It's also legal to give someone money after the fact for a job well done, and it's definitely not a bribe.

Well he did make it so tha tnothing he does in office is illegal, even if it’s illegal.

In many countries it is legal to promise a tax rebate when you are in office. Many cons (oops, I mean conservatives) use this as voting bait for people with no critical thinking skills, and then turn around and give their corporate masters and billionaires huge tax cuts that make those same voters loose critical services that makw them pay out of pocket.

In other words, "Heres $200 to vote for me so i can make your life way more expensive on a yearly basis through medical care, less regulation, less infrastructure repair".

This is the same grift, but more blatant and obviously something that would never get fulfilled, which is why the number is so big. Bigger numbers make critical thinking fail harder, especially when times are economically tough. It tends to get cons reelected even when they are not doing well in polls, speaking from the Canadian experience in this.

Step 1: Have money.

Step 2: Rape children (and adults).

Step 3: Put an "R" next to your name.

Congrats, you are now immune from consequences.

Law means nothing in a coup

They won't even let you stand outside a polling place and hand out water bottles to people waiting in line.

The law only matters to us poor folks. It isn't applied to the rich.

If no one prosecuted you for it, it might as well be.

Technically, the equivalent would be you standing outside a polling place with a sign saying “I will give every adult in the area $500 if Candidate X wins”.

Ostensibly, you could just be lying (just like Trump) - and that would probably be covered under your 1st Amendment rights.

It’s stupid, but there is enough of a disconnect between action and reward that it might skirt past.

Welcome to America

It's very different. One is "I will give YOU money if you vote for me" and the other is "I will give EVERYONE money if I win". The main difference is that one is not discriminating against who people voted for. The first is buying votes, the second is a campaign similar to "I will retroactively lower taxes for this year if I win", which I don't think anyone would see as problematic but it's exactly the same outcome as the one you're finding problem with, i.e. give people money.

It's a stupid campaign because anyone with half a brain understand that he's not going to do it and that that money would have to come from someplace else, but it's still a campaign promise similar to any other promise politicians make to ask you to vote for them.

do you have supreme court immunity?