ToS that enforces 16+ to post content of themselves as the main focus of their channel. Definitely not require any sort of ID. If they’re proven to be lying, or are clearly and visibly under 16, then ban.
Okay the age part doesn’t seem pragmatic at all since aging a kid based on only appearances is wildly inconsistent, and now you’ve banned someone so they just make another account.
I’m sorry, I’m confused. I asked how someone who wanted to ban child influencers would accomplish that, and you gave a small list of things you would do to do it, and then when it didn’t work you said that was the whole point?
Is your point that you can’t do it? And if so, why did you offer up something if you figured it wouldn’t even work?
If they’re ban evading, they’re just going to keep getting rebanned and isn’t an influencer at that point. Appearances is a difficult problem, and unless it’s very obvious they’re under 16, they shouldn’t be banned. The alternative is that you ask for IDs to guarantee this, which is horrible. It’d be much more preferable to let this small problem run rampant, since it’s significantly less harmful then requiring IDs which I hope I don’t need to explain why that’s extremely bad, privacy invasive, and a security nightmare.
I don't think it should be banned outright, but there definitely needs to be more regulation in this field. Child influencers are basically child actors, who have notoriously been taken advantage of by the entertainment industry for ages. While regulations have made things a lot better for child actors, it's still not perfect, but way better than before. There should be pushes for similar protections for child influencers, since they're basically doing the same thing, just on social media instead of in film.
Kansas state patrol needs to step in and take over this situation, hopefully ending with the prosecution of the police chief for abuse of power and manslaughter. If they don’t act soon, the FBI needs to investigate both organizations.
Yes. But sometimes the shitbirds make enough shit that the shit starts to run uphill, and the staties get involved so some politicians don’t have to deal with even more shit.
Not just the police chief. They need immediate investigation into magistrate who authorized this raid basically signed their name to a raid that blatantly violates constitutional rights and ignores over 100 years of legal precedence
They carry live weapons in some cities, but more often they carry pepper spray and tasers. They also work with the police to incarcerate people who threaten the profitability of the stores on the property. State violence is still violence, the most cowardly kind.
It’s been 8 hours since the MicroWave notified me that my HotPockets were ready. Maybe, for the first time ever, I won’t burn off the roof of my mouth on my second bite.
Weird, it was toggled on in my settings but I don’t remember checking it. I guess I thought it was for making bot accounts visible when I first signed up? Thanks for flagging.
The SW passed them through anyway, “with conditions” which likely include "just don’t give this couple any gay kids"
They were ultimately denied for reasons not stated
We actually have no other information about what they said apart from they don’t like gay or trans kids
I think point 2 kinda invalidates the lawsuit, and point 4 is going to become extremely relevant when we find out they were fine with hitting kids who misbehaved or something.
This has been one delicious fucking disaster. He doesn’t stand a chance in a general. But he’s still managing to prevent the Rs from rebranding into something sane enough idiots can vote for.
No, he’s really not. He’s in how many court cases at the moment? His Russian funders are busy losing a land war they started. He’s already lost the general once. People had four years of him so he’s a known quantity.
No, that’s fucking stupid. He’s not more dangerous than ever. It’s idiotic to suggest so.
Should we we be cautious? Of course. But the best possible outcome for this election slcycle was a fracturing of the Republican part and that’s what has happened. They’re fucked because after 40 years of Republicanism, they don’t mean or stand for shit other than hate and oppression. Their entire policy back catalogue is bunk. They’ve got nothing and are on the wrong side of everything and everyone, even their voters, know it.
I would suggest the Russians have never had a greater interest in controlling a US president than right now. Given how disastrous a Trump win would be, this is not the time for positivism and certainties. Anything could happen.
That’s not true. He has 2 state indictments plus federal charges. If he were elected he could only pardon the federal charges. In fact he will probably be charged soon in a 3rd state so even more fucked.
He's going to have to work to be elected during the court cases. He's already incredibly unpopular as is, and he'll have constant news dripping out about how big of a traitor he is and how he attempted a self coup. That's not going to help his poll numbers with anyone who wasn't already a MAGAt.
That doesn't matter at all in today's political climate. Tribalism has taken over and they don't care if he's a criminal, Republicans will all vote for him simply because he's the nominee. The ONLY thing that matters is if the Dems can turn out enough of their people to beat him in the general.
