4 ms·
You're probably right, had I probed enough I probably could have found policy they disagreed with. But on surveillance/national security stuff, the self-identi
by jnbiche 10y ago
You're probably right, had I probed enough I probably could have found policy they disagreed with. But on surveillance/national security stuff, the self-identified Democrats I know have stood staunchly behind Obama, and view Snowden as a traitor. It's kind of odd how much like most Republicans they sound when talking about these issues (not counting pro-liberty Republicans like Rand Paul, who view these issues like a libertarian would).
- dogma1138 10y agoBeing against surveillance and considering Snowden a traitor are not mutually exclusive; one can be pro-privacy and liberty and still think of him as a traitor for seeking refuge in Russia and for having a deadman switch for example.
- JBlue42 10y agoI'm not disagreeing but I think it can also be hard to trace it back and be absolutely 100% on this. If Snowden hadn't committed the activities he did and revealed more information about the scope and breadth of the surveillance state, would that be good or bad? Did those activities help affirm your stance on surveillance? If so, can we truly consider them traitorous (outside of a legal standpoint)? Now, you folks are probably far better at logic puzzles than but as someone that fits the bill of pro-privacy and liberty and still questioning how to classify him, I'm open to other ways of arguing for or against.