Earlier quoted context omitted.
HRC got nearly 3m more votes. That ain't nothing.
But less turnout than Obama. Disastrously less.
Obama preached change, clinton to stay the course. People are so desperate for change they even voted for trump.
Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue
131–140 of 167 posts
Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why didn't Obama do a proper job if it's such an important issue? To be clear, you're trying to blame Obama for something the Republican controlled Congress was responsible for? Obama wasn't a dictator; Congress decides what laws to pass and Congress wasn't exactly in favor of just about anything Obama wanted to do. Also I think you're misunderstanding what Net Neutrality is about. Net Neutrality doesn't say that e…
>To be clear, you're trying to blame Obama for something the Republican controlled Congress was responsible for? No, he's blaming Obama for something the Democrat controlled Congress was responsible for. It was an important enough issue for him to cosponsor a bill while a senator, but while in control they let a bill die without debate.
So I assume you are in support of Net Neutrality? Wouldn’t the correct thing to do in that case be to support politicians that are in favor of it, and oppose politicians that are against it? Obama could have done better, but I am satisfied that he did more than any other president, before or since, to establish Net Neutrality.
I don't think it's productive to assign blame in situations where a politician helped, but didn't help enough by some arbitrary standard, especially in an adversarial political system like ours where the alternative is politicians that actively are trying to cause harm.
Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this a joke? Your pivot to corruption is probably the strongest example of whataboutism I've seen on HN in a while. It has absolutely nothing to do with the OPs point, which is that Republicans are overwhelmingly in favour of removing government regulations in preference to big business, and the Democrats are not. (and do you really believe a Republican president would have been easier on Edward Snowden than Obama…
Case in point, Trump suggests killing the traitor, it's what we used to do in the good old days after all. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jul/2/donald-trump...
and Obama droned a 15 year-old American citizen without due process.
Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue
#134This vote seems like the best chance of maintaining NN at the national level. Congress ultimately directly serve at the pleasure of their constituents, unlike the FCC commissioners. Point being, the time leading up to this vote is probably be the best time to let your congress members know your opinion on NN. Do not let the "failure"[1] of previous efforts to get congress to act in defense of NN dissuade you from fut…
> This vote seems like the best chance of maintaining NN at the national level.
It's got near zero chance of succeeding, but that's not the only point; the point is to make NN a 2018 midterm election issue for Democrats if it fails. (Which, ideally, sets NN up, via regular legislation, for a vote with a more favorable Congress in 2019.)
Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought that was the point the article was positing; it's a symbolic vote to get Republicans on the record for their support of an unpopular position.
I think what people fail to realize is that it's not unpopular enough and not with the right people. For the GOP base, they may disagree wholeheartedly but what are they going to do? Vote for a abortionist gun-grabbing Democrat? For Dems, the best use of these things is barrage the election cycle with negative news about the GOP. Failed policies, bad ideas, myopic leadership. Bad bad bad bad. Suck the energy right ou…
Reducing enthusiasm in the opposing party’s base is a key tactic in US elections, which are won at least as much by turnout of reliable votes as turning swing votes, however much the media prefers the swing voter narrative.
Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think what people fail to realize is that it's not unpopular enough and not with the right people. For the GOP base, they may disagree wholeheartedly but what are they going to do? Vote for a abortionist gun-grabbing Democrat? For Dems, the best use of these things is barrage the election cycle with negative news about the GOP. Failed policies, bad ideas, myopic leadership. Bad bad bad bad. Suck the energy right ou…
You didn't mention the largest voting block, voters who don't strongly identify with either party.
Voters who claim not to strongly identify with either party vote as consistently with one party as voters who do strongly identify with a party, at least, from research I saw several years back.
Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, everyone to the right of Antifa have been told Net Neutrality was disguised legislation to censor conservative opinions. Given how completely Twitter, Facebook, Google, et al censor right-leaning political opinions, and they're big pro-NN orgs, it wasn't a hard sell. Unfortunately, NN has become yet another casualty in these weird post-fact times.
weird post fact times? heres a CMU taught, Cambridge written paper that concludes: "we never had network neutrality in the past, and I do not believe we should engineer for it in the future either." Its the exact condescension and willful ignorance of intelligent opposition in this thread that so characterizes the left. http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~srini/15-744/papers/p49-crowcroft.pdf
We've had net neutrality as official FCC policy with different enforcement mechanisms from 2005 until 2017. Being “CMU taught, Cambridge written” apparently doesn't stop the paper from being blatantly wrong and simple, easily verifiable facts.
Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
>To be clear, you're trying to blame Obama for something the Republican controlled Congress was responsible for? No, he's blaming Obama for something the Democrat controlled Congress was responsible for. It was an important enough issue for him to cosponsor a bill while a senator, but while in control they let a bill die without debate.
So I assume you are in support of Net Neutrality? Wouldn’t the correct thing to do in that case be to support politicians that are in favor of it, and oppose politicians that are against it? Obama could have done better, but I am satisfied that he did more than any other president, before or since, to establish Net Neutrality. I don't think it's productive to assign blame in situations where a politician helped, but…
The correct thing to do is to support politicians who work to ensure net neutrality. That does not describe the Democrats, at best they worked to ensure the courts would decide the fate of net neutrality.
Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why don't Democrats pass NN through congress and get it enshrined into law? Instead of trying to block that from happening, since it's Republicans who are trying to do that. Why was NN so easy to repeal in the first place? Why didn't Obama do a proper job if it's such an important issue? I still don't agree with the accepted wisdom about what NN is in the first place. Seems to me to suggest companies that are using u…
> Instead of trying to block that from happening, since it's Republicans who are trying to do that. They are? Which bills?
The Open Internet Preservation Act (Dec 2017)
https://freedomoutpost.com/open-internet-preservation-act-se...
http://techfreedom.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NN_02_xml....
Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
Case in point, Trump suggests killing the traitor, it's what we used to do in the good old days after all. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jul/2/donald-trump...
and Obama droned a 15 year-old American citizen without due process.
[deleted]