Twitter explains why Trump can use site as venue for violence, hate

Announcement comes as social media is under pressure to remove hate-based accounts.

Read the whole story

 

[Kane2207]

arstechnica and leftists in general: we like censorship, north korea is a good model to follow.

Notice how all of the right leaning comments get auto-downvoted by a swarm of 30 sjw bots when all surrounding comments have hardly any votes. This site has fallen very far.

Off topic, but again, can you please explain the pejorative 'sjw' here?

'Social Justice Warrior'. Lets consider that for a minute.

Someone who campaigns for a just society. Someone who wants justice equally applied across society?

Explain to me how this is:

1) somehow derogatory
2) how justice is something that shouldn't exist in society

When you actually break it down, you look like a bit of a tit?

Yeah and North Korea is actually the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

Don't be obtuse.

I'm not being obtuse, it was a straight up question.

I personally find the terms 'sjw', 'liberal', etc, highly amusing. They're slung around with venom but don't actually stand up to even the slightest bit of logical analysis.

Do I want a just society for me and my family? Why yes, I do, actually.

It's almost as dumb as Joao calling me 'Antifa' in TDS threads, like being nonchalant about countering extremism, or even choosing extremism, is a viable option.

The DPRK being a 'democracy' is a droll counter though - are you going to argue that the Nazi party were actually socialists next? We should definitely revisit that one for the thousandth time!

By your logic they would be. Ergo 'don't be obtuse'. SJWs 'fight' for actual social justice as much as Nazis were actually socialist and NK is actually democratic.

By way of elaboration, SJWs don't fight for social justice, they fight for conformity to their internal dogmas. They might believe what they're fighting for is justice, but only insomuch as Jehovah's Witnesses believe they're saving souls.

Oh I didn't realise you knew every single one personally - how stupid of me, we had the oracle on the matter here all along!

You do realise I'm mocking the fact that it's a very dumb pejorative that doesn't stand up to scrutiny, right?

 

[Kilia]

Twitter letting Trump talk as he wants?

How about Twitter letting PORNO on it's site as well?

@SexuallPosts ‏

I just found this out a few days ago.

 

[windywoo]

Is Donald Trump really it’s most popular user? Justin Bieber has 3 times as many followers.

 

[Kane2207]

Is Donald Trump really it’s most popular user? Justin Bieber has 3 times as many followers.

Has to be taken in context though.

Last time I checked, Bieber wasn't elected President of the US, with a large nuclear arsenal at his disposal.

 

[andygates]

Yet another case of what sysadmins call "Entitled Executive Syndrome" - the one where Mahogany Row get their printers fixed first, people can run private mail accounts and threaten crimes against humanity (DPRK: pop. 25mil) because they're just big enough bigwigs.

T'was ever thus, and there's a certain bleak sport in watching the ad-hoc justifications spun up when people ask questions.

 

[itsastickup]

Let's see a bit of that hate:

"Mexicans are rapists"

Except that he never said that. The video clearly has him denounce illegal immigrants as criminals and rapists; qualified to say 'most'. Yet he was denounced as racist when that clearly isn't racist. The only justification is a presumption on his motive, which is not supported by any substantiated evidence.

The misrepresentations of Trump were a consistent story of the election, and still now.

In fact today, all kinds of things are labelled as 'hate', racism, etc etc that no objective analysis would accept as hate.

But the hate-labellers would have freedom of speech curtailed even for a president on the basis of their own particular views, which much of the USA doesn't share. Note that a lot of Mexicans voted for Trump. They saw past the media BS.

It's quite the nutty situation.

 

[r3loaded]

The answer is that the government has a monopoly on force and violence.

 

[dlux]

The misrepresentations of Trump were a consistent story of the election, and still now.

Oh, so the 'Just kidding' defense has been updated to 'misrepresentations'?

There's no way to misrepresent Trump. His id has been spilled out in front of us like an explosion of a rotting whale carcass, and it doesn't take any interpretations to understand what the man is like.

Clue: "Grab 'em by the pussy" was not a reference to a feline.

 

[rabish12]

Let's see a bit of that hate:

"Mexicans are rapists"

Except that he never said that. The video clearly has him denounce illegal immigrants as criminals and rapists; qualified to say 'most'. Yet he was denounced as racist when that clearly isn't racist. The only justification is a presumption on his motive, which is not supported by any substantiated evidence.

The misrepresentations of Trump were a consistent story of the election, and still now.

