AIRBNB can easily limit accounts and watch for people trying to rent out multiple properties.
That doesn't mean section 230 doesn't apply.
It was meant for ONE person renting out THEIR apartment or home. In Los Angeles, every local asshole with mommy and daddy's money have bought up any and all new apartments around Hollywood and now rents them out on AIRBNB.
That also has no bearing on whether this regulation complies with federal law, which is what's in question here.
I don't think "increasing property values" is a goal that government should have. Lower property values allow more people to own property. Why should government try to further enrich those who already own property?
If your choices are between bad and worse, voting for either is continuing the problem.
This isn't a choice between two bad candidates, it's a question of do we do this thing or not do it? So either the thing is better than what we're doing now, or it's worse (slim chance it's the same). Whether what we're doing now is awesome or terrible isn't part of the question.
So lets talk majority vs. minority. In the US, Obamacare was passed w/o a single Republican vote.
Brexit is more on the scale of a Constitutional amendment, not just an ordinary piece of legislation. An important one to be sure but not one that reshapes the country (as much as the Limbaugh types like to claim otherwise). And a constitutional amendment requires much greater than a simple majority, for good reason. Of course, this referendum wasn't even binding.
The federal law that covers all states except the district of columbia allows the 1 caller law to be enforced. I or you may record any of your own conversations at anytime anywhere. You do not have to tell others you are recording your conversation either in person or on the phone.
It's not that simple.
"Eleven states require the consent of every party to a phone call or conversation in order to make the recording lawful. These "two-party consent" laws have been adopted in California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington."
Clinton has admitted that setting up a private server was not a good idea and says she regrets it.
As far as I've heard though, she's stopped short of saying that she did something wrong and she's sorry for it. I'm sure she regrets it, but I think only because of the trouble it's caused her, not because she realizes it was the wrong thing to do.