Politics should not be something that trends.

Nov 22, 2017 2:51 PM

SaxonsNowRedux

Views

243261

Likes

9057

Dislikes

311

Dont get me wrong. Its great that so many people care about this. But politicians are smart. They know that the minute after the vote in december...this issue will be non existent and people will go back to their starbucks and kardashians and etc. They dont fear the people because they know that politics is only a fad to a lot of us. What is anyone gonna do if net neutrality gets shitcanned? Make sure to vote out these scumbag senators that didnt support the peoples interest? Nah. Theyll complain about it on the internet...make some cool memes...then move on to the next trendy thing to go up in arms about.

Blah. Thats all i have to say about it.

I'm in a red state fighting the good fight to turn it blue. I could have given up and moved up north, but I stayed here.We're doing our best

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

Why I want to bang my head against a wall everytime I hear I don't vote because it doesn't matter anyway.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

An internet site isn't the "entire country"...

8 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 2

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Voters often feel fatigue. Don’t give in keep voting

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Stop bit ching and do something. Vote, get involved.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Entire country isn't banding together for jack. Don't be delusional. If 5% of the populace knows what's going on, that's massive.

8 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 0

Most run unopposed. Get out there and do your thing.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Name a SINGLE candidate who agrees with me on every issue, and I'll respond with "I wasn't aware I was running"

8 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 3

It's simply not bad enough yet. We're going to have to hand corporations more power until voters wake up and elect people to gut them.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Thanks you!! Everyone vote these jerks out

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Murder the Government!

8 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 5

obligatory cynical VOTES ARE RIGGED AND BOUGHT

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Maybe just maybe, we could you know.. Recall all of them and send new people. Then maybe just maybe force term limits.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Everbyody is coming together? The only things I've seen about net neutrality, is on imgur.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

So you only view / read Imgur?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I follow plenty on mobile. No TV.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Probably because most media is owned by large ISPs who would just as soon not talk about it at all.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Because people think ranting on the internet is better than FUCKING GOING AND VOTE. If you are not voting YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.

8 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

That's the trick. Most people (including those that populate this site) won't do shit. That's why United didn't worry. That's why EA wont

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

worry. And certainly the Congressmen won't worry. Honestly, half this site thinks it's cool that they can't even do well in school or

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

succeed in basic social situations. If you can't succeed in the most basic facets of life, how do you expect to get what you want? If

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

The problem is that the people who care about these things are not the people who vote. FUCKING VOTE DIPSHITS.

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

The entire country isn't banding together for this. Most of the country is either ignorant or doesn't care.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

You realize you can vote for what people say but can’t control what they do.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Yeah that's what I don't get. Unless elections are rigged why keep voting for asshats that destroy functional government and make life hard?

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

"Deregulation!" "free market!" That's what many voted for and they are getting that illusion now. On the other hand, could it be plutocracy?

8 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 3

It would be fine if the telecoms didn't operate under legal Monopolies. Lack of competition is what wrecks this.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Yes, this would be more in line with the free market. But we have a poor history when it comes to the free market and infrastructure.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The problem is there are some things that probably shouldnt be free market. Internet is a necesary utility at this point.

8 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 2

ISPs were granted utility status which meant a regulated monopoly. This was in trade for building infrastructure. (part 1)

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Perhaps we need the infrastructure in government hands and the service part can be private. Open competition that way. (part 2)

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But look at our highways, we have not continues to invest, so this has problems too. Maybe Starlink will help (part 3, end)

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

We are not voting at all, which makes it bad. Its just the same few people reelecting them.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

It doesn't help when the representatives listen to who bought them out instead of the people that elected them.

8 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 1

And this is NEVER going to change UNTIL we remove money from politics. Nobody and no corporation should EVER be allowed to buy influence.

8 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 0

"Okay or, hear me out, or we could remove the limit on corporate campaign donations. Yeah, let's do that." - SCOTUS in 2010

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

We're going to have to have a little chat about this, ladies and gentlemen...

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The FCC are appointed bureaucrats not politicians. They don't care about reelection.

8 years ago | Likes 378 Dislikes 19

They're appointed by politicians who do.

