4 ms·

Vote out your Republican rep and vote for Democrats that vocally support Net Neutrality. That is literally the only thing that can be done. This would not be h

Vote out your Republican rep and vote for Democrats that vocally support Net Neutrality. That is literally the only thing that can be done. This would not be happening if Hillary Clinton was President.

programmarchy 9y ago
Neoliberals like Clinton aren't looking out for the consumer either.
- seanmcdirmid 9y ago
  They were very invested in the status quo of net neutrality, regardless of what you think about their sincerity.
  - shmerl 9y ago
    It didn't help, since Republicans made it a point to oppose it out of spite. Overall it became a partisan issue, instead of a normal common cause.
    - DubiousPusher 9y ago
      "a normal common cause" For better or worse, those no longer exist. Everything is politics now.
      - shmerl 9y ago
        Which is why we have such dysfunctional results.
shmerl 9y ago
Not sure if current two party system is geared towards solving such issues altogether. Where is the Pirate Party for example?
- GVIrish 9y ago
  The US election system not geared towards accommodating 3rd (or more) parties in Congress in any kind of numbers that would make a difference. First-past-the-post voting basically ensures a two party result. Might not be the same two parties forever, but 2 parties nonetheless. But really, for this issue it is fairly simple: Republicans are generally against net neutrality, Democrats are for it. There is no way in hell someone like Ajit Pai would have been confirmed as FCC Chairman if Democrats controlled Congress.
  - shmerl 9y ago
    > First-past-the-post voting basically ensures a two party result. Yeah, it would be better if each party got percentage based on percentage of votes.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
vinhboy 9y ago
As far as I am concerned, this is the only answer to the question. The Republican party has always supported ending net neutrality, and they have acted on it every chance they get. Democrats, for all their follies, defend it. It drives me nuts that a lot of techies don't understand this. Abstaining, or side stepping, from politics because of some misguided sense of ideological purity does not help.

programmarchy 9y ago

Neoliberals like Clinton aren't looking out for the consumer either.

seanmcdirmid 9y ago
They were very invested in the status quo of net neutrality, regardless of what you think about their sincerity.
- shmerl 9y ago
  It didn't help, since Republicans made it a point to oppose it out of spite. Overall it became a partisan issue, instead of a normal common cause.
  - DubiousPusher 9y ago
    "a normal common cause" For better or worse, those no longer exist. Everything is politics now.
    - shmerl 9y ago
      Which is why we have such dysfunctional results.

shmerl 9y ago

Not sure if current two party system is geared towards solving such issues altogether. Where is the Pirate Party for example?

GVIrish 9y ago
The US election system not geared towards accommodating 3rd (or more) parties in Congress in any kind of numbers that would make a difference. First-past-the-post voting basically ensures a two party result. Might not be the same two parties forever, but 2 parties nonetheless. But really, for this issue it is fairly simple: Republicans are generally against net neutrality, Democrats are for it. There is no way in hell someone like Ajit Pai would have been confirmed as FCC Chairman if Democrats controlled Congress.
- shmerl 9y ago
  > First-past-the-post voting basically ensures a two party result. Yeah, it would be better if each party got percentage based on percentage of votes.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]

vinhboy 9y ago

As far as I am concerned, this is the only answer to the question. The Republican party has always supported ending net neutrality, and they have acted on it every chance they get. Democrats, for all their follies, defend it. It drives me nuts that a lot of techies don't understand this. Abstaining, or side stepping, from politics because of some misguided sense of ideological purity does not help.