Remember that California Democrat who helped AT&T eviscerate a net neutrality bill? We’re gonna put up a billboard in his district

https://medium.com/@fightfortheftr/remember-that-california-democrat-who-helped-at-t-eviscerate-a-net-neutrality-bill-there-e02636427958

created by evanFFTF on 26/06/2018 at 21:12 UTC

55057 upvotes, 135 top-level comments (showing 25)

Comments

Comment by SquizzOC at 26/06/2018 at 22:21 UTC*

8768 upvotes, 8 direct replies

Donated to get the billboard up. Fuck this guy.

To be clear, this is not my Billboard, I just donated $10 to help.

Comment by [deleted] at 26/06/2018 at 23:53 UTC*

2417 upvotes, 13 direct replies

[deleted]

Comment by [deleted] at 26/06/2018 at 21:29 UTC

1377 upvotes, 3 direct replies

Hopefully that will help that asshole to lose the next election.

Comment by MustGoOutside at 26/06/2018 at 23:50 UTC

366 upvotes, 4 direct replies

Do you have to say "With donations from the internet" ?

I think it looks much better with just "Paid for by Fight for the Future."

The reason is that old people vote. They think people on the internet are crazy. For example - when they ran internet-based polls in the democratic primaries, Bernie would almost always win. The TV commentators would always proceed to say something along the lines of "Oh, that's just the internet, it's not how people really feel."

I know this isn't the *same* thing. I just think that older voters will look at the source of funding and be skeptical of the cause.

Everything else, include the name of your organization has great optics for anyone who doesn't have a clue what this sign is actually about, include the people who actually vote (hint, it's old people).

Comment by evanFFTF at 26/06/2018 at 21:51 UTC

606 upvotes, 4 direct replies

SB 822 can still be saved. Some helpful links:

Go here[1] to call the California Assembly

1: https://www.battleforthenet.com/call/california

Chip in[2] toward the billboard in Chairman Miguel Santiago's district

2: https://donate.fightforthefuture.org/campaigns/santiago/#page-1

Read[3] and analysis of how SB822 was gutted and how it can be restored

3: https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2018/06/failing-real-test-sb-822-no-longer-restores-all-lost-net-neutrality-protections

Comment by Zilveari at 27/06/2018 at 00:32 UTC

69 upvotes, 2 direct replies

"That" California Democrat? Weren't there like eight of them?

Comment by CommanderVillain at 26/06/2018 at 23:12 UTC

64 upvotes, 2 direct replies

What district is this guy in, put his office address and let everyone mail him some letters how much of an asshat he is.

Comment by ryachow44 at 27/06/2018 at 02:14 UTC

18 upvotes, 0 direct replies

Vote him out

Comment by [deleted] at 26/06/2018 at 21:52 UTC

60 upvotes, 0 direct replies

Thank goodness. Thank you for the initiative. Will contribute to this fund to keep it going.

Comment by [deleted] at 26/06/2018 at 22:59 UTC

45 upvotes, 0 direct replies

Put up two in every district on the major highways for Dems that decide they want to sell us out to fucking monopolies.

Comment by Gld4neer at 27/06/2018 at 03:23 UTC

10 upvotes, 0 direct replies

Net neutrality is too nebulous a concept for most non-technical voters. Something like "AT&T paid Miguel Santiago <amount> to vote against affordable internet" would probably resonate more with people.

Comment by magneticphoton at 27/06/2018 at 00:25 UTC

34 upvotes, 1 direct replies

Why don't you advertise for a candidate that supports NN instead?

Comment by [deleted] at 26/06/2018 at 23:51 UTC

28 upvotes, 2 direct replies

[removed]

Comment by PM_me_UR_duckfacepix at 27/06/2018 at 00:51 UTC

31 upvotes, 2 direct replies

Here's what's wrong with that mock-up:

MIGUEL SANTIAGO IS HELPING TRUMP KILL NET NEUTRALITY

This is too long and not as legible as a roadside poster should be.

The all-uppercase-ness actually hampers legibility.
The name should be distinct from the other words, both to make it stand out, and to "shorten" the remainder, to improve legibility.
Jamming Trump into the sentence may be counterproductive. It may help you get people who don't understand why Net Neutrality is important but who hate Trump, but it will probably make you lose people who like Trump, even if they'd agree with you on Net Neutrality. Better to limit yourself to one person and the issue. Mind you, there will also be Democrats who'll refuse to attack Santiago for partisan reasons even though they hate Trump and like Net Neutrality. Try not to restrict yourself to people who agree with you 100%. Try not to lose people.
If Santiago already did this, then *helped* would be better – and also slightly more legible.