8 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

Why are people upvoting this nonsense? Trump is the reason the FCC is headed by who it is. And Republicans in Congress back it.

8 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 5

It is ALL traced to elected Republicans. We can put EA to the fire, but nobody wants to put Republicans to it?

8 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 4

But, but, but... SJW's support Hillary! MRA! BLM! Which would you rather have, net neutrality, or a president who says it's OK to be white?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Hopefully all this will make people more aware of the dangers poised by unwatched purely bureaucratic administrations like the FCC/ATF/EPA.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Seemed to be working fine before. This seems more like a cautionary tale about rampant deregulation.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Actually this same kind of issue has popped up in the ATF especially repeatedly over the years. We do need deregulation that is (1)

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

undeniable however as seen here with the FCC it has to be controlled otherwise you hit something structurally essential. (2/2)

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This I can agree with. As I said, "rampant" deregulation is a problem. More oversight and more neutral parties need to be involved.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

If we voted out politicians the ones that stayed would hopefully work harder and interface with the ftc...ie do their job!

8 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

Ironically, the opposite happened: after voters kicked out establishment politicians in 2010, we got the least productive Congress ever

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Appointed by who?

8 years ago | Likes 85 Dislikes 1

FCC commissioners are appointed by the POTUS to 5 year terms. Ajit Painted was appointed By Pres Obama, Pres Trump elevated him to Chairman.

8 years ago | Likes 69 Dislikes 0

Only because the old chairman resigned in a huge wave of resignations during trumps election and his push on the fcc the be more relaxed

8 years ago | Likes 39 Dislikes 2

It is customary for the current chairman to resign when a new president is elected.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 3

Correction, his term would end next year. So 2 years early

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

They have 5 year terms... He resigned a year early

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Whom

8 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

I'm an ass.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Thank you proud protector of English. You have my up vote.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The senate.

8 years ago | Likes 46 Dislikes 10

appointed by the President, confirmed by the Senate

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Not the President?

8 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 4

President appoints the chairman of the FCC. Obama appointed the current d-bag and trump just kept him in position.

8 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 14

Obama put the cunt in the commission because he had to put a Rep there and Mitch Turtle nagged him, Trump made the cunt chairman.

8 years ago | Likes 37 Dislikes 9

Nope. Obama put him IN the FCC because he had to put a Republican in. Trump made him chairman.

8 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 4

"It's the Democrats' fault that the Republicans are screwing us!"

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I am the senate.

8 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 1

Found it

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Not. Yet.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

We could always revolt.

8 years ago | Likes 580 Dislikes 14

Please can we?! I don't want to go back to work Monday if the revolt can happen before, that would be great!

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

Americans have enough guns to do it

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

They trying to take them though. So not for long. Then we'll really be fucked.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

v

8 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 2

I’m game

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

Sir! The peasants are revolting!

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

"They can't do that! We blocked that! Have they even paid for their premium packages?!"

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

I dont think throwing the tea in the harbour is going to work this time.

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

At least we can spell it as “harbor” now, so it was worth it, British person.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

...but why would you want to spell it wrong? :p

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

@Zigor22 I’ve found you a kindred spirit.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I can't find what I said for which you responded to.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I had to dig for it, BUT—waging war on the country.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No link?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

How about we use the system the way it was designed and vote these asses out of office? Less bloodshed (which is kinda the whole point).

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

I’m down.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They would then repeal the 3rd Amendment.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Technically speaking, we the people can institute a constitutional convention w/o Congress. The hard part is getting 2/3 of states on board.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

IT'S TIME

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

If we can't even get people to vote, how will we get people to fight? Revolts won't happen.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Been a while since the last good old fashion revolt.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Hit me up if you wanna plan something. Probably time for a change the way things are going

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

GLHF with that.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

yeah, just make sure to print out enough pamphlets.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I've been telling people this since November. Apparently I'm 'wrong' and 'immoral' and a 'war crime'.

8 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 4

Not a bad idea to take to the streets.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

We did...twice...this is the outcome.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

How about we try the voting thing first. It's a lot less fucking bloody.

8 years ago | Likes 34 Dislikes 5

Voting got us where we are now?????

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That's boring, and obviously doesn't do shit. Ajit Pai's head needs to be put on a pike.

