Jim Acosta is deliberately misrepresenting the position of Tucker Carlson. To accidentally do this, in journalism school, would give one an automatic ‘F”. At least up until 2010 or so it did. To do it intentionally is pathetic. To say being against mandatory ANYTHING is the equivalent of being against the thing itself is a false dichotomy. Why someone who takes a ‘liberal’ position believes in mandatory anything is a contradiction, as is deliberately misrepresenting another person’s position. In these polarized, divided times, journalists need to represent both positions fairly and accurately so that we can understand the other person’s actual position. It doesn’t mean they have to agree with it, Just know what it is.