U.S. President Donald Trump, in an interview with NBC News on Saturday, said there would be “serious consequences” if billionaire Elon Musk funds Democratic Party candidates to run against Republicans who vote for Trump’s sweeping tax-cut bill.

Trump declined to say what those consequences would be in the phone interview, and went on to add that he had not had discussions about whether to investigate Musk.

Asked if he thought his relationship with the Tesla and SpaceX CEO was over, Trump said, “I would assume so, yeah.”

  • Fingolfinz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Reality is fucking stupid as fuck right now. I think I’m going to mentally check out for a bit

        • pyre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          9 hours ago

          ok? still, that’s how you got into this, with people checking out. i didn’t say you did, since it wouldn’t make sense after you said you wanted to check out now. my point is that these cunts want to tire people enough to make them check out so they can do whatever they want without any pushback.

            • pyre@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              8 hours ago

              dude, go fuck yourself. this is a public thread. if you don’t want comments don’t make public comments online.

                • pyre@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 hours ago

                  the what? what does being a hero have to do with anything? and “someone’s upset” is rich coming from the dude who immediately took things personally and started cursing defensively.

  • decapitae@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Because in a functional democracy, threatening opposition is encouraged and often leads to a healthy society. /s

    • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 hours ago

      He’d sorta have a point about people shouldn’t be able to just dump a few millions on elections to influence them, but since Elmo did literally that for trump it’s not only too late, it’s also hypocritical as shit

      Which makes sense because for Republicans it’s always them accusing Democrats of what they are doing themselves

    • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      If they take his money and then release a public statement calling him a nazi piece of shit who will never have any influence in their office I’d allow it. Bonus points if they promise Musk they won’t do that before doing it.

      Otherwise, yeah. Musk needs to be a Kanye level pariah at least for what he’s done.

    • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m mixed on this. I understand the sentiment, but it probably depends on who they’re running against. If it’s a red state and they’re running against a republican, I would be fine with them taking the money.

      • drzoidberg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Musk is a nazi, as evidenced by his nazi salute earlier this year.

        Any democrat that accepts nazi money, it’s saying they’re fine with nazis, which makes them a nazi, because the only scum that’s fine with nazis, are other nazis.

        You can’t condemn nazi behavior while taking money from nazis, and allowing them to support you. You tell them to fuck all the way off, because the only thing a nazi deserves is the comfort of a grave.

        • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          I see what you’re saying, but taking nazi money from a nazi to spend and then using it to do good in the world? It’s like an ethics trolley problem.

          • drzoidberg@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            Taking nazi money by seizing his assets is how you go about using nazi money, not by accepting the support of a nazi. If you’re accepting the support of a nazi, you’re no better than conservatives currently accepting the support of nazis.

            • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 days ago

              I feel like that’s the best option and you’re right. I just don’t see that happening in America now or in the near future. The next best option is to do what the other poster said and say they will not be bought and won’t be doing anything he asks before they take the money. Also, again, they’re not going against another democrat.

              • drzoidberg@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                By accepting money from a nazi, they’re saying they can be bought by a nazi. It’s lobbying, and it’s why we file taxes for a return every year, why climate change is ignored, internet isn’t a utility, weed is federally illegal, and the fairness doctrine got chucked out the window.

                • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  That will win you a moral high ground and lose you an election thereby extending a fascist rule. Money wins elections. You can’t “sieze assets” when you aren’t in office. It’s delusional to think someone will be able to turn down money from the biggest donors and get into any position that will change something meaningful at this point. They need to make sure the money doesn’t have any strings attached to it, and get into office. Then make changes.

        • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          It’d be acceptable if they also invited him on stage and shot him dead. Take advantage of his comfort towards what he assumes is moral duplicity and stroke his ego a bit, then well kill him.

      • blitzen@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I wouldn’t say I’d be “fine” with them taking the money under any circumstance. But it’s never going to lead me to voting for repugnacans either directly or indirectly through abstaining.

        • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          That’s what I’m afraid of, that this would lead people to vote 3rd party or republican. Republicans being split up would be great too.

          • blitzen@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 days ago

            I’d go so far as to say Musk donating to a democrat candidate may be done explicitly as a poison pill to reduce support from the base.

  • apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    The fact that a billionaire bought an election and can easily buy it again is so plain for all to see and it is repugnant. The rich shouldn’t be.

  • TotallynotJessica@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’m sure billionaires will be funding Democrats hard, which is why we need to treat the party like neo-feudalists from now on. No matter what they say, they cannot be trusted to do anything but further raid the working class. They’re more of a long term enemy than Trump, and we cannot give them an easy time. They will never be saviors, only new masters.

  • mossberg590@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Musk is going to fund Republican candidates in the primaries, non-MAGA Republicans. The idea he would fund Dems is laughable. It will be interesting to see which way the Republicans go, money or MAGA.

  • evenglow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    2 days ago

    Trump doesn’t want to get blamed when Democrats start winning elections. If it happens Musk will gloat for credit and the finger pointers will say Trump should not have pissed off Musk.

  • mercano@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 days ago

    And, since the Supreme Court has ruled money = speech with the Citizens United ruling, Trump has just set Elon up for a First Amendment case if anything happens. One that the taxpayer will likely foot the bill to defend.