8 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 6

I hope you lot are just joking and not actually this retarded & trigger-happy.PEOPLE put these politicians in.It'd be civil war,not a revolt

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Death and destruction and ruining lives is exciting. Stability is boring. The daily maintenance of good governance SHOULD be boring.

8 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 1

We don't HAVE good governance. There's nothing to maintain. An oil change doesn't fix a broken engine.

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 3

If only there was a mechanism for peacefully replacing the parts. Oh, yeah, there is.

8 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 2

Hasn't been working. I think it's time.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Like we have for the last 290 years?

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

That is a revolting idea.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Guy Fawkes would approve.

8 years ago | Likes 113 Dislikes 7

Its funny how the UK has a day of commemoration for an attack that didn't even end up happening.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

You said "Guy Fawkes" but my brain showed me guy fieri

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

That's not guy Fawkes

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Remember remember

8 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 1

To dupe legal tender

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

The fifth of November

8 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 1

Think that date already passed this time around.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

The gunpowder treason and plot.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You’re far too comfortable for that to happen and they know it.

8 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 2

that sounds like too much work tho

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

ah yes, the good ole gender wage gap. a fine example of how statistics can be bent any way to confirm biases

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

we need a fucking revolution

8 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 5

Yeah, in your fucking heads. A revolution in culture, so people stop being so selfish and uneducated.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I'd say a lot of us are pretty revolting.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

We could start voting more. Only 43% of the 18-24 demographics voted in the last election and 54.3% total. Old uneducated people vote more

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Those that don’t vote are largely anarchists who would prefer no government. Not the majority, but a lot of them.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

Well they're retarded and part of the problem too.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

If non voters are responsible for government stupidity, then we are all responsible for the actions of every group we don’t support....

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

You think you're not stupid and the government is? Reality check- you're a fucking idiot, and frankly people like you deserve this shit. 2/2

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Holy shit the retardation never ceases. If they had voted the outcome could have been different, therefore yes they are responsible. 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

THIS.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You mean, put that 2nd Amendment to use?

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I don't think the american people would revolt over anything anymore. They have their marches, protests, etc... but all in all no actual...

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

"let's halt the country or really fuck shit up or even let's kick every member of congress/senators or whoever out of the office"

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Be careful out there mate, you might be watched

8 years ago | Likes 105 Dislikes 3

Good, retards like him should be watched.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Plot twist: poster is from a different continent from North America.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

*from Russia*

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Fortunately monitoring someone and stopping a revolt are two very different things.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You're already being watched.

8 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

The FCC is part of the executive. Literally the last president protected net neutrality.

8 years ago | Likes 169 Dislikes 7

[deleted]

[deleted]

8 years ago (deleted Nov 23, 2017 6:04 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

The president has control over appointments to federal agencies, so if the president appoints a stooge...

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

8 years ago (deleted Nov 23, 2017 6:04 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Ok

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yep. This is not a "both sides" thing. One party consistently for, one party against. Vote for the GOP, you get what you fucking asked for.

8 years ago | Likes 114 Dislikes 10

I'm always amazed how people who vote right-wing get upset when right-wing politicians do things they don't like.. Play stupid games, (1/2)

8 years ago | Likes 36 Dislikes 3

win stupid prizes (2/2)

8 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 2

I was going to upvote your comments until the"play stupid games" comment I've heard way to much. Focus on the lies, not the misled.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 4

So when Comcast (you know, owner of NBC) makes Trump voters pay twice as for a 'MURICA BUNDLE (needed to see FOX) I'll get my quantum violin

8 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 5

Honestly, this scenario would probably be the only way to get through to any conservative voters who don't regularly use the internet.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Most likely that will be the only free channel

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

Not possible to vote for candidate who values everything you do. If candidate is against 1 thing you like but for 15 others you value...

8 years ago | Likes 166 Dislikes 11

[deleted]

[deleted]

8 years ago (deleted Nov 22, 2017 6:44 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

And more often it's about picking the person with the least number of things you detest. Our selections are made defensively. It's sad.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Then throw your hat on the next elections. Who said there can only be Democrats or Republicans on the ballot?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Senators are supposed to represent the people. Not the other way around.

8 years ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 5

They do represent the people. In Alabama, it’s a choice between someone who prosecuted the KKK and a child molester. It’s a close race.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Preach!

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'd rather have a candidate who is guaranteed to vote for the stuff most important to me, even if it's only 40% of the time.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 3

I don't think you understand how guarantees work.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I mean, the 40% is the stuff most important to me (IE choice, voting rights). The other 60% are issues I disagree with but aren't critical.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Yep, this is the shitty part about having such drastic party lines...

8 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 2

No it isn't. Why should you have a candidate that agrees with you 100% when they represent millions of people with their own opinions?

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

More likely, candidate A is against 9 things you like and B is against 10.

8 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 4

Not really, unless you're wildly inconsistent with your beliefs.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 5

It would help if America wasn't a de-facto two party system because of FPTP elections. More parties = broader spectrum of ideologies.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I just want more politicians that are for helping the average person.. Not the businesses and insainly rich. Is that too much to ask?

8 years ago | Likes 80 Dislikes 5

Then did you vote for the candidate who's charity foundation has given out AIDs medication to over 9 million people.

8 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 3

A lot of people see "helping the average person" differently than you do. Hence the issue.

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

This is true. But it isn't too hard to tell the average Joe wants a free internet, affordable Healthcare, ect.. Yet here we are!

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Lots of people not on Internet communities don't give a fuck; plus, lots of poor people vote against affordable healthcare. Not clear cut!

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

I can agree it gets incredibly complicated quickly. And politicians do well at mudding the water and confusing people too.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

don't be naive truly selfless people don't exist, human brains simply aren't wired like that.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

That's a challenge to be better, not an excuse for laziness.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Indeed, however "better" is subjective. some might say become cyborgs is better while some would rather cling to tradition for example.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Three down votes for wanting average people to be helped. Kind of strange.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

A candidate won't even become a candidate without already having helped one or both of those

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Yes.

8 years ago | Likes 88 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 40 Dislikes 0

This is why voting in primaries is important. Don't pick the guy that's perfect for you, pick the pretty good guy who can beat the guy 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

This is called strategic voting and results in worse results for everyone overall.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

They can't be worse for everyone.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You have subverted your own choice in an attempt to keep the worst from winning but you're pretty much forced to do so by our voting system.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It's called compromise, and it is sorely needed. My vote isn't just for my representative, it's for the whole district.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

We tried doing that in the presidential primaries but it turns out that delegates and super delegates do the actual voting, 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Why is everyone so hung up on presidential elections? They're not everything.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Can't account for everyone here, but I was using the 2016 primaries as an example of how rigged the system is. Can you honestly say 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Candidate how worried are they going to be about primaries that draw less publicity? fin

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You know who ran in the last congressional primaries? If the party feels like they can get away with essentially choosing a presidential 2/?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You have access to the internet. Its not hard to find your Reps. They do far more damage to the internet than the national level too.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Like, what state are you in? I can give you a run down of al lthe candidates in swing districts.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I work on Congressional campaigns. Have for 6 years. Yes I know who is in all the primaries in my state.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The same way that the electoral college does the actual voting in the election. Except the super delegates' can vote for whoever they want.2

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

who is absolutely fucking awful in the general election 2/2

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

The people who are fighting to protect NN aren't the ones electing conservatives. They're typically packed into liberal districts.

8 years ago | Likes 95 Dislikes 24

True.I'm from Kansas and I know a bunch of people here voted for trump because erk a der and then never pay attention to anything politics 1

8 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 7

And that is why you moronic asshat. Fuck you

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Ever again they "are too busy living and working." 2

8 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 3

its weird I was raised republican but as I age I keep agreeing with a lot of liberal platforms. the only thing I disagree on is gun control.

8 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 1

Same. And I was raised in SF. So I had crazy right opinions and crazy left thrown at me. I have a more moderate opinion on gun control tho.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Younger people typically have more to gain from liberal policies because they begin adulthood with little personal income or savings.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

they're used and treated in rural vs. urban areas, and the types of guns people encounter in the two locations. 2/2

8 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

What specific Democratic Congressperson has introduced gun control legislation you disagree with? What about it do you disagree with?

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

As a liberal, the right to guns isn't an issue, the fanatism is.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

The liberals right now are the more reasonable party in most ways. Part of the issue with guns is that there's a big divide between how 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 3

Mostly because you're still young, I'd guess. The world has developed quickly recently, and so it's hard to agree with old republican ideas.

8 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 5

The world is changing very quickly. And I think thats where a majority of the huge divide comes from. People don't adapt easily.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Old ideas are fine, for the most part. New ones are terrifying. R's used to be pro-environment, pro-science, and not anti-government.

8 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

Where or when did it go so wrong?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Starts with the Southern Strategy, bolstered by Newt Gingrich's co-horts, then the Tea Party solidified it into what it is now.

8 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

I'm 28. usually you get more conservative as you age. not the other way around. to be fair my parents weren't hardcore republicans and 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

You don't get more conservative, Others get more liberal so comparatively you become "conservative"

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

were pretty open minded people who volunteered at church and loved helping people.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

That sounds good! Honestly, being a good person matters more than any party affiliation, and I want to hope voters keep that in mind.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I'm a conservative and support Net Neutrality and I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would want to get rid of it

8 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 2

They don't know what it is.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Rich conservatives would profit from it, and poor conservatives love voting against their own interests if it'll piss off liberals.

8 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 4

The problem is that it *does* stifle innovation at the ISP level, but it's what allows innovation for every other internet-based-industry.

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 5

Innovation and competition happens in emerging industries. Everything becomes an oligarchy eventually. That's why early comp era was great

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Innovation and competition happen in all industries, even old ones. It might not appear as much from the outside, I suppose.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Very minimal. Most happen in other industries that get carried over. Driverless cars, less about cars, more about computers.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 34 Dislikes 0

...aaaaaannnnd there’s the answer

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

If anyone bothers to think about it though they will realize that in the long run its only going to hurt their wallet not line it with cash

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The problem though is that no one who matters seems to be capable of thinking that way. #877-CASH-NOW

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The ISPs are the ones who get the money. They just bribe the politicians to ignore the peasants.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Who? Comcast gets the money. Comcast pays the politician. The politician is it for themselves. Politics is a get rich scheme

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Why do you think lower taxes hits mostly the top. Their money, not yours.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

And the liberal districts are jerry mandered to keep them split and conservative.

8 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 12

No, that's not how gerrymandering works. They're gerrymandered so that they're 90% lib, and other districts are 55% conservative.

8 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 6

Actually both. Minimize liberal districts in any way possible.

8 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 8

What's the state that only has like 30% of people voting Republican but has 70% Republican representation?

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Feel free to look at Ohio's gerrymandering issue where it concentrated "liberal" votes but increased "conservative" districts.

8 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

That one map of all us red and only cites blue. Our cites aren't that populated, such obvious gerrymandering.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 7

the right has majority control.....so...my point still stands. If more liberals voted we might have more seats.

8 years ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 16

I really wish this wasnt a partisan issue. I dont want to have to give away all my rights to keep something this basic.

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

But im nit turning this into a 'its that wings fault' debate. My point is entirely accurate. People only care when its popular to do so.

8 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 6

But it is that wings fault

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

You realize the scumbag that is fighting to remove NN hAS been in his position longer than 11 mo.

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 7

Not in his current position, just one that needed to be filled by a minority/opposition representative, if I understood someone else right.

8 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 2

We do and did in the last election. The problem is we are all packed on the coasts. It is rural america, where the few people who live (1)

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 4

vote these corrupt idiots in. What we need is more liberals in these states, but most of rural america is poor, uneducated, and offers (2)

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 4

a lack of jobs, so there is no incentive for liberals to move there.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 4

More liberals voted in the last election, the Democrats won the popular vote.

8 years ago | Likes 35 Dislikes 7

There is more than one election. And more offices than secretary of state. And thaaaats the problem. No one seems to care about that lol

8 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 1

Just not in the states where it mattered....

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 5

Correct, they only vote in the states where they live.

8 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 3

I mean, you aren't allowed to vote outside of your state.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Congress has a 14% approval rating and a 95% reelection rate (as of 2014).

8 years ago | Likes 2177 Dislikes 7

Yeah, and a voter turnout similar to that of Russia. Getting people to vote is more effective than complaining about the people you voted on

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

And If I recall removing net neutrality has a 98% disapproval rate yet 5 people, 3 of which corrupt, are deciding the fate of the internet

8 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Gerrymandering

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I would ponder if the majority of those concerned do not vote or haven’t voted for a long time.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Americans are retarded

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 5

It's mostly because they don't care about who they're voting for as long as the letter after their name matches their own.

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

I thought this was very good. This explains why this is https://youtu.be/rStL7niR7gs

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

v

8 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

You know you have beaten the system when everyone doesn't want you in office but you still keep getting re-elected

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Wheels on the bus go round & round

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Elections are won in the primaries. The rest is a formality.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It’s gerrymandering. Politicians picking who gets to vote for them. Voting doesn’t work. We need Supreme Court intervention.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It's because there are no other choices.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

We like our own representatives and hate everyone else's.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Its because the people they poll aren't actually the people that vote. I don't know how people haven't figured that out.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That's because we have 1 party that comes in varieties . Republican and diet republican, same shitty economics, half the social guilt.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

*in 2 varieties

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

v

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

isnt that cus the internet represents mostly young people, but the older folks make up most of the voting?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That's because Americans are loyal and also mistake political parties with sports teams. You choose one and support it forever, for loyalty.

8 years ago | Likes 32 Dislikes 2

That loyalty also stems from a political system in which a two party system is so heavily favored, nothing else is feasible.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Well you know where the problem lies if you lose net neutrality.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Holy shit that's fucking depressing. Brb, buying more bourbon.

8 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 0

Thanks for reminding me that I have private stock and coke!

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'd vote for you.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Ooh, can I come over? What is your bourbon of choice?

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I can't find/afford the nice ones I keep hearing about, but right now I my favorite (that I can get) is Elijah Craig. I also have a 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

fairly decent bourbon from The Thousand Islands, that isn't as good but that's my favorite place on earth so it's okay. :) 2/2

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Cool - what's it called?

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Right or left, they all get paid off by the big companies... I just wish politicians didn't get paid, and did it to make a difference

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 4

I love how in a topic about an evil Republican agenda, we're hearing all this 'both sides' rhetoric. Republicans must be laughing...

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 4

Do consider that when you call all Republicans evil, you help Trump's divide and conquer strategy. There is a way to oppose him w/o dividing

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 3

It's because of that Gerry Mandering asshole. Fucking son of a bitch prick bastard.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Who is this "Gerry Mandering?" He sounds like a bad egg.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Oh he’s a right bastard I tell you. Raped my entire family and the one across the street on a drunken rampage once. I swear it’s true.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Let's vote him out! My whole district disagrees with him, and the two neighboring districts are only slightly in his favor.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

start running people. ill almost always choose a new guy over a career politician. dont hope for change, be the change.

8 years ago | Likes 47 Dislikes 1

Institutional knowledge is important.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Ironically, people conveniently claim they want new people to run, but then complain that the person running lacks experience in politics

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

call them out on their shit then. the only thing for me is if their a bumbling idiot or go against my key principles.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Classic mindless american attitude.Look at your "new guy" pres.It's not about career politician or new politician,it's about their policies.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

trump isnt a "new guy", hes a millionaire with an established presence in politics. when I say new guy, i mean average joe/small CEO.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Trump called himself an "outsider", not a politician, and it sold. Yours is the same mindless principle. Their policies are what matter.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

i never said to ignore their policies. this isnt a fucking legal hearing. we have 140 characters to use, things are left to be inferred. 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

...how'd that work out in the presidential race in 2016?

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

the real shit show is in congress and the house. if you want change, start there, not with the president.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

You don't have to tell me that's literally my job. Point still stands that voting for the guy who isn't a career politician was a bad choice

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Or how about both? The president is a pretty big fucking deal, and this topic is the executive branch. Your attitude is retarded.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

let say you want to change something at mcdonalds, how would you do that? by working your way up to where you can. yea you might have a 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I don't have any money...

