Comments by "Dan A" (@DanA-nl5uo) on "Who Elected Zuckerberg Head of the Thought Police?" video.

Ofcourse there is an easy answer. The Congress could pass a law making it illegal for any politician to lie in an ad. If they are proven to run ads with lies they disqualify themselves from the election and ban them from ever holding public office again.
7
Well if you read through the comments below the video you will see several people who failed the test in the video and are upset by what Graham "said" in that ad which the video tries to make clear was fake. So you might be able to sort it out but clearly even when told it was fake some people where tricked.
3
@dashx1103 who determines it now with the super PAC ads? But it isn't hard to prove false or misleading statements. As to would they be removed from office I believe if you are disqualified form an election then you are removed from office that is what happened to the Republican in NC during the last election IIRC. The one who interfered with the election by having his campaign collect ballots from people and filled them out or didn't turn them in.
1
Vincit Omnia Veritas well the fact that we have one political party that has convinced a large percentage of the population that climate chance is a Chinese hoax would definitely make the case that some people are tricked by lies. Or there would be no point in saying them in the first place. So thanks for proving how meaningless your argument is. By the way we already do limit the ability of politicians and PAC to lie to the public. So it isn't a question of free speech it is a question of having one constant standard. Unless you are arguing it should be illegal for Facebook to block anyone form airing any ad. So tell me are you upset that they pulled the ad the guy in the video was running? Or do you support different standard for politicians than avg Americans?
1
@dashx1103 who said the corporations get to be the fact checkers?
1
@dashx1103 well I said the Congress should pass a law which would be government oversight not corpate. But you seem to think the Washington post would be the deciding factor.
1
@dashx1103 we do have a group which is responsible for oversight of federal elections and campaign finance laws. They need to be fully staffed. But as it is an election and campaign law it would clearly fall under their jurisdiction.
1
@dashx1103 dude I haven't written the law. Laws are more complex then a YouTube discussion.
1
@dashx1103 it is a prime example of where government regulation is the correct answer.
1
@dashx1103 you are funny. .it is simple we use the government to pass regulations to control political campaigns already. The only difference is we haven't included socal media in those laws. So we pass laws to regulate it not hope or beg that Mark Zuckerberg does the right thing. Right now he chooses who gets to say what. Great for the company not so great for our society.
1