Nothing *directly* related

“Ultimately, after all was said and done, the Latino community did come out to vote, and completely surprised us,” Murillo wrote in the email. “We never anticipated that 29% of Latinos would vote for Trump. No one did. "

ironic

And making law to regulate *indirect* donations may just lead USA to tyranny

yeah? and what if it was found out a private company was paying trump voters to stay home?

i mean, its just a private company and a private citizen

I'm not saying I like it, or support it

that sounds like corruption to me

But I don't see a way of making legislation that a tyrant couldn't use to gain further power and silence opposition

“It was aimed only at one group, a group that Google cynically assumed would vote exclusively for the Democratic Party,” Carlson said. “Furthermore, this mobilization effort targeted not only the entire country but swing states vital to the Hillary campaign. This was not an exercise in civics, this was political consulting. It was in effect an in-kind contribution to the Hillary Clinton campaign.”

There are a couple of tactics to prevent Google from exercising undue political influence. Minority shareholder lawsuits, threats of anti-trust investigation, and maybe assigning a dollar figure to services donated to political parties and counting that against their contribution limits.

Like , just imagine Trump accusing google and suing them for meddling in the attention for those latino bus rides. Now imagine Hillary doing the same to, say.... McDonald's, saying that too many democrats went to eat burgers than to vote

Like if they're only allowed to donate $500,000 in cash, but they donate $500,000,000 in services that's a big problem.

well the issue with that sort is, what if you just stuff the other faction with services and say you're with them

i don't think companies should be allowed to endorse candidates. not without being labeled a political organization and therefore their efforts count as contributions to their candidate

But google was doing so indoors

So is Twitter and such

The legislation isn't going to stop this sort of thing

And may be used negatively

stop? no. But are you saying there should be no course of action?

the country is already run by corporations enough as it is

Antitrust action is the obvious answer to any company that thinks it's large enough to fix elections.

republicans are too stupid to win the culture war

republican politicians

seeing how rubio reacted to alex jones says it all

we actually have facebook employees onr ecord saying they censor conservative news

twitter employees saying the same

but what does rubio and Rs ask dorsey about?

russia

Rubio is a tool. Completely manufactured.

federal politicians in general are complete garbage. any that aren't complete garbage are anomalies.

Rubio is an example of the Finlandization of the republican party that Trump saved us from.

wasn't rubio a robot?

i recall him repeating his lines

His focus on 'muh Russia' is more evidence that he's carrying water for the left. Gang of Eight was another example.

The Washington GOP settled into its role as controlled opposition to a Dem POTUS a long time ago. That's why they're so lost while Trump is POTUS.

sellouts

Rubio isn't a democrat of course, nor does he have any official ties or sympathies to them, but he represents a strain of the republican party that is so fearful of the democrats they they reflexively favor their policies in some pitiful attempt to avoid criticism.

He's a weak version of McCaine

Stockholm syndrome.

Panders to the Dems, abandons the Republican stance, and is anti Trump

There were Republicans at the hearing that brought up bias. Cruz most notably but there were others.