So Zuckerberg Helped Biden Win the Election

So Zuckerberg Helped Biden Win the Election

A New Controversy Hits the President of the United States Joe Biden. According to an analysis by the New York Post, a conservative newspaper controlled by entrepreneur Rupert Murdoch, Mark Zuckerberg He would have paid an amount of $419 million to some non-profit organizations to influence the presidential vote.

Story

guardian of Facebook Ended up in the lens of the New York Post. Journalistic investigation alleges that influenced the presidential vote of 2020 in favor of Joe Biden Against Donald Trump in the race for the White House.

In particular, it is through Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, an organization led by Mark Zuckerberg’s wife Priscilla Chan, that money was paid to two nonprofits: according to the NYP, Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL) and Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR) amount will be received 419 million dollars by a company controlled by the Zuckerberg family.

By doing so, both organizations would have made the presidential vote conditional, increasing the consensus gap of major states such as Joe Biden, such as Georgia I L’Arizona; Where actually both the opponents fought till the last vote. In Georgia and Arizona, the DEM candidate won by 12,000 and 10,000 votes, respectively.

NS Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL) and Center for election innovation and research (CEIR), are two non-profit organizations that aim to facilitate the democratic alternative process.

CTCL is exclusively a group of citizen professionals, electoral and administrative experts, researchers and data experts working to promote a more informed and engaged democracy and help modernize American elections.

See also  Armenian, Azerbaijani trade accuses of breach of peace agreement

With funds from the Zuckerberg family, they would have infiltrated people close to Democrats in electoral offices, promoting practices such as voting by mail, which Favorite Vote for Joe Biden.

Party Financing System in the United States

Before Bush’s arrival in 2000, the practice of party funding was largely advertising. public privilege, was a form of public funding for the parties: Ronald Reagan He used purely as such. The case may arise from financing, so to speak, not strictly regulated, lobbies and/or carried out by private individuals, but in legal practice, public financing was the norm.

with him George Bush’s rise to power At the White House in the 2000s things started to change. George Bush decided to start a general fundraiser, with the first contribution sent by the so-calledsmall donors“: A small voluntary contribution made by citizens.

Bush surrounded himself with the first pioneers, hired theorists in the development of this financial technology that was based on the development of an internal network in the country.

Together Barack Obama Things definitely changed. Obama refused the money received from public funding and opted for a fundraising bell via the Internet: Taxpayers could pay the money using the Web.

but it is a Supreme Court’s decision 2010 American regarding the case Citizen United One who approved private financing: This sentence allowed the use, in addition to pac, I Super Pac without worrying about spending limits; There was no further funding limit.

What are PACs?

I political action committee They are committees created to raise funds for the then finances and try to elect a political candidate.

See also  About one lakh Russian soldiers are ready to jump from the border of Ukraine

Many pac They represent money held together by interest groups and stakeholders who, through the outlay of funds, attempt to influence electoral processes based on their own interests, economic or ideological.

each pac After that it should be registered FEC (Federal Election Committee), the institutional body that registers the committee and ensures transparency under the federal law on funding for politics.

Am I Super Pac?

After the 2010 Supreme Court decision, i super pac, i.e. PACs that do not contribute directly to candidates or parties.

However, they do spend freelancing by posting announcements or by sending mail or communicating in other ways with messages that specifically support the election or defeat of a specific candidate. There is no time limit or restrictions on the sources of funds that may be used for these expenses.

zuckerberg They seem to have used these methods to influence the presidential vote. It is not said that the work of zuckerberg Both should be classified as crimes, at least in form, but it is certain that private individuals play a leading role in elections in America.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here