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

pretty sure some states/counties will provide funds if your too poor. also take a page from our predecessors books and do a tour. 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Wouldn't a tour cost $$ though?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

cheaper than ads n shit. price mainly depends on what position your running for too. house and county level stuff is just a bit in gas.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

personally anyone who went on tour and actually talked to people would have my vote. 2/2

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

My dad has run independently for years. The most he's ever received is 2% of the vote. No campaign funds. I have stuffed countless (1/2)

8 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 1

independents dont have the name, money, or klout behind them to win. government at its core is a system of corruption, sadly.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

what better place to fight that corruption than from the inside? once enough people are in you could break off and form a 3rd party.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Envelopes, and door to door campaigned for him, its just not enough to compete with party money, party recognition.

8 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 0

you got to run with a party right now. no choice. once in though, you can start endorsing 3rd parties, etc. play by their rules to change em

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

It's easy to talk like that, but at the end of the day money is still needed. Joe Schmoe like me won't be able to get money/interest.

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

dont run as independent. this country wont let you. run either rep, or dem, and change parties during your last term if you want to. 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

the point is to get people who care and want change into office. from there we can enact change. endorse other parties and etc. 2/2

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

If you arent towing the party line the party wont support you.

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

so tow the line as long as you have to? or be really passionate about something relating to the party even if the rest isnt for you. 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I give you Rand Paul. Exceptions exist to nearly every rule

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Apathy in action.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

IT'S CALLED GERRYMANDERING PEOPLE... LOOK IT UP AND QUIT BLAMING THE OTHER VOTERS!!!

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Fix THAT ^^ and we have a chance to fix the rest of it. Otherwise, it's a game of hot potato with a Nuke. (It doesn't matter who drops it)

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Term limits, state by state. states have control over who qualifies to appear on ballots, and state laws can often be enacted by referendum

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Wow it’s almost like democrazy is a big fat joke eating powdered donuts watching football... weeeeirrd

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

You prefer a ruling power that gives you no say over the government?

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Lolololol as if we do have that now

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

I don't disagree with that. But democracy is best chance to not have it. What's your strat? Bend over and take it up the rear?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

At least we’d be honest about ourselves. Democracy is failing due to its capitalistic bully mentality. Just repeating the word doesn’t help

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

When most vote along party lines, and believe it when their guy says everything wrong in US is caused by the other side. I can believe it.

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Well in this case, this whole thing truly is being pushed by the Republicans so......yea, maybe dont vote for them if you dont want this?

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

If you can't understand the conversation you don't have to chime in. Neither op nor my statement is at all partisan. We were having a 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

nice convo without knowing each other's political leanings. If you read bias from our/my statements, perhaps its based on your own. 2/2

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Or if you do vote for them anyways, then dont complain. If you voted Republican/Trump, you are to blame for this.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Almost as if it's rigged..

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Vote suppression is a real issue. Gerrymandering, picture ID laws, roll purges, etc. Both sides do it, but the GOP has made it a science.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

I thought that reelection is due to people falling for the same bullshit lines every election, or lack of political competition during elec.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

When I went to go vote, hardly any young people. It was 90% older (guessing 65+) that was voting. And most of them vote a certain way so....

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Everyone likes THEIR congressman

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Congress should, like diapers, be changed frequently and for the same reasons.

8 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

Term limits. Seriously. We need to pass state by state referendums imposing term limits on their own senators and reps

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

States have control over how those positions are elected, so it should be a workable solution that doesn't require Congress to pass

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Gerrymandering, voter suppression, and campaign finance laws are killing our democracy. It's very difficult to vote out incumbents.

8 years ago | Likes 49 Dislikes 3

It's the finance laws. Voters are cattle and can easily be bought.

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Voters are actually kind of brain dead and believe whatever a TV ad says. Take TV advertising out of politics, and you've changed the game.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Actually incumbency is not nearly as protective as it used to be. Partisanship is a much higher driver at this point...

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

While those problems are very real, the reason house incumbents are difficult to beat is; they have more experience, more money to campaign

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

with, and they have the psychological edge of being difficult to beat. Some people who possibly could beat them don’t because they lack

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Confidence.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Use and algorithm to split districts evenly. Tech is there. Take it out of the hands of the parties.

