    • BooBees@fedinsfw.app
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 hours ago

      The only party that actually reduces or has ever done away with deficits to the point of surplus, and the only party that has done so nearly every time elected, with the exception of those inheriting a pandemic and a nation with an economy crashing thanks to it.

  • CaptDust@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Ah yes tariffs, the Republicans personal revenue stream cumulating in a very accessible slush fund to burn whatever way that specific party wishes, up to and including bribing voters.

    Makes me wonder why no one else has ever thought of this? Oh, because it’s not a political loophole, just blatantly fucking illegal.

  • hopesdead@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Next thing you know, only select people will receive the money and he’ll complain about who is technically considered an adult.

  • Triumph@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Since the tariffs are a tax on American people purchasing things, and since rich people purchase more things, and the promise is to pay every person the same amount, this is classic socialist wealth redistribution.

    I mean, it would be, if it ever came to pass.

    • doc@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 hours ago

      But it’s a charade when the 1% are getting massive tax cuts at the same time. Still a net loss to the 99% getting checks, but WEEE $5000! 🙄

  • Rhaedas@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Aside from it being false, that’s not at all how you stimulate an economy. But he’s never been good at growing a business, so…