I am being sarcastic ;) the guy is supposed to be a freedom fighter for privacy/security but is trying to ban boycotts, the most basic form of protest, and integral to US democracy.
Your previous comment came off very genuine. If clarity of statement is important, it might be worth ensuring your actual intent is made unambiguously clear somewhere in message, if that message is otherwise ironic or sarcastic.
It already in exists in the form of Anti-BDS laws. 35 states already have them
>Anti-BDS laws
These would seem to contravene the First Amendment.
And? The US doesn’t work the way you think it does. It operates illegally and protects its powers over people. As a factual observation. What then
I am being sarcastic ;) the guy is supposed to be a freedom fighter for privacy/security but is trying to ban boycotts, the most basic form of protest, and integral to US democracy.
Your previous comment came off very genuine. If clarity of statement is important, it might be worth ensuring your actual intent is made unambiguously clear somewhere in message, if that message is otherwise ironic or sarcastic.
He's only banning the 'bad' boycotts. Right? /s
Well, apparently, that's how a good politician works. Just like a good software engineer would have not one, but two backups, at different locations.
It's similar to what economists say about not pulling all your eggs in the same basket.
close enough
I must add that "good politics" are all about compromise.
In my somewhat grim perspective the best outcome of good politics means none of the constitutents are happy and none are desperately angry.
politics are all about the completely bland and boring averaging
but I come from a land of historically terrible, awful politicians and leaders