|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1531217841 Message started by eau de sauvage on 07/10/18 at 03:17:21 |
|
Title: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by eau de sauvage on 07/10/18 at 03:17:21 You couldn't make this up. She said 'no one likes you' so he blocks her on twitter. I'm not even sure that legal for him to block someone for fair comment on the official WH account. It's a violation of the 1st amendment. You guys have a clown for a president. No wonder they are going to fly a giant baby (with tiny hands) over London for his visit. https://twitter.com/chrissyteigen/status/889832887041871873 |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by MShipley on 07/10/18 at 06:08:02 WOW, this is important! |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Eegore on 07/10/18 at 06:34:37 2F310A0B120E071B620 wrote:
Is anything on here "important"? I was under the impression that we were free to bring up issues for discussion here no matter the importance. Personally I wonder if blocking people from WH official media is allowed, it may very well be a violation of the 1st Amendment. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by MnSpring on 07/10/18 at 10:11:04 6A4A48405D4A2F0 wrote:
Is a, ’Twitter’ account, a, ‘Official’ Government account? I have not encountered any official data, or peer reviewed studies, stating that is true. The US Government does have, MANY, ‘official’ web presences. Just don’t think a, ’social’ media account, of one person’s view of something, it at all or in any way, ‘officially the US Government’. But by all means, if their is any, any, official data, or peer reviewed studies, stating that is true. by all means please forward it to us all. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by MShipley on 07/10/18 at 10:36:37 Is anything on here "important"? I was under the impression that we were free to bring up issues for discussion here no matter the importance. Personally I wonder if blocking people from WH official media is allowed, it may very well be a violation of the 1st Amendment.[/quote] Ohhh, believe me Nothing here is important...... |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Serowbot on 07/10/18 at 10:45:57 Trump can’t block users on Twitter, judge says https://www.vox.com/2018/5/23/17385256/trump-twitter-lawsuit-block-users-loser A federal judge ruled Wednesday that President Donald Trump has to stop blocking people on Twitter because it violates the First Amendment — the first time the courts have had to weigh in on presidential tweets. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Eegore on 07/10/18 at 10:55:19 "Is a, ’Twitter’ account, a, ‘Official’ Government account? I have not encountered any official data, or peer reviewed studies, stating that is true. The US Government does have, MANY, ‘official’ web presences." Twitter accounts are official government record if they are representative of the official's position, this information is readily available and widespread: https://www.archives.gov/presidential-libraries/laws/1978-act.html Tweets are part of the official presidential record, and as such the White house is now archiving them: https://www.archives.gov/files/press/press-releases/aotus-to-sens-mccaskill-carper.pdf This includes records created on electronic platforms like email, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. As this is law there has been no studies done to my knowledge thus no peer reviewed submissions have taken place. The clear documentation of law and government record does not represent a theory that can be tested. This is a comprehensive guide with many resources for government officials to stay within the federal guidelines for NARA: http://www.businessofgovernment.org/sites/default/files/A%20Managers%20Guide%20for%20Using%20Twitter%20in%20Government.pdf More sources: https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2017-02-01/donald-trumps-tweets-are-now-presidential-records http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-trump-tweets-national-archive-20170404-story.html |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Eegore on 07/10/18 at 11:16:17 Here's some information that lays the groundwork for how modern social media platforms are considered official record: The E-Government Act of 2002 December 17, 2002 Creates position of Chief Federal Information Officer. CIO’s job is to implement the act and ensure all agencies and branches of government enhance the use of the Internet as a resource to interact with American citizens. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ347/pdf/PLAW-107publ347.pdf Plain Writing Act of 2010 October 13, 2010 All government publications (including websites and linked to information on social media and the use of social media) must be written clearly with easy to understand language. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-111publ274/pdf/PLAW-111publ274.pdf |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by MnSpring on 07/10/18 at 13:05:59 08282A223F284D0 wrote:
