I live in arguably the most liberal borough in one of the most liberal cities in the country and I have never heard a single solitary person make that argument. Ever.
According to conservatives private corporations have first amendment rights and therefore yes, as per the Supreme Court big tech companies must be permitted to promote/muzzle whoever they want. Now if you want to revisit that precedent I'm all on board, but that means appointing a lot more liberal justices to the Supreme Court.
You guys fought for the ability of tech companies to do exactly this for years - you made your bed, I'm sorry if you sleep badly in it. Democrats tried to warn you of the dangers of excessive corporate power but you guys thought it would be fine because the corporations would use it to help you.
Yeah I read a lot of progressive stuff, follow a lot of progressives, and my friends and all the girls I date are progressive - not one wants non-citizens to vote. It's just an imaginary bogeyman created by right wing lunatic media and these morons eat it up like candy.
To think that someone who serves their time for a felony should never be able to vote again is also a sick twisted way of thinking. You serve your time you should have every right to vote again.
I get it that they are trying to federalize the elections, but it will be challenged, due to the constitution. The constitution specifically lays out that how the elections are run is to be determined by state legislatures. I don't have a problem with a standard. I do have a problem with opening the door to being loose on who can vote, like illegal aliens, convicted felons who have not completed the terms of their punishment, minors and other ineligible people.
The fox provides for himself, but God provides for the lion. - William BlakeHow do you feel about Fox News influencing elections?
Personally, I think that currently incarcerated individuals should have every right to vote that other citizens have. It would encourage them to be conscientious citizens. What more can you want of them? It would benefit everybody.Yeah I read a lot of progressive stuff, follow a lot of progressives, and my friends and all the girls I date are progressive - not one wants non-citizens to vote. It's just an imaginary bogeyman created by right wing lunatic media and these morons eat it up like candy.
To think that someone who serves their time for a felony should never be able to vote again is also a sick twisted way of thinking. You serve your time you should have every right to vote again.
Not only that, but it is ironic that you lose your right to have a say in the very people who control your fate. Reminds me of a certain scenario where 18 year olds were compelled to fight and die but had no say who their commander in chief was... 🤔Personally, I think that currently incarcerated individuals should have every right to vote that other citizens have. It would encourage them to be conscientious citizens. What more can you want of them? It would benefit everybody.
Strongly agree. Morally the right thing, but tactically the very wrong thing. The stakes are too high, cut out everything but the essentials.I agree that those incarcerated should have the right to vote, but I don't want it in this bill. I don't want anything in there to give the repugs a "populist" argument against the bill. I don't want them to be able to argue that the bill gives people like Ted Bundy the right to vote. The arguments for it make sense, but typical voters respond to those kinds of emotional appeals. This bill is too important to jeopardize by giving them any sort of argument in opposition that might resonate with voters.
First of all, Tucker Carlson doesn't count as a talking head. He is sheer Joseph Goebbels.Yea, not yet...
I've heard some talking heads along the way who think anyone who can get a vote in should be legit. My very liberal sister is one of those, as well as a bunch of my family.
How do you feel about big tech being able to influence elections? Should they be able to promote some candidates, while muzzling those who are not of their ideology? A professor conducted a study and came to the conclusion that Google can cause a vote impact in the millions. He testified before congress and he is a Democrat and Hillary supporter.
First of all, Tucker Carlson doesn't count as a talking head. He is sheer Joseph Goebbels.
What in HR-1 will allow big tech to influence election more then they already do?
It was far worse than that. Faux news influenced the president. Faux news was in control of the narrative far more often than the orange monkey in control and then they parrottedHow do you feel about Fox News influencing elections?
It was far worse than that. Faux news influenced the president. Faux news was in control of the narrative far more often than the orange monkey in control and then they parrotted
chusing?
On Monday, the Georgia state House passed a bill brazenly attempting to deter Black voters. The bill proposed to scale back Sunday voting — taking direct aim at the longtime “Souls to the Polls” tradition in which Black voters cast their ballots after church on Sundays. The bill also would increase voter I.D. requirements — known to disenfranchise Black voters disproportionately — and even would make it illegal to serve food or drinks to voters waiting in long lines outside polling places; lines are typically longer at minority precincts.
Come on dude, people on the right say they are marginalized in this forum but whenever specific questions are asked of you it's met with silence.I get it that they are trying to federalize the elections, but it will be challenged, due to the constitution. The constitution specifically lays out that how the elections are run is to be determined by state legislatures. I don't have a problem with a standard. I do have a problem with opening the door to being loose on who can vote, like illegal aliens, convicted felons who have not completed the terms of their punishment, minors and other ineligible people.
This one is particularly odious. They purposefully create conditions where people have to wait a super long time to vote and are then trying to criminalize any efforts to make that waiting less terrible.Here we go again. This is the very kind of state legislation which will not be allowed if HR1 is passed.
I'll be darned.Hey, it was a long time ago, so what can you do?
Blocking liars, false and manipulated facts, and conspiracy theories is not siding with anyone, and has nothing to do with siding or banning anyone's ideology. It's funny, you want to argue about who influences elections while ignoring the truth, but have no issues with the same influencing the very laws that are created, and have no issues with that. Then you have the likes of Fox News manipulating shit, yet you are okay with that, because it supports your bullshit false narrative. You want to talk about political ideologies. Start with the truth and the facts first.Yea, not yet...
I've heard some talking heads along the way who think anyone who can get a vote in should be legit. My very liberal sister is one of those, as well as a bunch of my family.
How do you feel about big tech being able to influence elections? Should they be able to promote some candidates, while muzzling those who are not of their ideology? A professor conducted a study and came to the conclusion that Google can cause a vote impact in the millions. He testified before congress and he is a Democrat and Hillary supporter.
That's where Twump got the line "the cure can't be worse than the disease." Which he continued to parrot and spread to conservatards. These people had no sense of the dynamics of our predicament.It was far worse than that. Faux news influenced the president. Faux news was in control of the narrative far more often than the orange monkey in control and then they parrotted
I agree for the most part, but Manchin's push for only $300 per week for unemployment instead of $400 per week may be a good thing because the $300 per week deal also makes the first $10,200 of unemployment tax exempt up to household income of $150k. Depending on your income level and tax bracket, that alone can save you as much as $2440 in taxes. Even if you are in the low end 10% tax bracket, that is $1002 you save in taxes. For the most part and for most states, that makes all of their unemployment tax exempt. Even where I live, Washington state, which has one of the highest unemployment payouts in the nation ($794 per week before the $300), that is nearly 10 weeks of tax exempt unemployment. Hell, I had to go on unemployment for 10 days in Oct 2020. cost me $250 in taxes, just to give a little insight for those that don't have a clue on how much that exemption means.Sinema turned out to be a dumb POS. Her and Manchin just fucking suck.