Yeah, I wonder how all those people feel that didn't vote because it doesn't matter, they're both the same?
What is needed is a bunch of these people to move to swing states where the vote really matters. Places like OH, FL, etc.
But, the blue states people have built their own little comfortable enclaves in their respective states and there's little chance they'll be moving to places like AK, TN, or MS.
Now, why does this matter? Well, because it's clear the republicans are pro big business and in the case of net neutrality, pro locking up the internet for the few (the few being, big media/telecom companies). There will never be a pro-citizen net neutrality policy as long as the republicans/big-business types are running the show.
So, living in CA, for instance, doesn't matter much in this case. Having a progressive, pro-net mentality will make much more difference in swing states.
Now if only we had a president in office who lamented what a travesty the electoral college was, and how it should be done away with ...
Current first-past-the-post states are incentivized under the current regime to stay that way because it makes for more opportunity to be treated as a "ballroom belle" ("swing state") each election cycle, which brings money and attention to the state it might not ever see otherwise.
It's possible, though sadly unlikely, you could fix the current regime by fixing things from the bottom up at the state legislature level, one state at a time if need be.
Alas, I don't think there are enough of these types to actually effectively hack elections like that.
I'm not disagreeing with you about Net Neutrality, but to assume your opinion is enlightened or progressive for a people you've never met is very narcissistic.
I'm talking about for the people in general. Net Neutrality within the U.S. has absolutely no bearing on me personally as I'm neither a U.S. citizen, nor a resident. I'm merely opining because I am interested in the well-being of my fellow humans... in this instance, Americans and residents affected by internet service providers looking to dishonestly gouge their customers.
I care about you guys and your struggles, I care when I see people being taken advantage of, I care about the erosion of your constitutional rights, I care when I see you having to struggle to have your voices heard by a system that doesn't give a fuck about you except for how quickly they can part you from your money. I care because I see your struggles every day, I listen to your complaints, I follow your news, I read and I watch. I speak from a place of wanting to fight your causes. I live on the internet and it's hard to stand by and watch your internet gradually being taken away and used to exploit you.
So to assume I'm narcissistic without knowing anything about my background or my motives for comment is slightly er... I don't even have a word to finish that sentence.
I really think that the American left (and I say this as a pretty far left guy myself) is still caught in a hangover from the civil rights era, where we're fighting for the rights of increasingly smaller groups of people so we can still be seen as the liberal / progressive party, while ignoring economic issues that are so hard to fight for in our version of democractic government.
Wrong, you mean swing states.
> If you're a liberal, progressive, futurist, etc, and you're living in states like CA or NY or OR, then statistically speaking, those states are pretty much gonna go democrat regardless. So your vote counts 'less' there.
Just as it counts less if you're a Republican in one of those states. Or a Democrat in Mississippi.
> But, the blue states people have built their own little comfortable enclaves in their respective states and there's little chance they'll be moving to places like AK, TN, or MS.
But when they want to escape the tax climate they'll move to Colorado or Wyoming or Austin, TX.
It shows you the nearest districts and what margin they were won by so you can sign up and get involved between now and the midterms of 2018.
At this point it isn't even really so much blue-state versus red-state: it's a lot closer to city versus rural/country.
We're very aware of how much Hollywood and the RIAA/MPAA want their claws in as much of the internet as they can to "protect the entertainment industry." They were drooling over SOPA/PIPA/COICA/etc.
The democrats will happily lock up the internet in favor of their own big media/telecom interests too. That's something I think people often forget. Remember, one of the first things Obama did was hire five former RIAA lawyers to the DOJ.
It's actually a decent place for technology workers: the jobs and schools are good and it offers a decent standard of living at a low cost.
If we publicize telco infrastructure and rent it out to various companies, that would solve much of the probl..."OH!! BUT then it's not free market! Each carrier should have to buy their own infrastructure otherwise it's not fair!! Blah blah" Right, even though much of the infrastructure was built with public funds. Ok, so back to net neutrality? "No! Government regulations are evil! The free market can solve this!"
How, exactly? Can someone tell me how the free market can deliver net neutrality with federal, state, and local governments in the pocket of the large telcos? I'm actually asking.
Nothing at all I'm sure. I doubt that demographic knows or cares about net neutrality.