These "single issue donors" are the most morally corrupt. I can understand someone who genuinely believes in the cause, even if that cause is disgusting. But this guy...this guy knows that the things happening are wrong, and he doesn't care as long as he gets what he wants from this administration.

These people should be made social pariahs.

▲

scottyah 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Do you condone all actions made by all people claiming to be part of your party? We're all told that we must pick the "lesser evil", and if you truly believe that one particular issue is more important than the rest, is it not your moral obligation to pursue that?

	▲	refulgentis 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I'm confused about what are you asking (404 CAFFEINE_MISSING), and it helped me to reframe in terms of what the parent and grandparent write. My reframe was, "If you're a Dem, don't you think Brockman should donate $25M to Trump, because I'm told I have to vote Dem if I don't like GOP, because Dems are the lesser evil, thus, Dems believe it is okay to support evil if it is in your self-interest?" Assuming that, then turning back to theory, "Lesser evil" is a constraint on imperfect choices, not a moral voucher that turns any tactic into virtue. If you can justify writing a $25M check to someone you think is dangerous because it helps your side, then your issue was never "good vs. bad" - it was "my team wins," and you’re just shopping for a cleaner-sounding label.

▲

jacquesm 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You can pretty much lump all of the billionaire bootlickers in the same category. Almost none of them have any ethics, whilst of course proclaiming the opposite.

	▲	joquarky 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's like the old Sim City game where you can cheat in unlimited funds. This causes you to get bored and suddenly the disaster menu starts to become interesting.