4 ms·

How can you cross reference and double check if only one side is presented and the internet is the main means by which one double checks? This is the conundrum

How can you cross reference and double check if only one side is presented and the internet is the main means by which one double checks? This is the conundrum I haven't figured out.

wizzwizz4 5y ago
Go to the library. (Hopefully you still have one.)
- iammisc 5y ago
  No the democrats shut mine down and are taxing us for them anyway
  - wizzwizz4 5y ago
    Can you write to your local representative?
    - iammisc 5y ago
      After several calls with my Oregon house representative, she no longer responds to my e-mails or calls. Can't contact her via social media because I've been blocked there. I've thought about going to her office but those are closed down too. Of course, if you just block constituents you can just ... do nothing and in Oregon, you'll be re-elected because there's a big D next to your name. Of course, there's also no non-D candidate running, because it's a one party state. I imagine this is what it must be like to vote in North Korea. Oregon law mandates that one must run under the purview of a political party. Forming a party requires a large set of requirements that means only the democrats can run in many places because there's simply not enough of an opposition to form a cohesive opposition. This prevents independent candidates from running. There is no incentive for my representatives to change the status quo. Eventually, I'm guessing I'll vote with my feet, but I don't understand why I should have to move to an area in which the GOP runs unopposed in order to experience the 'other' side. I mean... it's not like the GOP is perfect and a uni-party GOP jurisdiction would be much better. What I want is actual politics with people competing for my vote, instead of people who assume they'll get it.
sp332 5y ago
"The internet"? It's just YouTube. He's a senator, he has one of the biggest and most un-cancelable platforms in the world.
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  That doesn't justify selectively banning him at all. We could agree if we ban everyone with a political mandate perhaps. Fair and square. Wouldn't support it intrinsically, but at least we could rid of these weasel excuses for why such measures are allegedly justified.
- iammisc 5y ago
  What platform is that?
  - sp332 5y ago
    They can call a press conference whenever they want and get national news coverage. They can write down anything they want and hand it to the clerk for inclusion in the Congressional Record. They have email and physical mailing lists. The CAN-SPAM act doesn't cover political calls or texts, either.
gunapologist99 5y ago
> only one side is presented and the internet Wait, only one side is presented ... on the internet? I must be misunderstanding you. Unless you're being snarky, or referring to the Internet 'as controlled by google/youtube', and the fact that they're cancelling everyone that disagrees with them.

How can you cross reference and double check if only one side is presented and the internet is the main means by which one double checks? This is the conundrum I haven't figured out.

wizzwizz4 5y ago

Go to the library. (Hopefully you still have one.)

iammisc 5y ago
No the democrats shut mine down and are taxing us for them anyway
- wizzwizz4 5y ago
  Can you write to your local representative?
  - iammisc 5y ago
    After several calls with my Oregon house representative, she no longer responds to my e-mails or calls. Can't contact her via social media because I've been blocked there. I've thought about going to her office but those are closed down too. Of course, if you just block constituents you can just ... do nothing and in Oregon, you'll be re-elected because there's a big D next to your name. Of course, there's also no non-D candidate running, because it's a one party state. I imagine this is what it must be like to vote in North Korea. Oregon law mandates that one must run under the purview of a political party. Forming a party requires a large set of requirements that means only the democrats can run in many places because there's simply not enough of an opposition to form a cohesive opposition. This prevents independent candidates from running. There is no incentive for my representatives to change the status quo. Eventually, I'm guessing I'll vote with my feet, but I don't understand why I should have to move to an area in which the GOP runs unopposed in order to experience the 'other' side. I mean... it's not like the GOP is perfect and a uni-party GOP jurisdiction would be much better. What I want is actual politics with people competing for my vote, instead of people who assume they'll get it.

sp332 5y ago

"The internet"? It's just YouTube. He's a senator, he has one of the biggest and most un-cancelable platforms in the world.

raxxorrax 5y ago
That doesn't justify selectively banning him at all. We could agree if we ban everyone with a political mandate perhaps. Fair and square. Wouldn't support it intrinsically, but at least we could rid of these weasel excuses for why such measures are allegedly justified.
iammisc 5y ago
What platform is that?
- sp332 5y ago
  They can call a press conference whenever they want and get national news coverage. They can write down anything they want and hand it to the clerk for inclusion in the Congressional Record. They have email and physical mailing lists. The CAN-SPAM act doesn't cover political calls or texts, either.

gunapologist99 5y ago

> only one side is presented and the internet Wait, only one side is presented ... on the internet? I must be misunderstanding you. Unless you're being snarky, or referring to the Internet 'as controlled by google/youtube', and the fact that they're cancelling everyone that disagrees with them.