Would anybody else vote on this one issue? Any candidate who said flat out "your government is spying on you through giant corporations and they're all lying about it, and I'm going to Washington to put a stop to it" would have my vote.
The public will vote for one thing in plain sight and complain about their own choice the day after because all the other things in their life suddenly take a bad spin.
TL;DR; do not vote blindly on a single action point. Do not bewilder others to do so. Instead vote for the complete package and learn others to do so as well.
Disclaimer: seen from a foreign standpoint. This is what reached us oversees. For every other article on non-immigration there were 10 on his immigration rants.
https://www.aclu.org/issues/national-security/privacy-and-su...
I understand that some disagree with the other (and past) positions of the ACLU and may be disinclined to trust its website. Fortunately this issue isn't a particularly party-based one. Here's another good source, although it also says a lot about the history of the leaks:
https://www.eff.org/nsa-spying
If there is any accurate secondary source that is clearly conservative, It'd be welcome for me to see it in a reply. There's no particular reason why we'd have to porkbarel this issue - presumably there would be no party affinity at all.
Edit: I know that there is lots of text behind those links, but the issue is an expansive one. I sincerely invite you to read them!
You can find a lot of this in the things Julian Sanchez has written for Cato.
If your communications are intercepted, stored, but then never looked at, and eventually deleted - this is functionally equivalent to having never been collected at all.
It's very very difficult (some people say impossible) to assure 100 percent that people's data have been safely stored and transmitted for their whole retention lifetime.
Assuming this is an incident and not a coverup.
It's a shit show everywhere. Very very few congress-people seem to have any backbone what-so-ever. Ron Wyden of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is one of the only people that seems to even try to ask questions, and he is shut down and denied by the military at every turn. https://www.thecipherbrief.com/column_article/dont-pass-surv...
Which seems to be a star court
What were the percentages when there was a democratic party president?
You think people would warm to the NSA if only they demonstrated an inability to keep secret the findings of their domestic spying, and revealed they'd been spying on the president?
You don't think that would make them look like they were illegally meddling in partisan politics?
They may not need to make it domestic or seem like they were spying on the president, finding some sort of scandal involving a different nation doesn't seem that hard. Or they could use some intercepted knowledge from a foreign spy agency.
As a whole though, I suspect they'd see an opinion boost even if it came from domestic surveillance. The hatred of Trump is ridiculous, Democrats have even praised Bush following his attacks on Trump. Plus, Mark Felt did basically did this and just got had a movie made about him.
At some point you've gotta admit they're just scrambling to be slightly less detestable than the GOP, to just enough voters to win elections.
absolutely. i'm arguing that that has finally (obviously) become untenable, the shift left will be bolstered by the vivid, insurmountable gulf in inequality