Uh... no. You're right that he never said that all Mexicans are rapists. You're wrong that he was denouncing illegal immigrants as criminals and rapists. What he actually said was that the people Mexico "sends" to the United States in general are criminals and rapists. He also didn't qualify it with "most". He did qualify it, in an embarrassing afterthought of an addition at the end of the statement. Here's the full quote:

"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

So they're all rapists, but don't worry, he assumes that some are good people. Yeah, okay.

 

[Hack-n-Slash]

Let's see a bit of that hate:

"Mexicans are rapists"

Except that he never said that. The video clearly has him denounce illegal immigrants as criminals and rapists; qualified to say 'most'. Yet he was denounced as racist when that clearly isn't racist. The only justification is a presumption on his motive, which is not supported by any substantiated evidence.

The misrepresentations of Trump were a consistent story of the election, and still now.

Uh... no. You're right that he never said that all Mexicans are rapists. You're wrong that he was denouncing illegal immigrants as criminals and rapists. What he actually said was that the people Mexico "sends" to the United States in general are criminals and rapists. He also didn't qualify it with "most". He did qualify it, in an embarrassing afterthought of an addition at the end of the statement. Here's the full quote:

"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

So they're all rapists, but don't worry, he assumes that some are good people. Yeah, okay.

To be fair, it's consistent with his "both sides" statement.

 

[ApplePaladin]

By your logic they would be. Ergo 'don't be obtuse'. SJWs 'fight' for actual social justice as much as Nazis were actually socialist and NK is actually democratic.

By way of elaboration, SJWs don't fight for social justice, they fight for conformity to their internal dogmas. They might believe what they're fighting for is justice, but only insomuch as Jehovah's Witnesses believe they're saving souls.

Well that's just completely untrue. Let's look at the ACLU, one of the prime targets for being labeled (in a nonsensically negative way) as a liberal, SJW organization: The ACLU is constantly taking on Free Speech lawsuits on behalf of people and groups with detestable goals and messages. Just recently Ars ran an article about the ACLU defending a number of ads run on the DC metro including ones by Milo Shitbird.

If you think that "SJWs" don't fight for social justice you might want to evaluate what belief you have or behavior you engage in that you think is being unfairly targeted. As it is you aren't doing a great job of conveying why you think "don't hurt or disenfranchise people based on their skin color, religious beliefs, sexual/gender orientation, etc." is forcing people to conform to dogma.

 

[itsastickup]

Let's see a bit of that hate:

"Mexicans are rapists"

Except that he never said that. The video clearly has him denounce illegal immigrants as criminals and rapists; qualified to say 'most'. Yet he was denounced as racist when that clearly isn't racist. The only justification is a presumption on his motive, which is not supported by any substantiated evidence.

The misrepresentations of Trump were a consistent story of the election, and still now.

Uh... no. You're right that he never said that all Mexicans are rapists. You're wrong that he was denouncing illegal immigrants as criminals and rapists. What he actually said was that the people Mexico "sends" to the United States in general are criminals and rapists. He also didn't qualify it with "most". He did qualify it, in an embarrassing afterthought of an addition at the end of the statement. Here's the full quote:

"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

So they're all rapists, but don't worry, he assumes that some are good people. Yeah, okay.

You must be desperate to dress Trump up as a racist, but this doesn't support it.

The context was the Mexican authorities' leaflet guide to illegal immigrants on how to get across safely. It was most certainly illegal immigrants. And he's never had a problem with legal immigrants. I put 'most' in single quotes because the meaning was most; I wasn't directly quoting.

As I said, objective analysis cannot support these smears and misrepresentations.

So, no, rabish12, it was not racism, despite your spin.

 

[itsastickup]

The misrepresentations of Trump were a consistent story of the election, and still now.

Oh, so the 'Just kidding' defense has been updated to 'misrepresentations'?

There's no way to misrepresent Trump. His id has been spilled out in front of us like an explosion of a rotting whale carcass, and it doesn't take any interpretations to understand what the man is like.

Clue: "Grab 'em by the pussy" was not a reference to a feline.

Go on then, give some examples.

Grab-em by the pussy is presumably 'misogyny'. Which means hatred of women. However, his comment disrespects those women who he thinks are gagging for powerful men. It's not even sexist, let alone a generalised disrespect of women. You only get to misogyny by presumption, as with his supposed racism, sexism etc etc.

As I said, an objective analysis does not support the smears and misrepresentations against him.

 

[ApplePaladin]

Let's see a bit of that hate:

"Mexicans are rapists"

Except that he never said that. The video clearly has him denounce illegal immigrants as criminals and rapists; qualified to say 'most'. Yet he was denounced as racist when that clearly isn't racist. The only justification is a presumption on his motive, which is not supported by any substantiated evidence.

The misrepresentations of Trump were a consistent story of the election, and still now.

Uh... no. You're right that he never said that all Mexicans are rapists. You're wrong that he was denouncing illegal immigrants as criminals and rapists. What he actually said was that the people Mexico "sends" to the United States in general are criminals and rapists. He also didn't qualify it with "most". He did qualify it, in an embarrassing afterthought of an addition at the end of the statement. Here's the full quote:

"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

So they're all rapists, but don't worry, he assumes that some are good people. Yeah, okay.

You must be desperate to dress Trump up as a racist, but this doesn't support it.

The context was the Mexican authorities' leaflet guide to illegal immigrants on how to get across safely. It was most certainly illegal immigrants. And he's never had a problem with legal immigrants. I put 'most' in single quotes because the meaning was most; I wasn't directly quoting.

As I said, objective analysis cannot support these smears and misrepresentations.

So, no, rabish12, it was not racism, despite your spin.

The irony of you accusing rabish12 of posting spin is just... wow. That's a lot to take in.

You're focusing on the one incident that you can spin to try defending Trump's racism but you're ignoring his history of racist attitudes and statements. And the really sad part is that you don't even get why you're wrong about the way he's denigrating Mexican immigrants. He characterized all illegal immigrants from Mexico as criminals and rapists. And he framed immigration from Mexico as a problem of that country deliberately sending us their worst people. And when addressing that crowd he hammered on the idea that Mexican immigrants are different from them - note the repetition of "they're not sending you." It's a clear, unambiguous message from Trump to his supporters that identifies them as good people, and ethnically different immigrants as bad people. Unless you endorse that racism and are just so accustomed to it that you don't recognize its evils and just see those attitudes as normal, there is no honest way to say that he wasn't being racist.

 

[itsastickup]

The irony of you accusing rabish12 of posting spin is just... wow. That's a lot to take in.

You're focusing on the one incident that you can spin to try defending Trump's racism but you're ignoring his history of racist attitudes and statements. And the really sad part is that you don't even get why you're wrong about the way he's denigrating Mexican immigrants. He characterized all illegal immigrants from Mexico as criminals and rapists. And he framed immigration from Mexico as a problem of that country deliberately sending us their worst people. And when addressing that crowd he hammered on the idea that Mexican immigrants are different from them - note the repetition of "they're not sending you." It's a clear, unambiguous message from Trump to his supporters that identifies them as good people, and ethnically different immigrants as bad people. Unless you endorse that racism and are just so accustomed to it that you don't recognize its evils and just see those attitudes as normal, there is no honest way to say that he wasn't being racist.

Ok, then, give more examples.

MEanwhile, he did not say that all illegal Mexicans are rapists and criminals, to correct you. He qualified his comment. Even if he had, to be racist he would have to say, or imply, that rape and criminality is a Mexican quality, which he also did not say. Rather, that's your prejudiced inference that the facts do not support. And sure, he may have had some of his facts wrong, I don't dispute that, but it's you who are characterising him as racist rather than him characterising Mexicans as criminals.

The fact is that there is no substantiated evidnece that he is racist. And his comments are simply misrepresented by his prejudiced opponents, as above, to make him out to be racist etc.

It's even got to the point where people started calling him a fascist and Hitler. Which is simply absurd.

The fact is that many Mexicans did vote for him. Because they weren't so stupid as to be taken in by media misrepresentation. Same for other minority groups.

 

[Goatous]

The irony of you accusing rabish12 of posting spin is just... wow. That's a lot to take in.

You're focusing on the one incident that you can spin to try defending Trump's racism but you're ignoring his history of racist attitudes and statements. And the really sad part is that you don't even get why you're wrong about the way he's denigrating Mexican immigrants. He characterized all illegal immigrants from Mexico as criminals and rapists. And he framed immigration from Mexico as a problem of that country deliberately sending us their worst people. And when addressing that crowd he hammered on the idea that Mexican immigrants are different from them - note the repetition of "they're not sending you." It's a clear, unambiguous message from Trump to his supporters that identifies them as good people, and ethnically different immigrants as bad people. Unless you endorse that racism and are just so accustomed to it that you don't recognize its evils and just see those attitudes as normal, there is no honest way to say that he wasn't being racist.

Ok, then, give more examples.

MEanwhile, he did not say that all illegal Mexicans are rapists and criminals, to correct you. He qualified his comment. Even if he had, to be racist he would have to say, or imply, that rape and criminality is a Mexican quality, which he also did not say. Rather, that's your prejudiced inference that the facts do not support. And sure, he may have had some of his facts wrong, I don't dispute that, but it's you who are characterising him as racist rather than him characterising Mexicans as criminals.

The fact is that there is no substantiated evidnece that he is racist. And his comments are simply misrepresented by his prejudiced opponents, as above, to make him out to be racist etc.

It's even got to the point where people started calling him a fascist and Hitler. Which is simply absurd.

The fact is that many Mexicans did vote for him. Because they weren't so stupid as to be taken in by media misrepresentation. Same for other minority groups.

He knew what he was doing. Hell, he even accused a US born judge of being unable to handle Trump's case because he was "Mexican."

You really want to find a different angle. There's too many examples disproving your theory.

 

[SteveTheSixth]

The context was the Mexican authorities' leaflet guide to illegal immigrants on how to get across safely. It was most certainly illegal immigrants. And he's never had a problem with legal immigrants. I put 'most' in single quotes because the meaning was most; I wasn't directly quoting.

If Trump had said that he had a problem with illegal immigration, his words would not have been so appalling. The problem is that he claimed they were mostly criminals and rapists.

Pointing out that he said that is not smearing or misrepresenting him.

 

[Z1ggy]

The irony of you accusing rabish12 of posting spin is just... wow. That's a lot to take in.

You're focusing on the one incident that you can spin to try defending Trump's racism but you're ignoring his history of racist attitudes and statements. And the really sad part is that you don't even get why you're wrong about the way he's denigrating Mexican immigrants. He characterized all illegal immigrants from Mexico as criminals and rapists. And he framed immigration from Mexico as a problem of that country deliberately sending us their worst people. And when addressing that crowd he hammered on the idea that Mexican immigrants are different from them - note the repetition of "they're not sending you." It's a clear, unambiguous message from Trump to his supporters that identifies them as good people, and ethnically different immigrants as bad people. Unless you endorse that racism and are just so accustomed to it that you don't recognize its evils and just see those attitudes as normal, there is no honest way to say that he wasn't being racist.

Ok, then, give more examples.

MEanwhile, he did not say that all illegal Mexicans are rapists and criminals, to correct you. He qualified his comment. Even if he had, to be racist he would have to say, or imply, that rape and criminality is a Mexican quality, which he also did not say. Rather, that's your prejudiced inference that the facts do not support. And sure, he may have had some of his facts wrong, I don't dispute that, but it's you who are characterising him as racist rather than him characterising Mexicans as criminals.

The fact is that there is no substantiated evidnece that he is racist. And his comments are simply misrepresented by his prejudiced opponents, as above, to make him out to be racist etc.

It's even got to the point where people started calling him a fascist and Hitler. Which is simply absurd.

The fact is that many Mexicans did vote for him. Because they weren't so stupid as to be taken in by media misrepresentation. Same for other minority groups.

He gave you 13 examples(it's in the link he supplied)

 

[ApplePaladin]

The irony of you accusing rabish12 of posting spin is just... wow. That's a lot to take in.

You're focusing on the one incident that you can spin to try defending Trump's racism but you're ignoring his history of racist attitudes and statements. And the really sad part is that you don't even get why you're wrong about the way he's denigrating Mexican immigrants. He characterized all illegal immigrants from Mexico as criminals and rapists. And he framed immigration from Mexico as a problem of that country deliberately sending us their worst people. And when addressing that crowd he hammered on the idea that Mexican immigrants are different from them - note the repetition of "they're not sending you." It's a clear, unambiguous message from Trump to his supporters that identifies them as good people, and ethnically different immigrants as bad people. Unless you endorse that racism and are just so accustomed to it that you don't recognize its evils and just see those attitudes as normal, there is no honest way to say that he wasn't being racist.

Ok, then, give more examples.

I just did. Read the fucking article I just linked to you.

Keep in mind that article predates the election, so it doesn't even include Trump's refusal to condemn literal fucking Nazis who murdered a woman in the name of white supremacy. And if you want examples of Trump being fascist and his refusal to condemn actual swastika-wearing, Nazi-flag-waving, Nazi-saluting, Nazis isn't enough for you, how about this past weekend's events in which he tried to use his official power to illegally force athletes to put on patriotic displays at the expense of their free speech? As a reminder, choosing to stand at attention for our flag is patriotism, being forced to under threat of government power is fascism.

