• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Of course now Donny needs Section 230

As someone who voted twice for The Donald and who would vote for him again (unless he opposed federal aid to pay families for caregivers for their loved ones!!!), I wish his new website great success.

But as a person devoted to impartial journalism, I doubt that his website will be a success.
 
Anyone who values online discussion needs Section 230.
 
What could go wrong with Trump and Nunez in charge?
 
The king hypocrite

Didn't the proclamations of that new site claim it would be a bastion of FREE SPEECH?

If that was the case why on earth would anyone managing that place need the ability to ban subscribers?

Especially just for having opposing disagreeable opinions they would post?

Doesn't sound very FREE SPEECH friendly to me?

Hypocrisy might be the right terminology?

Kind of like the 1000 year BAN I received at the Hannity website not really being a "BAN" according to their Mods but merely a 1000 year timeout or some such!

Some R-wingers are truly cluelessly hilarious!
 
A quick check of the Truth social site was enough to note that signing up also opens the door for unlimited emails.

More spam.

Regards, stay safe 'n well 'n remember the Big 5.
 
Back
Top Bottom