Interesting ‘perception’. The links provided, do NOT say anything about who Trump may block, on twitter or any other social media. Could be a violation of the 1st. The Closest, is below. Where the questions come from a agency, who believes their $hit does not stink. ( NARA does not make “determinations” ) And the answers are from the W.H. Question 3: NARA considers President Trump's tweets as presidential records that need to be preserved for historic purposes. Has NARA made a determination of whether the Trump Administration must also preserve altered or deleted tweets? If so, please provide this determination. If not, please indicate when NARA anticipates making such a determination. Answer: No, under the PRA, records management authority is vested in the President, and NARA does not make “determinations” with respect to whether something is or is not a Presidential record. Rather, NARA provides advice and guidance concerning the PRA upon the of the White House. The January 23, 2017, AP article cited in your question references the reporter’s conversation with a NARA spokesperson to the effect that “presidential tweets, like all electronic communications ‘created or received’ by the president or his staff, are considered presidential records.” NARA has advised the White House that it should capture and preserve all tweets that the President posts in the course of his official duties, including those that are subsequently deleted, as Presidential records, and NARA has been informed by White officials that they are, in fact, doing so As to Bots Judge: A Trump Hating Judge, appointed, by Clinton, gives a opinion, that holds less water than a arthritic hand. “If you can’s wow them with wonder, than just Baffle them with Bull$hit” |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Eegore on 07/10/18 at 15:19:53 I meant "groundwork" as a means of conveying that that information preceded the modern laws and interpretations as groundwork typically comes first. I can clarify by stating that the aforementioned links precede the laws that currently govern social media in government. None of the linked material was intended to say that Trump is violating the 1st Amendment, I too wonder if blocking someone from Twitter counts. I had stated this earlier: "Personally I wonder if blocking people from WH official media is allowed" Research has shown that Twitter is considered official record, but the question is does blocking someone constitute a violation. Similar to blocking personal IP addresses from accessing public records, which is a violation. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by justin_o_guy2 on 07/10/18 at 15:37:24 If someone is a jerk, blocking them should be your right. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Serowbot on 07/10/18 at 15:53:31 6E7177706D6A5B6B5B63717D36040 wrote:
For the representative of the American people?... Doesn't he work for us?... He's "tweeting" from the White House on our dime. From an unsecured phone BTW... ::) |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Eegore on 07/10/18 at 16:34:09 716E686F72754474447C6E62291B0 wrote:
I think if someone chooses to be POTUS they should have thick enough skin to not need to. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by justin_o_guy2 on 07/10/18 at 16:47:43 Why should he be bothered with it? I can screen calls. His public account is his. If someone is a problem, dump them. There are people who don't want to wade through the lefty bullshit. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by MnSpring on 07/10/18 at 17:38:27 This blocking a nut case on twitter, is the perfect example of: “A Conservative does not like something they just don’t do it. A Ultra-Liberal does not like something, they make a LAW, NO One Can do it” So the POTUS, Blocks a person on a social media account. (A Person, ANY ONE, of us would block. when they constantly talk trash) A Conservative, would just block the nut case, or shake their head, and say, ‘just ignore it’. The Ultra-Liberal, goes Freeking NUTS. For the, ‘Panty in a Bunch crowd’, Exactly, what part of the POTUS, not wanting to hear her venom, has stopped her, from spewing the same venom, elsewhere ? |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by eau de sauvage on 07/10/18 at 18:43:00 130D36372E323B275E0 wrote:
Why would the president of the US violating the constitution that he has sworn to protect. Is this the gist of your post? |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by eau de sauvage on 07/10/18 at 18:46:44 Nevertheless first amendment and all that, the point was that the US has a freaking man/baby clown as a president. This will not end well. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Eegore on 07/10/18 at 19:43:17 "I can screen calls. His public account is his." Did you even look at the information provided? There's a 54 page document outlining how a Twitter account is not personal if used to represent a government official. If someone writes letters to the president that's bullshit of any direction the president can not block that person from sending more mail to the White House. He can choose to not open the envelopes, and he can choose to not use Twitter. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by justin_o_guy2 on 07/10/18 at 20:21:03 Phhht, I don't care |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Eegore on 07/11/18 at 05:15:14 Caring doesn't change the fact that POTUS Twitter is protected, both ways, by the 1st Amendment. It will be important to future generations since these platforms will be the primary method of communication. Similar to how letters were our grandparents method, and email is this generations. Ignoring the changes in tech could result in the removal of rights by means of complacency over time. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by MShipley on 07/11/18 at 11:32:42 What I mean is there is NO length that people will not take to try to harm or discredit this president. Do you really think this is worse than the Hillary E-mail issues? So what! He unfriended someone. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Eegore on 07/11/18 at 12:12:01 I don't think this is worse than Hillary's email issues. He may have unfriended someone but he chose to do it on Twitter, and that medium is now protected, as long as he is using it as the President. I realize its trivial, but triviality isn't how the 1st Amendment is evaluated and applied. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by MShipley on 07/11/18 at 12:15:10 I respect your view, i am not trying to be rude. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Eegore on 07/11/18 at 12:20:07 I don't think you are being rude. I see where you are coming from as well. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by MnSpring on 07/11/18 at 15:08:20 I am not on twitter, some here may be. So those that are, is this how twitter works? I believe if someone, ‘Blocks’ a person, it simply prevents those caustic comments from being viewed on the persons, ‘page’ who blocked them. It does not prevent those words, from being posted on the, words writers page, or the word writers followers page/s. It does not prevent, the poster, from seeing other words, the, ‘blocker’, said. (for some that don’t understand, Trump blocking, Tiegen, does, NOT, prevent Tiegen, from seeing any words that Trump writes) Is it not like, a person driving a car. Every morning at a stop sign, their is a person standing their, giving offense gestures/words. The driver does not drive that way anymore, so the driver is not subject to the offensive words/gestures. The driver did Not, prevent, that person from making those gestures/words, or prevent the place where those things were said or done. The driver simply went a different way. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Eegore on 07/11/18 at 16:48:00 When blocked communication stops both ways. Essentially Trump stopped Tiegen from being able to access his now considered official statements that should be made available to all. There are ways around it like looking at a friends Twitter feed, but that's like saying your TV is blocked and you have to go to a friends to watch a Presidential address, or mail the WH with a friends return mailing address. You can also just make another Twitter account to see what is being posted, which I think is a small part of the 1st Amendment questioning. I think the problem is that the tech portion isn't a cut and dry as websites or physical mail. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by eau de sauvage on 07/12/18 at 00:43:55 677942435A464F532A0 wrote:
No one needs to do anything, he is already a liar and fraudster, he has broken all ethical rules in order to use the presidency to enrich himself. He boasts about sexually assaulting women. He discredits himself and dishonours the entire office of the President. He punishes the US's allies and befriends her enemies. He is also a coward who would embarrass and then sack his own secretary of State via twitter. Worst of all his entire mode of operation in order to shore up his minority presidency is do divide the American people and set them against each other using the most basic of human fears. He in a word is scum and no one needs to do anything other than to draw attention to his actions which he himself chooses to do. Go Figger. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by eau de sauvage on 07/12/18 at 00:50:12 4E506B6A736F667A030 wrote:
No he didn't 'unfriend' someone, he illegally, (because his potus account is an official WH account) blocked someone in violation of the 1st amendment. Small beer in regards to his other more serious ethical upendings. The fact that he seems to have encouraged you to deliberately lie (unfriend) in order to try and excuse him, is exactly how he has perverted the presidency to pit the people of America against each other. He can have a private account and do what he wants, like everyone else. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by MnSpring on 07/12/18 at 08:35:02 1131333B2631540 wrote:
Is their anyone else on twitter that can confirm or deny this ? No need to join twitter to find out. "...Essentially Trump stopped Tiegen from being able to access his now considered official statements that should be made available to all. ..." I would like to see, the law, that now makes, twitters from Trump, "...considered official statements ..." I am not aware of any such laws, outside of, 'agency/s', (who have NO power to make law), have said it is. Please inform us/me, where that 'law' resides. So it can be looked at. Thanks. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Serowbot on 07/12/18 at 08:38:59 11031714030507620 wrote:
The First Amendment don't matter any more... Remember all that carrying the Constitution in your pocket, Tea Party stuff?... That's over. The Constitution isn't important anymore. Trump says so... |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by MShipley on 07/12/18 at 13:16:34 No one needs to do anything, he is already a liar and fraudster, he has broken all ethical rules in order to use the presidency to enrich himself. He boasts about sexually assaulting women. He discredits himself and dishonours the entire office of the President. He punishes the US's allies and befriends her enemies. He is also a coward who would embarrass and then sack his own secretary of State via twitter. Worst of all his entire mode of operation in order to shore up his minority presidency is do divide the American people and set them against each other using the most basic of human fears. He in a word is scum and no one needs to do anything other than to draw attention to his actions which he himself chooses to do. Go Figger.[/quote] This is why I can not be a progressive leftist, you have to throw away all reality. Winston Churchill was also considered to be different but he was just what the country needed at the time. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Trippah on 07/12/18 at 13:36:33 I hope you are not so beyond reason as to propose that Trump is what we need, although he is showing us just how far we haven't come in being healthy tolerant people. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Eegore on 07/12/18 at 14:12:18 Interesting reading about this topic for anyone that wants to see where the argument comes from. The Standford paper reveals a lot. Also a simple Google search with several descriptions, charts and videos on how Twitter blocking works. https://www.archives.gov/presidential-libraries/laws/1978-act.html https://www.archives.gov/about/laws/presidential-records.html https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1650425 https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=HMRHW9W3IoqgjwTq2I_YBQ&q=How+blocking+on+twitter+works&oq=How+blocking+on+twitter+works&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i22i30k1.1459.6093.0.6225.30.29.0.0.0.0.164.2766.20j9.29.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..1.29.2763.0..0j0i131k1j0i22i10i30k1j33i22i29i30k1j0i13i30k1j0i8i13i30k1.0.HaG4ELGPwo4 |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by faffi on 07/12/18 at 15:00:54 41534744535557320 wrote:
That is basically how the majority of the Western world sees President Trump. However, we must remember that he wasn't elected by the world, and the world's opinion is rather irrelevant - what matter is the opinion of the American people because he is their president. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by MnSpring on 07/12/18 at 16:42:58 5676747C6176130 wrote:
Went Through all of those, read them all, did NOT see, ANY, reference to a, 'Law', that what a POTUS, said on a, 'twitter', is a, 'OFFICIAL', Government Statement. Perhaps I missed it, could you point it out to me ? Thanks. Did find this: "Yes, Twitter has changed its blocking policy. Now, it says, "if you block another user, that user will not know that you have blocked them." With this new policy, unless your account is protected, the blockee can still follow you, add you to lists, see your tweets in his timeline, etc. The blockee can see everything!" Yes, "...where the argument comes from...." is interesting. Still, where is the 'Fact', that Trumps, tweets are, 'Official', therefor affecting the 1st ? |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by eau de sauvage on 07/12/18 at 18:25:56 4A4D4A4A452C0 wrote:
The world's opinion *is* irrelevant because the USA could if they wanted to begin a pointless war with say Iraq and destabilise the entire Middle East and make the entire world a less safe place. Oh yeah they already did that, but there's lots of other stuff the US can do like empowering Russia to interfere in elections that are Euro based. Also he lost the vote by 3 million but due to America not being a true democracy it turns out that in a country of 300m it only took 70k voters in three swing states to inflict this moron on the world. And now that the republicans blocked Merrick Garland they are further cementing their hold on power with blatant political appointees to the supreme court who will trample the will of 2/3 of US voters. Power should be tempered by compassion, Trump is a narcissistic pig. The world is now a global village. The USA made the rules for world trade, now they want to trash the organisation that they empowered due to one nutcase. All the past problems of humanity have often been down to one of nut jobs totally out of control. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Eegore on 07/12/18 at 20:12:23 "Went Through all of those, read them all, did NOT see, ANY, reference to a, 'Law'" There isn't any specific law about POTUS Twitter, that's why this conversation is taking place. What is available are the groundwork, and other laws that assist in the determination of the current situation and how it applies to the US Constitution. Pretty much how all new laws work now, they use precedence and the legal structure made available previously. A new law isn't made for every situation, the current law is applied to new situations, and the POTUS blocking someone may violate the 1st Amendment. More info: http://theconversation.com/federal-judge-rules-trumps-twitter-account-is-a-public-forum-97159 http://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/sites/lawjournalnewsletters/2017/12/01/trumps-tweets-are-official-statements/?slreturn=20180612225242 You have to read the information provided with the articles and not just the articles. The exact DOJ cases: 1:17-cv-05205-NRB 1:17-cv-00144-APM Twitter cites information that POTUS tweets are Official Whitehouse Statements. https://twitter.com/i/moments/872167606802718721?lang=en This has not been made law, or assumes that it is law, this is a situation or event that law is to be used to interpret how it applies, and if an action s legal. It is already clearly defined that Viewpoint Discrimination is a violation of the 1st Amendment. In May U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald ruled that @realDonaldTrump constitutes a public forum and by blocking people it constitutes viewpoint discrimination in 1:17-cv-05205-NRB. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Eegore on 07/12/18 at 20:30:43 "Did find this: "Yes, Twitter has changed its blocking policy. Now, it says, "if you block another user, that user will not know that you have blocked them." With this new policy, unless your account is protected, the blockee can still follow you, add you to lists, see your tweets in his timeline, etc. The blockee can see everything!"" That's interesting as it conflicts with Twitters information: https://help.twitter.com/en/using-twitter/blocking-and-unblocking-accounts "•Blocked accounts do not receive a notification alerting them that their account has been blocked. However, if a blocked account visits the profile of an account that has blocked them, they will see they have been blocked (unlike mute, which is invisible to muted accounts)." "Blocked accounts cannot: •Follow you •View your Tweets when logged in on Twitter (unless they report you, and your Tweets mention them) •Find your Tweets in search when logged in on Twitter •Send Direct Messages to you •View your following or followers lists, likes or lists when logged in on Twitter •View a Moment you’ve created when logged in on Twitter •Add your Twitter account to their lists •Tag you in a photo" "Blocking only works if the account you’ve blocked is logged in on Twitter. For example, if the account you’ve blocked isn't logged in or is accessing Twitter content via a third party, they may be able to see your public Tweets. Please keep this in mind when you choose to share content on Twitter." I'm not sure if Twitters description of their platform is correct. So yes you can still see tweets, but you have to circumvent the system to a degree, like watching TV from a friends, or using an alternate email address to send emails to the White House. So you aren't prohibited from seeing the information, you are just not allowed to see it like everyone else. The "Send Direct Messages to you" has already been addressed by the above mentioned case regarding Twitter recognized as a public forum. Not exactly the same as the original question in this thread, but very close. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by MnSpring on 07/13/18 at 08:30:10 725250584552370 wrote:
That's why I asked people that were ON twitter, and used it, and know what can, and can not be, done. Any of the companies, 'social media'. They change the, 'rules' constantly. - - - - So if Buchwald said that blocking a twitter account, violates the First Amendment. Because it does not allow a person to express political views. If up held. Does that mean that in 100’s of Universities, 1,000 of classes, when a professor ‘punishes’ in some way or another, a student, because that student/s, political view is different then that of the professors. That ‘opinion’, will be upheld ? Gee, why are their not a bunch of, ‘discussions’, considering a student kicked out of class, or campus, or out of a, ’safe space’, for stating a different political POV ? Starting 40+ days ago ? OH, ’Schools out for summer’. Wonder if that could, (if upheld) fall over in the private sector. Like in a case, where a employed person, could carry a firearm, while they were employed, to protect themselves in a dangerous situation, and protect themselves, in coming to or, going home from work. And now they can’t. It is Clearly a Political Opinion, of the company, that denied them, the right to defend their life, (while at the work place, that when they agreed to work their, by the rules that were in place when they were hired), with a firearm, stun gun, knife. A new employee, sure, those are now the new rules, so work their by accepting the rules, or don’t. But all the people that DO, work their, are suddenly told, Your Political Opinion does not matter, therefore, you conform to my, political opinion, or you will quit. Wonder how: ‘Viewpoint Discrimination is a violation of the 1st Amendment.” When a company, forces, the employed it currently has, to a different political viewpoint, under threat of being fired, if they don’t. Would be viewed ? |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Eegore on 07/13/18 at 10:08:19 "Does that mean that in 100’s of Universities, 1,000 of classes, when a professor ‘punishes’ in some way or another, a student, because that student/s, political view is different then that of the professors. That ‘opinion’, will be upheld ?" It should. "Like in a case, where a employed person, could carry a firearm, while they were employed, to protect themselves in a dangerous situation, and protect themselves, in coming to or, going home from work. And now they can’t." They can protect themselves, there is no policy in place that prohibits someone protecting themselves no matter how many times you say it. They can have a firearm in their car, they can not have the car on company property, if they choose to work for that company. "It is Clearly a Political Opinion, of the company, that denied them, the right to defend their life, (while at the work place, that when they agreed to work their, by the rules that were in place when they were hired), with a firearm, stun gun, knife." It is state law that prohibits concealed carry on posted property and issues with that should be taken up with the state. The facility is fine with people carrying concealed, the state isn't. Posting the signs are due to more lawsuits than threats, and actions of violence requiring the use of deadly force. Zero visitors/patients were killed in self defense in the past 134 years and lawsuits are fielded monthly. It may be viewed as a political move however the decision was based off of legal posturing not politics. The logic of that being that employees can conceal carry as soon as state law allows it. As for how this works with the 1st Amendment the medical center isn't prohibiting the free speech of people that want to conceal carry on property. They are not stopping anyone from posting on a public forum - which is what this thread is about - so their rights of free speech are not being restricted in any way. Employees are not reprimanded at all for voicing their disagreement about signs of any kind on company property. I don't think any judge out there is going to let people conceal carry in airports, prisons, or courtrooms because stopping it is a violation of the 1st Amendment. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by Eegore on 07/13/18 at 10:09:56 Twitters website reflects correct information as of 0104hrs GMT. |
|
Title: Re: Chrissy Tiegen blocked by Trump Post by faffi on 07/13/18 at 11:56:47 5A485C5F484E4C290 wrote:
;D 5A485C5F484E4C290 wrote:
That is a bit tricky, because there is a case for area also having an importance. We have the same dilemma in Norway, where Finnmark is the largest county but with the smallest population. And more than 10 % of the entire population - and twice that of Finnmark - live in the capitol city. So basically, a very small area of Norway could completely overpower the biggest county due to their lack of population. So Finnmark has their votes count more per head that those living in the capitol. Is it a perfect system? Not at all. But one person, one vote also has its limitations. 5A485C5F484E4C290 wrote:
Whether a fan or not of Trump, it will be very difficult to argue with that. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |