The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down

Status
Not open for further replies.
I still can't grasp the simplicity of the platform being politically unbiased , i.e. not shadow banning, or banning opposition party candidates etc vs Musks own personal views and see how they are able to exist without contradicting each other..

I mean, lets take the last legal/trust head Vijaya Gadde:
The link takes you to a site that has "Democracy is on the line in the midterms—and if we all show up, we can defeat the Radical Right", "Volunteering to get out the vote this weekend is the best way to ensure Democratic victories up and down the ballot"
Then her donation record (https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/results?name=Vijaya+Gadde&order=desc&sort=D) , 100% democrat..

Then compare to Musk:
Just his donation record shows massive bias to Democrats (https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/results?name=Elon+Musk) 28 Democrat vs 15 Republican
Never mind openly stating he's "In the past I voted Democrat, because they were (mostly) the kindness party. But they have become the party of division & hate, so I can no longer support them and will vote Republican."
and since said "I'm open to the idea of voting Democrat again in future"
and finally the most common sense of centralist mantras "To independent-minded voters: Shared power curbs the worst excesses of both parties, therefore I recommend voting for a Republican Congress, given that the Presidency is Democratic"

Staggering cognitive bias
 
Last edited:
dowie said:
Well, of course, you can change your mind, the point though is you were talking about how anyone could see themselves as independent-minded but he was addressing independent voters as per the second tweet i.e. those who are unaffiliated.

I'm not sure what it is you think is "even worse"? He's simply voicing his views on the election.
Click to expand...

It would be like Facebook going "Vote for Trump in 2024, because we've had democrats in the last 4 years, just to balance things out" - add the caveat that "for the independent voters".
 
Happy with everything he's done so far, there are more people that need to come back but they're getting there, slowly.

One of the first things Elon did was cut down the amount of child porn related hashtags on Twitter, why were they even on Twitter? That should have been something they could have easily clamped down on.. Which raises the question? Why does the left tolerate pedophilia? It took them several weeks to take down a video of child being abused, it was only removed when authorities ordered them to delete it.... What were Twitter staff doing at the time?
 
Raymond Lin said:
It would be like Facebook going "Vote for Trump in 2024, because we've had democrats in the last 4 years, just to balance things out" - add the caveat that "for the independent voters".
Click to expand...

No, it wouldn't!

It would be like Mark Zuckerberg saying that on his personal page and it's not a caveat, it's literally who was being addressed.
 
Last edited:
Raymond Lin said:
Oh yes, it wouldn't. Facebook didn't fire all their lawyers and PR department. Unlike Elon, who made himself the voice of Twitter.
Click to expand...

He's allowed to have personal views!

Demon said:
I still can't grasp the simplicity of the platform being politically unbiased , i.e. not shadow banning, or banning opposition party candidates etc vs Musks own personal views and see how they are able to exist without contradicting each other..
Click to expand...
 
Demon said:
I still can't grasp the simplicity of the platform being politically unbiased , i.e. not shadow banning, or banning opposition party candidates etc vs Musks own personal views and see how they are able to exist without contradicting each other..

I mean, lets take the last legal/trust head Vijaya Gadde:
The link takes you to a site that has "Democracy is on the line in the midterms—and if we all show up, we can defeat the Radical Right", "Volunteering to get out the vote this weekend is the best way to ensure Democratic victories up and down the ballot"
Then her donation record (https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/results?name=Vijaya+Gadde&order=desc&sort=D) , 100% democrat..

Then compare to Musk:
Just his donation record shows massive bias to Democrats (https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/results?name=Elon+Musk) 28 Democrat vs 15 Republican
Never mind openly stating he's "In the past I voted Democrat, because they were (mostly) the kindness party. But they have become the party of division & hate, so I can no longer support them and will vote Republican."
and since said "I'm open to the idea of voting Democrat again in future"
and finally the most common sense of centralist mantras "To independent-minded voters: Shared power curbs the worst excesses of both parties, therefore I recommend voting for a Republican Congress, given that the Presidency is Democratic"

Staggering cognitive bias
Click to expand...

Stunningly obvious post to all of us who are being intellectually honest in this conversation
 
Demon said:
I still can't grasp the simplicity of the platform being politically unbiased , i.e. not shadow banning, or banning opposition party candidates etc vs Musks own personal views and see how they are able to exist without contradicting each other..

I mean, lets take the last legal/trust head Vijaya Gadde:
The link takes you to a site that has "Democracy is on the line in the midterms—and if we all show up, we can defeat the Radical Right", "Volunteering to get out the vote this weekend is the best way to ensure Democratic victories up and down the ballot"
Then her donation record (https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/results?name=Vijaya+Gadde&order=desc&sort=D) , 100% democrat..

Then compare to Musk:
Just his donation record shows massive bias to Democrats (https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/results?name=Elon+Musk) 28 Democrat vs 15 Republican
Never mind openly stating he's "In the past I voted Democrat, because they were (mostly) the kindness party. But they have become the party of division & hate, so I can no longer support them and will vote Republican."
and since said "I'm open to the idea of voting Democrat again in future"
and finally the most common sense of centralist mantras "To independent-minded voters: Shared power curbs the worst excesses of both parties, therefore I recommend voting for a Republican Congress, given that the Presidency is Democratic"

Staggering cognitive bias
Click to expand...

I think you've got confused.
 
Never mind openly stating he's "In the past I voted Democrat, because they were (mostly) the kindness party. But they have become the party of division & hate, so I can no longer support them and will vote Republican."

This is the dumbest thing he has ever said to the point where I’m fairly sure it’s just him trying to wind up teh libs. It’s so unbelievably disingenuous it’s comical
 
Last edited:
imtoooldforthis said:
“Never mind openly stating he's "In the past I voted Democrat, because they were (mostly) the kindness party. But they have become the party of division & hate, so I can no longer support them and will vote Republican."

This is the dumbest thing he has ever said to the point where I’m fairly sure it’s just him trying to wind up teh libs.
Click to expand...

Indeed.
 
Demon said:
I still can't grasp the simplicity of the platform being politically unbiased , i.e. not shadow banning, or banning opposition party candidates etc vs Musks own personal views and see how they are able to exist without contradicting each other..

I mean, lets take the last legal/trust head Vijaya Gadde:
The link takes you to a site that has "Democracy is on the line in the midterms—and if we all show up, we can defeat the Radical Right", "Volunteering to get out the vote this weekend is the best way to ensure Democratic victories up and down the ballot"
Then her donation record (https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/results?name=Vijaya+Gadde&order=desc&sort=D) , 100% democrat..

Then compare to Musk:
Just his donation record shows massive bias to Democrats (https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/results?name=Elon+Musk) 28 Democrat vs 15 Republican
Never mind openly stating he's "In the past I voted Democrat, because they were (mostly) the kindness party. But they have become the party of division & hate, so I can no longer support them and will vote Republican."
and since said "I'm open to the idea of voting Democrat again in future"
and finally the most common sense of centralist mantras "To independent-minded voters: Shared power curbs the worst excesses of both parties, therefore I recommend voting for a Republican Congress, given that the Presidency is Democratic"

Staggering cognitive bias
Click to expand...

So to clarify.

Not especially well known person employed by twitter, with just over 100k followers, doesn't tell people who to vote for but post a link to democrat site.

One of the most well known people on the planet and owner of twitter, with 119 million followers (That's 112,000% more) tells people to vote Republican

And that is the same thing?
 
Last edited:
VincentHanna said:
So to clarify.

Not especially well known person employed by twitter, with just over 100k followers, doesn't tell people who to vote for but post a link to democrat site.

One of the most well known people on the planet and owner of twitter, with 119 million followers (That's 112,000% more) tells people to vote Republican

And that is the same thing?
Click to expand...

We've had some bloke on here that thought Trump was just one person, compared to the political movement of wokeness.

I wouldn't expect serious and logical takes on anything in this thread.
 
imtoooldforthis said:
Never mind openly stating he's "In the past I voted Democrat, because they were (mostly) the kindness party. But they have become the party of division & hate, so I can no longer support them and will vote Republican."

This is the dumbest thing he has ever said to the point where I’m fairly sure it’s just him trying to wind up teh libs. It’s so unbelievably disingenuous
Click to expand...
Sure..

I mean on their own party page (https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/healing-the-soul-of-america/)
We believe Black lives matter, and will establish a national commission to examine the lasting economic effects of slavery, Jim Crow segregation, and racially discriminatory federal policies on income, wealth, educational, health, and employment outcomes; to pursue truth and promote racial healing; and to study reparations.
Click to expand...
The extreme gap in household wealth and income between people of color—especially Black Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, and certain Asian American and Pacific Islander communities—and white families. The extreme gap in household wealth and income between people of color—especially Black Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, and certain Asian American and Pacific Islander communities—and white families is hurting our working class and holding our country back. Democrats are committed to improving economic mobility for people of color. We will fight to tackle intergenerational poverty and close the racial wealth gap.
Click to expand...


What do you call it when you group people by skin colour, and aim to treat one differently from the other?

Some of us just think we should aim for a colourblind society, you know, poor white, black, asian, whatever, they are poor, they need help.. equally...


VincentHanna said:
So to clarify.

Not especially well known person employed by twitter, with just over 100k followers, doesn't tell people who to vote for but post a link to democrat site.

One of the most well known people on the planet and owner of twitter, with 119 million followers (That's 112,000% more) tells people to vote Republican

And that is the same thing?
Click to expand...
Oh, sorry I thought the point was the person who dictates Twitters moderation policy etc should not posting politically biased views on twitter, thats a severe conflict of interest if you are claiming the platform is politically agnostic..

But no, the point appears to now be it's only a conflict of interest if you are popular.. gotcha..

Jono8 said:
We've had some bloke on here that thought Trump was just one person, compared to the political movement of wokeness.

I wouldn't expect serious and logical takes on anything in this thread.
Click to expand...
Er no, I was pointing out that a 'movement' with no figure head can't be compared to a figure head of a party, they are completely different entities..

But it's fine, any more grossly simplified conflations I can help you with today?
 
Last edited:
Roar87 said:
Stunningly obvious post to all of us who are being intellectually honest in this conversation
Click to expand...

I must say that is one of the most intellectual dishonest post you have ever.

visibleman said:
Christ, the last five pages have been a right struggle; not going to get that time back...

TGyuRAR.gif
Click to expand...

Not me I have my dowie cloak of invisiblity on.
 
Surprise surprise dowie is still arguing that Musk didn't tell people to vote for the GOP :rolleyes: He wanted Republicans to take control of Congress and used his megaphone to try and sway people to vote that way. So ruining any chance for the Democrats/Biden to do anything in his last 2 years.

Most people like to think of themselves as independent thinkers, so they are all going to think that applies to them. That is why he chose those words. Any voters he thought he could persuade to vote Republican. He is talking to everyone.
 
Roar87 said:
You do realise there is the concept of free speech that is separate from the one that exists in the American constitution? Most reasonable people understand that social media platforms have become the main way of communication in our society, simply the fact they're in private hands doesn't mean that we should be perfectly happy to have one sides views censored and another not, that's a ridiculous idea. Then because technology companies are so intertwined and politically aligned even if you try to build a new platform they launch all sorts of attacks on you like removing your app from their stores and devices, now we're at the point where someone actually bought a platform and the attacks come in the form of advertisers suddenly withdrawing funding despite no actual changes to policy and Apple threatening to remove the app from their store. I think it's insane that people are actively seeking a platform that bans speech, literally begging to be censored and held in captivity like the Chinese population.
Click to expand...

What do you mean no changes? He is now the owner of the platform, he can do as he pleases with it, answers to no one, no board, no shareholders. He is not just a member of the community as he was before his purchase, what he says carries huge weight.

One of the very first things he did was post a CT about Nancy Pelosi's husband after he was attacked in his own home by some loon who wanted to break Nancy's legs so to get some 2020 election truth out of her. If you think advertisers don't see that and immediately think WTF! you are deluded. Words have consequences, they've always had consequences, they always will have consequences. Now being as rich as he is he may have forgotten that but he is now aware of it again, Twitter isn't SpaceX or Tesla.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom