EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 2990
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9037 Posts
| ||
|
Introvert
United States4921 Posts
Just to be super obvious. They can ban him, I'm not contesting that obviously. But this fails by it's own standard. This is going to make things worse, not better, espeically considering the tweets were not calls to violence explicitly or implicitly. edit: this is similar to what I was talking about a few days ago. These people think that now that Biden is going to be in, they can go back to the way things were, or even increase their own power at little cost. It isn't going to work that way politically. They are fools. edit2: also then, let's get started banning some Chinese and Iranian official accounts, how about that. One has to have standards, right? | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
| ||
|
Slydie
1932 Posts
On January 09 2021 09:15 Introvert wrote: Forget his whole account, the two tweets they cited were not instigating anything. This is a lame ass excuse and it's obvious. Seeing if they can get away with it. And like I said, it's incredibly short-sighted. Good work all around. Do you really think calling a mob which is inside the caption building interfearing with a democratic process "great patriots"* and defending their deeds is acceptable? If I were considering storming other buildings with my extremist friends, I would take that as a "go" and be patriotic, if not that same day then very soon. They DID kill a police officer, and we were very lucky it didn't go much worse, some of these terrorists went in to kill top politicians. The ban was indisputable. The question is why it didn't happen a long time ago. *Referring to the quickly deleted tweet which got him temp banned, and the later tweets must be read in that context, as well as all his other communication. | ||
|
pmh
1414 Posts
| ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On January 09 2021 09:15 Introvert wrote: Forget his whole account, the two tweets they cited were not instigating anything. This is a lame ass excuse and it's obvious. Seeing if they can get away with it. And like I said, it's incredibly short-sighted. Good work all around. What bullshit. First of all they don't need to "see if they can get away with it", they know they can. And it very much depends on how you interpret those two tweets. Glorifying dumb cunts storming the capitol, and rejecting peaceful transfer of power are actual reasons whether you like it or not. Are they reason enough for a perma ban by itself? Nah. To argue that Trump didn't have it coming considering he's tweeting/riling up his minions for weeks by just flat out stating he won by a landslide, anyone suggesting otherwise is the enemy or complicit in "stealing" the election is just fucking idiotic. The only question is why they didn't ban him long ago already. You the next unhinged one? | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9037 Posts
On January 09 2021 09:25 Introvert wrote: And I have objected to multiple bans on this site (people who most certainly did not "have it coming"). Just to be super obvious. They can ban him, I'm not contesting that obviously. But this fails by it's own standard. This is going to make things worse, not better, espeically considering the tweets were not calls to violence explicitly or implicitly. edit: this is similar to what I was talking about a few days ago. These people think that now that Biden is going to be in, they can go back to the way things were, or even increase their own power at little cost. It isn't going to work that way politically. They are fools. edit2: also then, let's get started banning some Chinese and Iranian official accounts, how about that. One has to have standards, right? As with us all, you see what you want to see and that's that. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
edit2: also then, let's get started banning some Chinese and Iranian official accounts, how about that. One has to have standards, right? Sure. Once the followers of the iranian and chinese official accounts storm their respective governmental buildings, ban them. You'd have a hard time proving it though considering twitter is banned in both countries in the first place. Oops. | ||
|
Introvert
United States4921 Posts
On January 09 2021 09:40 m4ini wrote: Sure. Once the followers of the iranian and chinese official accounts storm their respective governmental buildings, ban them. You'd have a hard time proving it though considering twitter is banned in both countries in the first place. Oops. Alright was gonna drop it but one last thing... Except of course, you and everyone else here thinks it should have happened a long time ago, before he instigated anything. Many of those accounts post horrible things that are in violation of twitter's rules, whether or they are going to make Iranians march in the streets. That's really not the main point though, of course. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9037 Posts
On January 09 2021 09:44 Introvert wrote: Alright was gonna drop it but one last thing... Except of course, you and everyone else here thinks it should have happened a long time ago, before he instigated anything. Many of those accounts post horrible things that are in violation of twitter's rules, whether or they are going to make Iranians march in the streets. That's really not the main point though, of course. What part of "Twitter is banned in both countries" didn't register? On January 09 2021 09:47 KwarK wrote: That Twitter helped spread the lies about a stolen election which culminated in this violence isn't really disputable. Twitter have made the situation worse through their prior inaction. Trump is responsible for his lies but Twitter are responsible for giving him the platform that let him spread them. This was always inevitable. You cannot tell a paranoid conspiracy theorist base that has been planning for civil war since Obama turned Walmart into FEMA camps for Jade Helm that the election has been stolen from them and call them to action without it being a call to violence. Twitter are doing damage control. All platforms are doing damage control. Most of the big ones have banned him already. While I agree with their "free speech" concern, there should have been a lot more moderation and oversight for him. He's been divisive the entire time and as you said, it was a matter of time. I don't expect their stocks to hurt in the least however. Probably get a good boost. | ||
KwarK
United States43729 Posts
Twitter are doing damage control. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On January 09 2021 09:44 Introvert wrote: Alright was gonna drop it but one last thing... Except of course, you and everyone else here thinks it should have happened a long time ago, before he instigated anything. Many of those accounts post horrible things that are in violation of twitter's rules, whether or they are going to make Iranians march in the streets. That's really not the main point though, of course. When did the instigating start then? Would you argue he never instigated anything? If not, when did it start? And no they're not going to make Iranians march in the streets because they can't fucking access twitter, so they can hardly incite violence through twitter now can they? | ||
|
KwarK
United States43729 Posts
On January 09 2021 09:25 Introvert wrote: also then, let's get started banning some Chinese and Iranian official accounts, how about that. One has to have standards, right? This is what it looks like when someone can no longer defend Trump's Twitter use but still wants to pretend they have an argument. You'll note that the question posed is no longer whether Twitter was right to ban Trump's account but whether Twitter was wrong to not ban the account of an unspecified Chinese official for some unspecified tweets. Flawlessly executed whataboutism. | ||
|
Introvert
United States4921 Posts
On January 09 2021 09:45 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: What part of "Twitter is banned in both countries" didn't register? I know they are, they still post their stuff for everyone else though. I mean not even a fact-check on this beauty, you may have seen it yesterday. + Show Spoiler + but really concerns about fairness are not the most pressing thing here, because it's obvious the standards are not evenly applied, and sometimes that has even worked towards Trump's advantage. But he still is the president. I think this does more harm than good. I just wanted to clear up that yes, I know Twitter is banned in those countries. | ||
|
Introvert
United States4921 Posts
On January 09 2021 09:50 KwarK wrote: This is what it looks like when someone can no longer defend Trump's Twitter use but still wants to pretend they have an argument. You'll note that the question posed is no longer whether Twitter was right to ban Trump's account but whether Twitter was wrong to not ban the account of an unspecified Chinese official for some unspecified tweets. Flawlessly executed whataboutism. and this is what it looks like when you went straight for my second edit and pretended I didn't say anything before. Perfectly executed. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43729 Posts
On January 09 2021 09:53 Introvert wrote: and this is what it looks like when you went straight for my second edit and pretended I didn't say anything before. Perfectly executed. That edit was when the discussion changed from whether Twitter should have banned Trump to whether Twitter was banned in Iran as if that has any bearing on the issue. You started that tangent and it's not like you tripped and fell on your keyboard. It was a deliberate attempt to change the subject with some absurd whataboutism which should be called out. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
But he still is the president. Matters fuck all in this context. | ||
|
mierin
United States4943 Posts
For example, universal health care...there are a lot of corporations lobbying against that. If Trump and his supporters are so awful, how about we support candidates that aren't as bad, but won't consider anything like UHC because they accept our donations? | ||
| ||
