The only reason it's partisan is because the previous government addressed it. Nothing else. There's nothing inherent in the values of either party to strongly side for or against net neutrality.

I think you and grandparent don't agree on the meaning of the word 'partisan', and ended up talking past each other.

Parties don't have inherent values at all. They're just factions of people who hang out at the same clubs. Their values swing as the people attending the parties change over time.

> There are near zero crossover votes on either side.

Citation? Because I don't know a single Dem or Rep who endorses removing Net Neutrality (although I think I just read the first comment to say so on HN above).

Literally every republican with a stake (i.e. the FCC board, and those responsible for nominating/confirming them) endorses this policy. It's literally the party line position.

I think this citation needs to go the other way: which republican do you know who have come out in favor of the current net neutrality regime. I honestly can't think of one.

Your original subject is "His core base", which was what I referenced. You are talking about party politicians. In this situation, we may both be correct.

I'm part of a large upcomming group on the net that has been pushed into a tiny corner that started with the original net neutrality. Many of these people supported trump, but now are joining in rallying against the FCC change.

This does not include that the new net neutrality we have now is not a true title 2. And has many loop holes inside of it. So what should be the conversation is getting a true title 2 on the books. Not a us versus them. As people I was talking about in the former do not hold the same beliefs of establishment Republicans