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

Actually a professor at my university developed an algorithm to do just that in a fair way. We should use it.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Could you make a post about this?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I will try to. I have finals approaching, but maybe over break. I can tag you if I do :)

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Most people are happy with their reps/senators; they just think Congress as a whole is inefficient.

8 years ago | Likes 347 Dislikes 22

"You're not in traffic, you are traffic."

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

My disctrict's rep is for NN. The guy right next door? Mad his career trying to end it.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The problem is you only get to vote for one of them. You can be happy with your guy and disagree with the rest.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

"MY Guy/Gal is doing good things, it's the others that are the problem." -All Humans Everywhere

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

No, it's just that they can coast by under a cloak of anonymity.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's not supposed to be "efficient"... That would be extremely dangerous to liberty for everyone in this country.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

i get your point but it’s not inefficient for the right reasons. filibustering just to protect partisan interest and general stubbornness.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Congress isn't even in office over half of the f**king year for God's sake

8 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 1

Ehh, with their job (which not many do) they should be meeting with peeps and whatnot for a good chunk of time as well.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Honestly, with the sh!t they've been trying to pull in recent years, that's a blessing.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

it's more the cabinets fault. but honestly Donald hasn't gotten much done whether you like it or not

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I'm not talking about just during this administration's tenure, but all the way back to the late 90's and early 2000's.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That's why I'm afraid he's going to succeed in convincing his fans that they need to replace most of congress with personally loyal toadies.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Most people dont even know their reps name.

8 years ago | Likes 321 Dislikes 1

This

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I actually don’t...time to google

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Ken Buck and Jared Polis. Ken is a useless shithead and Jared is the biggest bleeding heart to the point of inefficient

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Brian babin. Last time I contacted him via email his response was basically "thanks for contacting me, I'm against the thing you support."

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

But worded like we were in agreement on the thing in question

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Rep. Cecil Flugermeyler.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's not my guy that's the issue, it's your guy.

8 years ago | Likes 720 Dislikes 3

Had to swipe back and upvote.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

No it is my guy but he keeps fucking winning

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

welcome to representative democracy

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

To be fair, democrats are all against this.

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

They call it "Obama-era net neutrality rules" because of course if Obama fought against it then having to pay for decent internet *must* /

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

/be a *good* thing

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Well, in my case my rep is Dana Rohrabacher, so...yeah, my opinion can just go in the trash if it's not backed by Russian money.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That's the US in a nutshell atm. So confrontational against the other side, a climate of us vs them, so the real blame never gets laid

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But my guy is fighting the FCC

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Don't forget gerrymandering. If they know their candidate will always win, they need not appease the masses.

8 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 2

Tip: If you are in a hopelessly gerry'd district register as a rep/dem so you can vote in their primaries

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

... so... every district in every state in the Union?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I'm a Democrat in the middle of Texas. It's definitely my guys. I vote against them when I get the chance.

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

There are dozens of us!

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

My guy has a bigger dick than your guy?

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Anthony Weiner?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

*is

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

!*

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Well, my guys don't have dicks. Maybe that's the solution.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

(D) vs (R) in the states makes me think that it might be legitimately true that "it's not my guy, it's yours" is a valid statement.

8 years ago | Likes 31 Dislikes 3

Both parties are so used to just having to seem better than the other guy that they're both rotten beyond belief

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

Democrats also kept the war machine fed, engaged in and concealed corruption, and acted against govt transparency under Obama. Both suck

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 12

Hell, his administration got us entangled in Saudi's war interests in Yeman. A basic awareness of global events is my source

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

Jesus I'm not saying Republicans are better, far from it. I'm just saying that both sides are garbage and we need to push for actual change

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

Both Sides are Bad is the same rhetoric that allowed Trump to compare human rights activists to Nazis. BSAB is a false argument Imho.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It genuinely is. Approval ratings for any one representative are usually in the majority (except McConnell)

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Well honestly its not my guy. Wyden has been one of the biggest supporters of net neutrality.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

This guy gets it

8 years ago | Likes 36 Dislikes 1

This guy doesn't get it, that guy gets it

8 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

That guy doesn’t get it, that guy does.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0