That doesn't matter at all in today's political climate. Tribalism has taken over and they don't care if he's a criminal, Republicans will all vote for him simply because he's the nominee.
Wow, that's a really bad take considering that independents are what wins a candidate the election, since as you say, tribalists are going to vote for their tribe.
Independents aren't going to gargle trump's marbles in the face of overwhelming evidence of his incompetence, open fascism, and disdain for the electoral process, and there aren't nearly enough brain dead republicans to carry him in the general alone.
TLDR: Political scientist did a study and wrote a book on independents. Most people who identify as independent actually lean towards one party and actually act MORE partisan than a party member. The "true" independents/undecideds completely withdraw from politics and just don't vote at all.
I like your positivity, I just hope it happens like that as well. I still remember he had almost no chance to win in 2016 and somehow won, he’ll even Trump was surprised he won.
You mean when Trump was an unknown quantity, when he was going up against another unpopular candidate who was attacked constantly for decades and had the FBI release damning evidence but keep the evidence on Donny secret?
2024 is a vastly different race, because none of the above is true, and trump is going to have to try to get elected while he's on trial for stealing documents and trying to start a coup. Plus, the worst they've got on Biden is Hunter, and that's such a nothingburger that they're now mad that they got what they wanted.
Trump was not an unknown quantity. He was elected back then precisely because he is exactly what the fascist republican party wanted then and continues to want now. And because people underestimated his chances.
Ignoring the danger he poses now because “people surely know better” is insane. January 6th and everything that lead to it happened after 4 years of that man’s bungling administration and you want to believe that everything is going to be fine?
Be optimistic if he loses. If he wins, the country is fucked. And until we know which way things go, anyone left leaning should treat this election as if we’re losing because letting our gaurd down has the potential of resulting in a Trump presidency with no brakes.
This has been one delicious fucking disaster. He doesn’t stand a chance in a general.
This mindset is what let him win in 2016. I don’t know about you, but I generally try not to make the same mistake twice. Yes, he has numerous indictments against him, some federal, some state. However, there is no constitutional or legal precedent preventing a felon from becoming president.
This is important to repeat:
There is no constitutional or legal precedent preventing a felon from becoming president.
No, it doesn’t matter if the indictments are federal or state. There is nothing disqualifing a felon from holding office. Furthermore, neither the states nor federal government can add a disqualifing condition without a constitutional amendment. I highly doubt a constitutional amendment will be written in those regards either, because I imagine there are many politicians at the state and local level who’d instantly lose their positions.
No its not. In 2016 the Democratic party thought they could win without progressives or leftists and they said fuckem’ along with the upper midwest. Democrats tried courting the center in 2016 and it failed.
… Yeah. Underestimating him and believing him to not be a threat is what lead him to win the election. The Democrats underestimated him and didn’t do their due diligence in reaching out to everyone and encouraging people to actually vote. That’s what I was trying to say.
If convincted he’s ineligible under the 14th amendment, which is technically binding without further actions. Of course he will still be allowed to run and it will be up to SCOTUs Imo they are not as sympathetic toward trump as most people here would believe.
This is above my pay grade, but I think it is ultimately up to SCOTUS to decide, in the sense that the constitution can disqualify you from something even if you weren’t charged with the relevant laws. In other words, even if insurrection wasn’t a crime, and even if trump was not charged with any crime, I think SCOTUS still get to decide what is an insurrection and what isn’t. I am just speculating I am not a lawyer.
While that is true, I think you’re putting too much faith in the system. It requires a lot of people to put the US before their own safety (because almost guaranteed, any state that leaves trump off the ballot will have nutjobs trying to take potshots at government officials). Additionally, if he isn’t elected, there will likely be another riot, especially if he was left off the ballot; and if he is elected and then forcefully removed from office, there will likely be an even bigger, bloodier one. I’m not totally convinced that the government won’t take the easy path, and, if he’s elected, make a big huff and fuss about it while avoiding anything tangible because they’re too afraid of trumpites.
I saw a post about this on a conservative site, and they all took offense to the implication that he “needed to be stopped”. And no one even mentioned the ‘coronation’ part.
news
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.