21–30 of 108 posts
Edit: I will be more blunt since some replies show they don't understand what I find weird:
Why do you need a private social media company to stop your president from planting terrorism in your own country because he thinks the election is fake instead of congress/government/whatever??!
I find this disingenuous. This is his latest position on the matter of succession[1]: "Even though I totally disagree with the outcome of the election, and the facts bear me out, nevertheless there will be an orderly transition on January 20th" Why does Twitter want to prevent him from making such a statement on his Twitter account? Would that not be calming the situation, if anything? [1] https://www.politico.com/ne…
He says the facts bear out his assertion that the election was stolen... how is that calming?
If any tech company were to try to suppress the "facts" that support the "rigged election" narrative, that would only reinforce the their beliefs.
Am I the only one who finds the whole situation bizarre? Edit: I will be more blunt since some replies show they don't understand what I find weird: Why do you need a private social media company to stop your president from planting terrorism in your own country because he thinks the election is fake instead of congress/government/whatever??!
I find this disingenuous. This is his latest position on the matter of succession[1]: "Even though I totally disagree with the outcome of the election, and the facts bear me out, nevertheless there will be an orderly transition on January 20th" Why does Twitter want to prevent him from making such a statement on his Twitter account? Would that not be calming the situation, if anything? [1] https://www.politico.com/ne…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He says the facts bear out his assertion that the election was stolen... how is that calming?
The part that says there's "an orderly transition of power". Trumpers will forever believe that the election was stolen, but they can believe that from the comfort of their homes, they don't need to go out and attempt to overthrow the government because of it. If any tech company were to try to suppress the "facts" that support the "rigged election" narrative, that would only reinforce the their beliefs.
Am I the only one who finds the whole situation bizarre? Edit: I will be more blunt since some replies show they don't understand what I find weird: Why do you need a private social media company to stop your president from planting terrorism in your own country because he thinks the election is fake instead of congress/government/whatever??!
I find this disingenuous. This is his latest position on the matter of succession[1]: "Even though I totally disagree with the outcome of the election, and the facts bear me out, nevertheless there will be an orderly transition on January 20th" Why does Twitter want to prevent him from making such a statement on his Twitter account? Would that not be calming the situation, if anything? [1] https://www.politico.com/ne…
Cherry picking one sentence of a post that is "calming" is what is disingenuous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The part that says there's "an orderly transition of power". Trumpers will forever believe that the election was stolen, but they can believe that from the comfort of their homes, they don't need to go out and attempt to overthrow the government because of it. If any tech company were to try to suppress the "facts" that support the "rigged election" narrative, that would only reinforce the their beliefs.
If somebody said "your democracatically elected government has been taken away but you should just go home," would you? Would the Trump supporters that raided the capital yesterday? The reason they will forever believe that the election was stolen is because Trump continues to say that the election was stolen.
The other side undermining the election results after they lost is not exactly new.
Am I the only one who finds the whole situation bizarre? Edit: I will be more blunt since some replies show they don't understand what I find weird: Why do you need a private social media company to stop your president from planting terrorism in your own country because he thinks the election is fake instead of congress/government/whatever??!
That’s what you get when you elect a tabloid celebrity billionaire to the most important office in the world. I’ve been mostly disappointed with our selection of candidates for a long time, but I never thought I’d see that. It’s as if nobody outstanding even wants the job. Literally Idiocracy.
I think the issue in 2016 was too many people wanted the job. You can agree/disagree whether the primary field included 'outstanding' people, but the sheer number of candidates allowed the loud mouth to stand out.