SoylentNews

‘Cost Me the Election’: Data Centers Trigger Voter Backlash

posted by hubie on Sunday June 28, @12:19PM   

owl writes:

https://www.newsweek.com/cost-me-the-election-data-centers-trigger-voter-backlash-12118327

A wave of voter anger over massive data center projects is beginning to reshape U.S. politics, with local officials and senior lawmakers losing elections after backing controversial developments tied to the artificial intelligence boom.

In Utah on Wednesday, State Senate President J. Stuart Adams—one of the most powerful Republicans in the state—lost his primary election after supporting a major data center development near the Great Salt Lake, in one of the clearest signs yet of the growing political risks tied to the industry.

At the local level, the fallout was just as direct. "Do I think that the data center vote cost me the election? Yes I do," former Box Elder County Commissioner Lee Perry said after conceding his primary race, after voting to advance the same project.

---

Original Submission

• Re:Hey hey he's a flunkie!Re:Hey hey he's a flunkie! (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30, @03:39PM (1 child)

  by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30, @03:39PM (#1446753)

  So one set of rules for certain people and a more restrictive set for other people. Real people not the corporate personhood people.

  A corporation is comprised of a group of people. But that group is not a separate person. The group may have some of the powers and responsibilities of an individual, biological person, but that does not make it a person.

  Can corporations marry each other? Does a corporation have a biological sex at its birth? Does a corporation have a right to vote in elections? Can a corporation hold public office?

  If you can't answer yes to all of those questions and provide cogent explanations for why you're saying yes, then it's a sign that corporations aren't people. If you're insisting that corporations are people but can't marry other corporations or hold public office, then you're denying rights to "corporate personhood people" that you provide to real people.

  So are you going to continue to gaslight everyone that "corporate personhood people" are actual people?

  Parent

  Starting Score:	0		points
  Moderation		+1
  Insightful=1, Total=1
  Extra 'Insightful' Modifier		0
  Total Score:		1

• Re:Hey hey he's a flunkie!(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday June 30, @06:14PM

  by khallow (3766) on Tuesday June 30, @06:14PM (#1446775) Journal

  There was a reason I wrote: "Real people not the corporate personhood people." It was to forestall arguments about same sex corporation marriages. Why would you suggest something unnatural like that?
  
  My point was that rights are being taken from real people not legal constructs.

  So are you going to continue to gaslight everyone that "corporate personhood people" are actual people?

  Are you going to read?

  Parent