I'm against censoring the internet in any way (except CP), but what about a law that prevents corporations and businesses from trolling and bullying people online like shareblue/CTR does? How is this legal? You would think with all the online bullying talk these days these things would be frowned upon. Not only that, but businesses use bots to give fake reviews to their products and have review and click farms. Should these things be outlawed as well?
On tucker there was a dem representative on tonight that said >trump colluded with Russian trolls to troll about Hillary. Why did tucker not immediately reply with shareblue? Why do they get hardly any publicity anywhere?
What should be done?
Adam Smith
Clean your room!
Carter Brooks
It's called sedition. All they have to do is enforce existing laws for any of Brocks many many crimes as illustrated by thecitizensaudit.
That fucking faggot is done. It's just a matter of time.
Josiah Hughes
I agree some of what they do is sedition, but much of it is just plain old bullying of everyone on this site, T_D, and news comment sections everywhere.
Eli Jackson
...
Jack Sanders
Pol is not prepared to focus enough to do proper COMPREHENSIVE research on the clintons and wider democrat networks without getting distracted by grandious sensationalism, or place it into a wider context of double standards without turning it into a fact finding witch hunt
By all means there is shit there on the clintons, but people stop digging right before they hit the real important parts and are too bored to read extraneous information
Research is a very time inneficiant proccess, it requires lots and lots of context information you will never use but must know regardless
Pol is too impatient , but if tiu want to start, go back to arkansas, Dixiecrats, the cold war, white nationalist southern politics, the cia and drugs and wider latin america
Christopher Jenkins
If idiots can sue Trump for blocking them on twitter can't any of you burgers file a civil rights thing against shareblue?
Samuel Allen
Did that squirrel on his head die of natural causes?
Jeremiah Hill
probably but they have millions of dollars in capital and DNC lawyers so its probably a losing battle unless someone extremely rich or famous brought the lawsuit.
Samuel White
probably easier to go after them for some kind of campaign finance law violation. they are openly campaigning and are funded with dark money. i suspect hillary or DNC directly provide input and strategy to them since they can't help themselves but micromanage these things (Donald Ducks his taxes)
Henry Powell
>(except CP) KEK!
Mason Scott
>what should be done? I'm unironically looking into the feasibility of organizing this from the right.
We'll call it KeepRed and bombard every faggy blue check on Twitter with Pepes and flashing gifs until they self-behead.
Jayden Stewart
>muh lets make up a new rule and everything will be better >cucked by tuck Hey, how about someone talk about the official propaganda public-private partnerships created in the lame duck session of Congress? >sedition But what if all that crap propaganda is designed to preserve the divided and obedient masses, as the Founders intended? Not seditious, then?
Jeremiah Harris
This requires pol becoming lawyers and journalists and feceral agents
Too ambitious
Caleb Allen
nah just need to get judicial watch interested, or as a far second cernovich
Caleb Campbell
I hate the shills, but I think they do lethal harm to the causes they purport to support, so I dunno
Robert Powell
shitty laws won't stop shitty people
Adrian Williams
they'll get theirs
Oliver Gomez
No but it will stop multi-million dollar operations from openly ruining message boards all over the internet and trolling/threatening people with dissenting opinions. The problem is that the lack of law allows them to be extremely organized and have lots of capital to troll. I've seen a screenshot of them talking about doxxing people who try to stop them as well, not sure if its real.
Colton Hughes
Shareblue and CTR bring out the best in us. They keep failing hard.
Brandon Sanchez
They are one of the reasons a lot of the general public believes these memes against the president. Normal people read the comment sections on news sites, reddit, etc and get tricked into thinking the public consensus is that no one likes trump.
Anthony Gray
Undisclosed astroturfing should be illegal online period.
Michael Collins
it errodes faith in government and makes competent people less likely to consider joining that government leading to an overall decline in the quality of people in government.
We are already seeing it with the number of executive appointments remaining vacant because Trump has NO ONE to appoint.
Gavin Russell
>it errodes faith in government Why do they care? They have cops whom they pay well to take care of their interests. >makes competent people less likely to consider joining that government Why do they care? They all work together to cover for the (((network))). Competence means people might do something surprising. Power doesn't need surprises. It only needs persistence. >an overall decline in the quality of people in government. Kek, as if quality affects policy. >We are already seeing it with the number of executive appointments remaining vacant because Trump has NO ONE to appoint. Could that be because of (((qualifications))) that aren't exactly public? Or could that be because of the false experience meme that only certain classes of people are allowed to manage large organizations? The point stands that the government is entirely the judge of its own affairs, and at best we get to vote for which narrative they apply to their exploitations.
Isaiah Roberts
The qualification is they have to work in the Trump administration. There are plenty of qualified people, but whether they actually want to become nominees for senate confirmation is another issue entirely.
Our government, which runs the strongest nation on the face of the earth, should have the best people occupying its positions. If you were the president, you would want the best attorney's in America to serve as White House Counsel and head the DOJ. Why don't you want the best?
If I were president, I wouldn't settle for diversity appointments like Loretta Lynch and Eric Holder as Attorney General because they obviously aren't the best attorney's in America.
Christopher Scott
>The qualification is I was suggesting that Harvard or U Chicago schooling might be a "necessity" for Federal appointments, for reasons other than those believed by meritocrats. >Why don't you want the best Because meritocracy is a lie. >muh strongest nation on the face of the earth >should have the best people >best attorney's in America This is an 18+ board.
