Current Twitter price is $39ish so the market is pricing in a pretty high chance of this deal either not going through or being re priced lower. My money is on musk backing out in the end
The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down
- Thread starter Energize
- Start date
- Status
Soldato
Not really as the idea that this Republican Party would or could deliver " equality, diversity, liberalism and freedom" is laughable. They've gone in the complete opposite direction for years and since 2008 and Obama's election they've gone off the rails. The rise of the Tea Party, Birtherism, and now even Qanon is rife in the GOP. So I disagree with the whole premise of his point, the GOP was never going to deliver that and they chose the complete opposite of those values in Trump.
Maybe I'm miss-reading it but I don't think Angilion was limiting their point to Trump or the GOP - there was an appetite from the population to go a different direction, which is why Trump had a chance at all, which *someone* could have delivered on rather than the inevitable mess and then switching back to the Democrats - at least that is my reading.
Soldato
I didn't take it that way, but now you say it, it may be what was meant.
I would say the flew with that view, is that *someone* was never going to deliver it. There's a reason you don't vote for billionaires with zero political experience, as they have no idea how to run a party full of elected members, that you didn't decide, and even worse, having to find a way to work with opposition.
Soldato
Maybe he meant it that way. Trump tapped into the populist nationalism that was rife even in the UK and promised the left behind blue collar workers the world. That he failed to deliver for them seems irrelevant, lots of them love the populist nationalism crap.
Angilian from his posting seems to believe that the left/progressives are anti equality, diversity, liberalism and freedom, which I couldn't disagree with more. History shows that is progressives that have delivered more on those issues than conservatives who by their nature want to conserve, not change. He takes the extreme left and paints the whole of the left with that.
Man of Honour
Your reading is right. Which is why I also said this:
I should qualify that - Trump was very competent at getting elected. Completely incompetent at being president, but very competent at becoming president. Progressives should be praising Trump heartily in private because Trump ruined the best chance to oppose their vile ideology.
No, I don't. I take progressivism and paint progressivism with their own words and deeds. The left/right false dichotomy is so divorced from reality that it's delusional. I've no real gripe at the "extreme left". I think communism is a good idea on paper. Impossible in practice, but I like the idea to a large extent. I'd nationalise all key infrastructure (power generation and distribution, public transport, etc, etc), for example.
Pretending that the entirety of politics falls into one of two discrete groups and that everyone must be wholly one or wholly the other is not reality. "Progressive" and "left" are not synonyms, nor are "progressive" and "extreme left".
The most important part of progressivism is belief in unchosen group identity. Which is irrational prejudice in itself and the foundation for all other irrational prejudice. It's the doctrine of "they're all the same". That's diversity out of the window, obviously. It's almost inevitable that it leads to belief in a hierarchy of group identities and progessivism is certainly no exception to that. Some believers in unchosen group identity make some sort of attempt at a "seperate but equal" sort of thing, but I'm not aware of any example of that actually being equal. Progressives don't even pretend - they're openly all about "seperate and unequal". So there's equality out the window too. Progressives require absolute obedience not just in deed and in word but also in thought and even in feeling. Nothing allowed other than complete obedience in every way. So there's liberalism and freedom out the window too.
All the "progressive" actually means is "more of that the person using the word wants". So to an anti-white racist, anti-white racism is progressive. To an anti-black racist, anti-black racism is progressive. Etc. Although they'd both agree that racial equality is anti-progressive.
Yup, hesitant to comment too much on this as it isn't the right thread for it but, for example, Bernie could have taken that election if he'd been the Dem's candidate.
Soldato
Soldato
they were receiving a higher share of corp output actually
Which had been rising as the US climbed out of recession under Obama. All that happened is it followed the normal pattern, the exception being G W Bush where is fell for most of his 2 terms. What did Trump do for the coal miners who he promised the world? The answer is nothing.
Soldato
always an excuse eh
Soldato
You are taking the extreme of the word progressive and painting anyone who isn't conservative with it. You seem obsessed with identity politics. Identity politics has been with us forever, it has been used by both sides of the political spectrum forever. Its the new "political correctness".
Soldato
So the normal pattern playing out is Trump doing something different is it?
Is that really all you've got? And those coal workers he promised so much to?? It was empty populism rhetoric.No **** Sherlock! He could hardly answer a post about the weather without bringing identity politics in it!
It's a shame as he's obviously an intelligent and erudite guy but his viewing everything through the lens of identity politics does skew his perception at times.
Soldato
No **** Sherlock! He could hardly answer a post about the weather without bringing identity politics in it!
It's a shame as he's obviously an intelligent and erudite guy but his viewing everything through the lens of identity politics does skew his perception at times.
I've not seen any poster mention it like he does. In fact I would say he uses it more than the next 10 posters combined who like to mention it. It really does seem to be an obsession. Obsessions aren't healthy.
Last edited:
Soldato
So the normal pattern playing out is Trump doing something different is it?
Now you're changing the angle. You said he failed to deliver blue collar workers a great share. You were proven wrong. The data doesn't lie.
You thought that blue line was going down until i posted.
Obama was empty populist rhetoric you mean. He was the definition of empty populist rhetoric
Last edited:
Soldato
I said he promised them the world and failed to deliver on that. Following the normal curve isn't changing anything.
Soldato
I said he promised them the world and failed to deliver on that. Following the normal curve isn't changing anything.
yea...
following the normal curve
Soldato
yea...
following the normal curve
You realise Trump took office in January 2017? So the curve simply continued. You are talking like he took office mid 2014 and what happened mid 2019 because covid didn't kick in until end 1st quarter 2020.
Man of Honour
You're stuck in your belief in hyper-simplified binary everything. So you can only perceive left/right, progressive/conservative, etc. I can't prevent you doing that but it has nothing to do with me.
It's very rarely been as blatant and as fundamental to a political ideology as it is with progressivism.
But if you go back on the graph and look at previous peaks, there was a decline that followed, where as in peak in 2017, the peak continued - you're acting like the "curve simply continued" was a guaranteed thing despite the fact that the graph showing it isn't.
Last edited:
- Status