**Miguel Santiago**

helped kill

Net Neutrality

**Ask him why:**

*916-319-2053**

Comment by [deleted] at 26/06/2018 at 21:16 UTC

56 upvotes, 2 direct replies

[removed]

Comment by PillowTalk420 at 27/06/2018 at 02:31 UTC

5 upvotes, 0 direct replies

This got me thinking that the term "Net Neutrality" doesn't really mean anything to people not already familiar with it. If you don't know what it is or why it is important, why would you care about it's demise, you know?

Just imagining a ton of LA commuters seeing the sign but not understanding it in the least.

Comment by wrongtypebefoming at 27/06/2018 at 21:15 UTC

5 upvotes, 0 direct replies

That money sucker needs to be run out of the state.

Make a fucking example of him so no one else even tries this.

Comment by myblogisamazingdude at 28/06/2018 at 02:30 UTC

4 upvotes, 0 direct replies

His senate email address is Miguel.Santiago@asm.ca.gov, it's also tied to his phone. Let him know how you feel. (Edited because I accidentally put the senate email extension instead of assembly)

Comment by christmaspresent_tax at 02/07/2018 at 18:00 UTC

4 upvotes, 0 direct replies

Keep in mind that the people can legally file for a recall. That will get him removed from office which is more effective then asking him questions that he cannot give an honest answer to.

Sure you can call him, but do you honestly think he will give the real answer of "the bribe AT&T paid me was too big to pass up"?

Get people to together to do a recall and get him removed, then get someone who wont take those bribes to take his place. If we want the government to start becoming less corrupt, we can't just wait until it is time for an election to vote them out. There are other legal channels available such as recalls, we need to start using that in order to minimize harm.

If a government official no longer believes they will win their next election, then all morals will go out the window, they will instead seen to line their pockets as much as possible on their way out. With him siding with AT&T, he will now cater to anyone and everyone who is willing to bribe him. If he no longer has to worry about the vote of the people, then he has no reason to do right by them, and this corruption is just the beginning.

Citizens need to make a new rule, due to the level of forethought, and planning needed to make a corrupt legislative decision, there should be a 1 strike policy. If a politician does 1 corrupt thing, the people initiate the recall process that same day, and collect enough signatures to get the ball rolling. A corrupt politician should not get the chance to finish out a term.

Comment by MNGrrl at 26/06/2018 at 22:47 UTC

37 upvotes, 4 direct replies

It's a good idea in theory, but it won't be effective. It's not more democrats we need to sway, but Republicans. Doing that means explaining the implications of NN with respect to free market principles. It's not hard to do: Go over what a natural monopoly is, and how the telecommunications is such a market. Then go over how unhealthy the markets are -- there are few competitors, and deregulation won't create more.

There's no incentive for companies, because all of them have already issued press releases saying the abolishment of NN didn't alter their short or long-term plans for infrastructure expansion. Explain to them how not having NN creates a market that's good for the players already in the market, but utterly destroys the ability for a newcomer to participate. Go over how the major tech and telecom companies can lock out competition.

There won't be another Facebook, or Google, or Amazon. There won't be any new competitors into the market because the incumbents can simply throttle them until they're uncompetitive, strangle their income, and then launch their own offerings. Microsoft for decades was referred to as "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" regarding how it would acquire competing products and then kill them off.

The fact is, NN was the only thing that had a shot of restoring an open and competitive marketplace. Pai and Trump sold out the free market for pennies to the telecoms. Conservatives should be pissed about this, but they've been sold down the river. They are stuck on the mantra "deregulation is good for business."

Not when there's a monopoly on the market. The proper role of the government, as many economists have said, is to come in and break them up. We did it to AT&T and Standard Oil. But this is a rare outcome, and Republicans have worked aggressively to gut the DOJ's ability to break them up.

The end result has been progress in IT has slowed to a snail's pace. Everything is ensnared in patent and copyright law, monopoly power. It's good for *big* business. It's *not* good for the markets, and ***THIS*** is the message they need to hear, over and over again. Liberals need to break out the macroeconomics books and begin a campaign to educate conservatives.

They have been lied to, and they need to know. There's a counternarrative that Fox and others have advanced that has a deleterious effect on the economy and the free market. A billboard won't get this done. It's a feel good, and maybe it gets a few people to call, but the truth is, that billboard isn't going to piss off the right people. We need conservatives angry. Very angry. Like grab your gun and head to city hall angry. We need them blowing up the phones.

Comment by arkaneent at 26/06/2018 at 22:10 UTC

107 upvotes, 4 direct replies

Quick question, why have you made this a left Vs right issue?

Instantly dividing your potential audience

Comment by BABarracus at 27/06/2018 at 01:27 UTC

5 upvotes, 0 direct replies

I remember my government teacher saying that sometimes a canidate will run under a certain party because they cant win otherwise

Comment by branchbranchley at 27/06/2018 at 01:56 UTC

2 upvotes, 0 direct replies