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

[Colonel_Klinck]

They do but it's already too late. Which is why the rights lies are dangerous.

Wasting your time with Roar. Trump spent 5 years undermining US institutions, including the election process with lies but Roar was happy to defend him.

 

[Irish_Tom]

As we chat about free speech an actual government minister, the car crash that is Nadine 'sandwich short of a picnic' Dorries, is tweeting actual lies about Kier Starmer.

Oh no, the horror, maybe someone should counter her "actual lies" with the truth then.

I’d be more concerned about actual threats to free speech, like the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 that’s just been passed into law — by a right-wing party no less.

 

[fez]

Why do people call liberal left? The opposite of liberal is illiberal, so is illiberal right? Is that where we are now? Are those of you on the right happy to be called illiberal?

There is no definition of left, right, liberal etc that people can agree on so its a bit of a moot point. The US left is further to the right than the European left. Liberal in the US means something different to the UK.

I basically mean people who would be considered left leaning in some capacity. People who have no axe to grind on race, sex, gender etc. People who adhere to the "give everyone the same opportunity and treat everyone the same" mantra.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Better censor her like the Hunter Biden laptop story then

What a weak argument. No one stopped any media outlet from publishing the story. Fox News turned it down before the NYP because its clearly nonsense. When Fox won't touch it, it must be bad.

Twitter and FB stopped it because it could easily have been more Russian hacked documents and there was no way to verify if they were even from Hunter Biden. Also look who was pushing it on media outlets, Rudy -my law licence is suspended- Giuliani . Why would anyone trust something coming from him?

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Even if they make verification 'optional', at least everyone "knows" that if you aren't verified your probably going to be a troll/bot/scammer/looney

Can you honestly see most Americans being happy to hand over their social security number or other private info to Twitter to be verified? Not a chance.

 

[fez]

Democrat voter != Left wing

I work in Fin-tech in the USA and I'm a conservative voter in the UK. Most people I work with vote democrat are more right wing than me.

The far woke left still makes up a small minority in most US tech companies.

I've somewhat addressed this in a post just above. There is no fundamental agreement on left/right. It differs on where you are in the world. The left in the US is democrat.

The far woke left make up a tiny proportion of people anywhere. They are just being pandered to disproportionately. Its one of the things I find fascinating about the US though. Their left wing party is very much not left wing by traditional UK/European standards. There are some very interesting contradictions in what they say in some areas and what they say in other areas which would logically match up.

 

[dowie]

There you go dowie, all the posts. Now please show us where you've proved your statement that 99% of Twitter employees are leftists. It should be really easy to do because your statement is clear and so must have bullet proof evidence to back it up. Enlighten us please, no waffle, just evidence to prove your statement is factual.

I literally already have supported my claim what is your argument here?

To be fair to @dowie, he didn’t claim there are all leftists he was replying to someone who asked if they were all lefty.

Now it may be splitting hairs, but as far as I’m concerned, there’s a difference between the two.

A leftist I would consider synonymous with woke/far-left whereas a lefty is just anyone on the left, from centre-left down.

Dowie even explains this in one of the posts you quoted:

Yes, there absolutely is a difference and I think that's likely gone over his head, I'm referring to democrat supporters, I made it pretty clear re: people on the US left, twitter is seemingly circa 99% left and 1% right by US standards, most tech companies are going to skew left as are most people living in San Francisco. That doesn't mean all 99% are card-carrying DSA members, a big chunk are likely Biden supporting moderate liberals etc..

I don't expect he's likely read any of that, I'm still trying to get him to attempt some form of discussion here but instead, he's just throwing in a few replies seemingly for the sake of posturing rather than dealing with what has actually been said and presenting an argument or rebuttal for me to respond to.

It was a ridiculous statement to make

Why? Are you able to explain? Provide an argument? Or is it going to be yet more posturing?

If you're just going to sperg out with nonsense replies, not even actually read or understand what is being said then it's going to be a bit rich if, in a few posts, you claim a "dowie hole" when if fact the poor signal to noise ratio has simply come from your own uninformative replies/inability to seemingly put forth any argument.

 

[PlacidCasual]

The far woke left make up a tiny proportion of people anywhere. They are just being pandered to disproportionately. Its one of the things I find fascinating about the US though. Their left wing party is very much not left wing by traditional UK/European standards. There are some very interesting contradictions in what they say in some areas and what they say in other areas which would logically match up.

This is why peopple use the phrase the liberal left sometimes to describe the fellow travellers who are far more obsessed with every right on grievance they can find rather than making the lives of the poor and disadvantaged better. Here the European left and American left are more in tandem I think whilst fully agreeing their fiscal redistributive positions are substantially different although the same side of their areas centre point.

 

[dowie]

Yes, he was saying 99% are “lefty” not “leftist” which is what you asked him to provide evidence for.

Now, I wouldn’t go so far as to state that 99% of Twitter staff lean left (in the context of the US Overton window) but I wouldn’t be surprised if a significant majority of them did.

Why not 99%?

 

[Irish_Tom]

Why not 99%?

Just seems a very specific figure for something I don’t have enough information about.

It could be 98%, it could be 100% for all I know.

 

[dowie]

Just seems a very specific figure for something I don’t have enough information about.

It could be 98%, it could be 100% for all I know.

I’m not sure how you could say it could be 100% given there are documented Republican donors?

The spilt based on donors is 99:1

Sure there is a bit of uncertainty around that figure but the outright dismissal by the other poster and seemingly some reinterpretation that I’m making a claim about the % of hard left/woke types doesn’t have any reasoning to go with it.

I don’t think some people realise quite how polarised parts of the US are.

 

[Irish_Tom]

I’m not sure how you could say it could be 100% given there are documented Republican donors?

Ok, so it’s not 100%. It could still be more than 99% if you want to start getting into decimals.

The spilt based on donors is 99:1

Sure there is a bit of uncertainty around that figure…

Ok, so documented donors is 99%. That doesn’t necessarily translate to 99% of the entire workforce. As I say, it could be 98% or it could be less. We can’t say for definite.

…but the outright dismissal by the other poster and seemingly some reinterpretation that I’m making a claim about the % of hard left/woke types doesn’t have any reasoning to go with it.

Well yeah, that’s exactly what I said in my first post.

 

[mattx2]

Why not 99%?

Because the 99% comes from a small subset and we dont know if democrats are more likely to donate than Republicans so it could be closer to 70/30

If you look back historically the split was 69/31 in 2016

Perhaps there's still Republicans there but they didnt want to contribute to the Trump administration?

 

[dowie]

Ok, so documented donors is 99%. That doesn’t necessarily translate to 99% of the entire workforce. As I say, it could be 98% or it could be less. We can’t say for definite.

No, but it's at least some data, I'm totally happy with the point that it's subject to some error and I'm open to arguments for why some other figure might be a better estimate but I've not seen any so far. Just straw man arguments from one poster and then pointing out that there is some degree of uncertainty around the figure.

Not everyone donates to parties but that works both ways. I wouldn't reply to someone posting a poll to point out that they only sampled 1000 people and didn't actually ask the whole UK population (granted polls come with a different set of issues and this is perhaps a rougher estimate but still).

Because the 99% comes from a small subset and we dont know if democrats are more likely to donate than Republicans so it could be closer to 70/30

If you look back historically the split was 69/31 in 2016

Perhaps there's still Republicans there but they didnt want to contribute to the Trump administration?

See that's more reasonable but that is still a works both ways thing unless you have data to support that democrats are x times more likely to donate... However supposing Democrats are more likely to donate, how much more likely? It could still result in a split well into the 90s in terms of democrat support. I think 2016 is an anomaly but it is a fair point re: the degree of uncertainty, however, you can also look at other tech companies, most of them do have a higher % of Republican donors, twitter is particularly skewed relative to the rest.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

I literally already have supported my claim what is your argument here?

Yes, there absolutely is a difference and I think that's likely gone over his head, I'm referring to democrat supporters, I made it pretty clear re: people on the US left, twitter is seemingly circa 99% left and 1% right by US standards, most tech companies are going to skew left as are most people living in San Francisco. That doesn't mean all 99% are card-carrying DSA members, a big chunk are likely Biden supporting moderate liberals etc..

I don't expect he's likely read any of that, I'm still trying to get him to attempt some form of discussion here but instead, he's just throwing in a few replies seemingly for the sake of posturing rather than dealing with what has actually been said and presenting an argument or rebuttal for me to respond to.


Why? Are you able to explain? Provide an argument? Or is it going to be yet more posturing?

If you're just going to sperg out with nonsense replies, not even actually read or understand what is being said then it's going to be a bit rich if, in a few posts, you claim a "dowie hole" when if fact the poor signal to noise ratio has simply come from your own uninformative replies/inability to seemingly put forth any argument.

You said 99% of Twitter staff are lefty. The amount donated was no where near an amount that would point to a significant amount of the staff donating. Now if you'd said 99% of the staff that donated are lefty, that would have been accurate but that isn't what you said. You have no idea how many staff donated but the donation figures point to it being a small percentage. So your original statement was wrong.

And I did read it all but it doesn't change a thing.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Because the 99% comes from a small subset and we dont know if democrats are more likely to donate than Republicans so it could be closer to 70/30

If you look back historically the split was 69/31 in 2016

Perhaps there's still Republicans there but they didnt want to contribute to the Trump administration?

Exactly. Dowie has no idea how many right leaning staff there are at Twitter. It was a ridiculous statement to say but rather than just admit that he'll go round and round until people get bored.

 

[dowie]

You said 99% of Twitter staff are lefty. The amount donated was no where near an amount that would point to a significant amount of the staff donating. Now if you'd said 99% of the staff that donated are lefty, that would have been accurate but that isn't what you said. You have no idea how many staff donated but the donation figures point to it being a small percentage. So your original statement was wrong.

And I did read it all but it doesn't change a thing.

The poll is wrong because they didn't ask everyone in the UK, they only asked 1000 people...

I'm well aware that it is a subset of employees and I'm open to arguments re: why that subset is skewed (avg donation size, probability of donating etc..) but you don't seem to have any other than pointing out something that is already apparent. In fact, no one seems to be providing any other estimates/data.

If your only point is that there is some degree of uncertainty around that then sure, if you're going to argue that it's wrong in a given direction then provide an actual argument for it as it's pretty clear that twitter is overwhelmingly left-leaning, not just from the data we have but also from the anecdotal stories, leaks etc.. and the way they've handled some prominent incidents which clearly required some high-level decisions.

 

[deuse]

You said 99% of Twitter staff are lefty. The amount donated was no where near an amount that would point to a significant amount of the staff donating. Now if you'd said 99% of the staff that donated are lefty, that would have been accurate but that isn't what you said. You have no idea how many staff donated but the donation figures point to it being a small percentage. So your original statement was wrong.

And I did read it all but it doesn't change a thing.

98% of twitter staff gave their money to the democrats via act blue. Nice fun fact.

 

[VincentHanna]

98% of twitter staff gave their money to the democrats via act blue. Nice fun fact.

98%....Is this you finally conceeding you are wrong?

 

[deuse]

98%....Is this you finally conceeding you are wrong?

Please post where I was right.

I'll wait. And as normal you won't post back

But for you lot "99 percent of their political donations pouring into Democratic campaigns and committees for the midterm elections, filings show."