-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
CNBC: McConnell ties $2,000 stimulus checks to unrelated Trump demands on tech and election
- Thread starter Saucycarpdog
- Start date
- News
I wish more Republicans would see what he's trying to do here. It's obvious he's actually against the $2000 relief checks and is constructing this unique scenario to ensure it will never get passed, but of course they're just going to fall for his spin even when it has received bi-partisan support across the board.
Yes lets accept defeat.
It's also funny how last week lots of people thought the Dems out played Mitch.
Come on now... Y'all should have known the Devil is smoother than that.
Uh, yeah random folks on the internet are the ones with privilege. Nevermind the guy that is putting obstacles in the senate...
Section 230 doesn't just protect social media, it's why the entirety of the internet is able to function the way it is. Custom reviews on Amazon, wikipedia entries, emails, this very forum you post on. Without section 230, the entire internet becomes liable to be sued if any random person writes something that someone else doesn't like.
Section 230 is literally the thing that allows the internet to exist as a medium for us to communicate with each other. Facebook and Twitter, as reprehensible as they are, are far from the only things at risk. The entire internet is at risk.
I agree that Section 230 should not be eliminated, but something HAS to be done about the big social media companies. It's more important than the $2k stimulus checks. The damage they are causing to civil societies around the world cannot be allowed to continue on this current path.
I'm talking about $2000 that people need right now. You're talking about a road block to the $2000 that's too much of an issue for you. My family will gladly take that $2000. That's the difference.
We aren't talking about reducing the safety net for social services that Republicans love to attach to these kinds of bills for concern of the "national debt".
You're absolutely right, something does need to be done but we cannot allow it to be this. Section 230 is probably more important to the internet than Net Neutrality is.
No, but you're talking about putting tens of thousands out of work around the world.
More than anything the bill being sent back to the house with poison pills will immediately ensure there won't be enough time to pass it before Congress resets on the 3rd. That's the truth behind the play even if Democrats were willing to rubber stamp all the shit Republicans would throw onto it.
Nothing you said refutes anything in my comment. People are hungry right now and need money. What people say or do here is of no consequence to what will ultimately happen with how the vote will go.
What is clear is that I don't see any concern or talk of the millions of people unemployed and living off of unemployment to eat. What I see is how this will effect people's ability to post online, charging money for content, and reviews being eliminated from Amazon.
It's very obvious where the concern is being aimed. How will the elimination of 230 affect my activities online? I don't see many people posting about how $2000 will help with groceries. You don't know what a food shortage issue actually is until you are living it. I can say that for myself at least. How many people here are able to relate feels very clear from the general attitude of people attacking my position of taking $2000 for every member of my family vs 230.
Sounding pretty selfish there. That's a "fuck you, got mine" attitude when such a move would put so many people out of work and fundamentally change the internet.
Well at least they got their one time payment of $2K.
Is anyone claiming they are related? How does that have anything to do with what I said? I myself stated that the poison pill tactic to throw in 230 will not resonate with people facing food shortages. Why does that resonate with you? It doesn't with me.
The economic impact of repealing 230 would be exponentially worse than the benefit of a one time 2000 payment. If people are worried about money now, imagine what it would be like when millions of careers suddenly vanish.
You could tie it with banning Muslims from immigrating, or permanently separating kids from their parents at the border and it would also not resonate with some people.
Why in the world are we still talking about Section 230 like Mitch expected that to go any where except as a means to delay being able to fix this bill; he made it unequivocally clear that he's opposed to $2k period that "goes to democrats' rich friends" which holds no basis in reality given that the checks diminish at $75k annual income, and will be completely gone for anyone who makes over $90k (or families combining the same).
The fact that GOP has us arguing among us ourselves to get rid of 230 or else they're gonna let millions starve means them Niggas won, lmao. They got us bro.
what's next, repel gay marriage for $3K? No mail in ballots for $5K? How easily can we be swayed for how much?
I know you don't want to hear this but it's $1,400, not $2,000. Saying the latter is falling for Republican talking points.
People in this topic are going to be shook as fuck if the Democrats agree to repeal 230 in exchange for $2k, and then Mitch is like "actually no how about $500 instead"
like jfc
Just so I'm clear, the 'controversy' around section 230 only really flared up because people were being mean to Trump on Twitter, right? I've not kept up with all this as I'm in the UK, but that's my takeaway from all of this, and it's fucking infuriating to watch play out because someone called a prick a prick on social media.
Man this fucking shit could have happened 4 weeks prior to election day and Bitch Mcconnell still wouldn't have lost his fucking seat.
Yes. 230 repeal wasn't getting any traction from either side until Diaper Don started trending.
Many people will give up anything that they don't think will have an effect on them personally for a payday.
GOP out here trying to straight-up buy back freedoms.
Jesus fucking Christ. That man has skin so thin it should be studied for science.
You can take a look at my post history and tell me if I have ever shifted responsibilities from the Republicans / Conservatives to the Democrats or Progressives. You will not find any.
We currently have about 20 million people getting UI and the money received is not enough. Let's talk about what I feel is needed. We need a clean $2000 for the up or down vote and we aren't getting that. We need the additional $600 for UI that was in place early in the year. We don't need a repeal of 230 or some election fraud investigation.
Is the removal of 230 going to impact more than 20 million people currently receiving benefits? I have not seen any numbers on that.
This shit is depressing as fuck, people know this shit is a poison bill, admit it is a poison bill, know Mitch Mcduck would never give $2000 and will delay this shit.
Still tell the whole population to swallow the poison bill. Like fuck man, how does $2k for gay marriage sound to you folks then?
Still tell the whole population to swallow the poison bill. Like fuck man, how does $2k for gay marriage sound to you folks then?
the dems have actually utilized this pretty well to make an argument of why the country should support them... the republicans were always going to use poison pills while offering "support" of the checks, but its hard to escape the optics that the dems are willing to spend and the republicans aren't when your presenting a very simple choice with checks.
republicans will own the no on increasing checks. maybe they could muddy the waters better if they could find a better item to tie the checks to (foreign aid worked well for trumps argument), but section 230/covid liability isn't a topic many people care about especially when it comes to a debate over direct cash aid.
the attack about wealthy people getting checks as well could have some traction since we keep seeing the republicans scream it the most, but even then your talking about blocking cash aid from the many because the few may benefit. this issue touches on many of the hallmarks of why the general public hates congress, it'll be hard for the republicans to worm out of the trap set by trump but obviously they will try their best.
republicans will own the no on increasing checks. maybe they could muddy the waters better if they could find a better item to tie the checks to (foreign aid worked well for trumps argument), but section 230/covid liability isn't a topic many people care about especially when it comes to a debate over direct cash aid.
the attack about wealthy people getting checks as well could have some traction since we keep seeing the republicans scream it the most, but even then your talking about blocking cash aid from the many because the few may benefit. this issue touches on many of the hallmarks of why the general public hates congress, it'll be hard for the republicans to worm out of the trap set by trump but obviously they will try their best.
The other user brought up a good point.
How much would your family take for repealing gay marriage?
Would repealing gay marriage impact more than 20 million as well? Haven't seen the numbers on that either yet.
I'm not sure why you keep sidestepping the consequences of removing 230? 1.4k checks on top of the 600 that are already coming through aren't going to stop those 20 million + those newly affected from 230 from needing more support in the future. It's very much a band-aid solution that puts us two steps backwards. We all want a clean bill, but McConnell is making sure that can't happen.
I already know that separating kids at the border and jailing them away from their parents doesn't resonate with the US population. I'm Mexican so you don't need to tell me. It already happened and people didn't care. You don't need to offer $2000 to people to not care about us.
We are talking about tying it with 230. That doesn't resonate with me. Why does it resonate with you?
Bro I sincerely feel for whatever members of your family are experiencing food shortages, and I hope things get better for them.
But the current week sees you putting some amount of the $600 stimulus into savings and shopping for a PS5 so you are probably doing better than I am at the moment. Stop trying to wield your poverty like a cudgel to shame anyone who actually cares about the long term effects of all this, because you are not the only one in this conversation who is struggling.
You want to cripple the internet because you want to give you and family $2000. The minute you give in to that shit, the only hope after that is you expect a bunch of old people who are not technologically knowledgeable get to rewrite section 230 which is worse case scenario. You know how GA runoff results ahead of time or something? Do you understand what 230 is? It is censorship. You want $2000 all it has to take is that they censor your voice. That shit isn't negotiable.
The fact that you would draw a false equivalence between 230 and gay marriage is shameful and you should feel bad about it.
I am very clearly saying that 230 is worth it for my family. Do you feel your job or job security is at risk if 230 is gone? Do you have friends or family that you think will lose their jobs if 230 is gone?
This makes no sense man.
I see.
People here and Democrats have been hammering this point for months.
You're being disingenuous as fuck to claim people here upset with this poison pill aren't themselves deeply affected or that they don't care about others.
That post said I was putting the $600 into savings / bills as in it goes into my savings account and then is withdrawn from my account to pay bills.
At no point did any comment say I was using those $600 for a PS5.
My wife was trying to get me a PS5 as a wedding gift since we got married in September. Things have changed drastically since then.
And the 600 is enough to cover the PS5 he's clamoring over in other threads.
Who is he going to ask for console drop information when the internet is dead?
I mean, I get it. I've lived insecure for some time in the past but what you're saying is that a wholesale paradigm shift that destroys one of the major organizing technologies of all current society should be destroyed for a one-time payout Increase.
its not Dems fault or people here's fault. it's McConnell's fault alone that Americans can't get a bit more without giving away a fucking unfathomable lot
Things drastically changed since Monday? Yea, you are getting 600 dollars and are trying to use it to buy a PS5.
230 allows for moderation of content without being sued for violating freedom of speech. It has a 'good samaritan' protection for things like abuse and child pornography. Think about that....platforms need a good samaritan law for things like abuse. If you don't think a full blown repeal will be a huge downfall of content platform you're 100% fooling yourself.
I was trying to be conservative with the numbers, but yes. The number of people's lives who would be destroyed by a repeal of 230 is incredibly huge. It's literally among the dumbest ideas Trump has ever had.
The weirdest thing about 230 discussion is that a lot of the negative stuff people attribute to 230 is actually attributable the 1st Amendment (hate speech, misinformation that is not libel/slander, etc).
And a lot of things that people want companies to do (moderate those above things) are explicitly legal due to 230.