 

[Goatous]

The irony of you accusing rabish12 of posting spin is just... wow. That's a lot to take in.

You're focusing on the one incident that you can spin to try defending Trump's racism but you're ignoring his history of racist attitudes and statements. And the really sad part is that you don't even get why you're wrong about the way he's denigrating Mexican immigrants. He characterized all illegal immigrants from Mexico as criminals and rapists. And he framed immigration from Mexico as a problem of that country deliberately sending us their worst people. And when addressing that crowd he hammered on the idea that Mexican immigrants are different from them - note the repetition of "they're not sending you." It's a clear, unambiguous message from Trump to his supporters that identifies them as good people, and ethnically different immigrants as bad people. Unless you endorse that racism and are just so accustomed to it that you don't recognize its evils and just see those attitudes as normal, there is no honest way to say that he wasn't being racist.

Ok, then, give more examples.

I just did. Read the fucking article I just linked to you.

Keep in mind that article predates the election, so it doesn't even include Trump's refusal to condemn literal fucking Nazis who murdered a woman in the name of white supremacy. And if you want examples of Trump being fascist and his refusal to condemn actual swastika-wearing, Nazi-flag-waving, Nazi-saluting, Nazis isn't enough for you, how about this past weekend's events in which he tried to use his official power to illegally force athletes to put on patriotic displays at the expense of their free speech? As a reminder, choosing to stand at attention for our flag is patriotism, being forced to under threat of government power is fascism.

Side note: Choosing to righteously and peacefully protest something in a manner that could cost you a high paying job and earn the ire of the president is bravery. Doing so in order to help make your country a better place is patriotism.

Continued side note: How are people supposed to protest? It's a right, but peacefully marching, kneeling and vocally criticizing are apparently the wrong way.

Anyways, back to your regularly scheduled dismantling of the coils itsastickup has been leaving on the board.

Hey, itsastickup. http://fortune.com/2016/06/07/donald-trump-racism-quotes/

Unless I'm mistaken, Fortune has yet to be dismissed as "Fake News."

 

[dlux]

Grab-em by the pussy is presumably 'misogyny'. Which means hatred of women. However, his comment disrespects those women who he thinks are gagging for powerful men. It's not even sexist, let alone a generalised disrespect of women. You only get to misogyny by presumption, as with his supposed racism, sexism etc etc.

To the other commenters in this thread:

When Trump University sends their people, they're not sending their best.

 

[rabish12]

Let's see a bit of that hate:

"Mexicans are rapists"

Except that he never said that. The video clearly has him denounce illegal immigrants as criminals and rapists; qualified to say 'most'. Yet he was denounced as racist when that clearly isn't racist. The only justification is a presumption on his motive, which is not supported by any substantiated evidence.

The misrepresentations of Trump were a consistent story of the election, and still now.

Uh... no. You're right that he never said that all Mexicans are rapists. You're wrong that he was denouncing illegal immigrants as criminals and rapists. What he actually said was that the people Mexico "sends" to the United States in general are criminals and rapists. He also didn't qualify it with "most". He did qualify it, in an embarrassing afterthought of an addition at the end of the statement. Here's the full quote:

"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

So they're all rapists, but don't worry, he assumes that some are good people. Yeah, okay.

You must be desperate to dress Trump up as a racist, but this doesn't support it.

The context was the Mexican authorities' leaflet guide to illegal immigrants on how to get across safely. It was most certainly illegal immigrants. And he's never had a problem with legal immigrants. I put 'most' in single quotes because the meaning was most; I wasn't directly quoting.

As I said, objective analysis cannot support these smears and misrepresentations.

So, no, rabish12, it was not racism, despite your spin.

You just literally invented context to justify his comments as not being racist. That quote is from the speech that he gave announcing his presidential bid. Here is the full speech. The actual, full context is that he's claiming that Mexico is deliberately sending rapists and criminals to the United States in order to get a competitive advantage, and that the people coming to the US from Mexico are primarily criminals and rapists because of it. Nothing involving leaflets (which would be bizarre, given that - as far as I can tell - that was an issue about ten years before he made that speech). Nothing specifically about illegals. Just a general message of "other countries are bad, immigration is bad, everyone else and especially Mexico is dumping their worst on us".

The fact that you think I'm applying spin when you try to add the "context" of a minor furor from 2005 to a speech Trump gave in 2015 makes me want to vomit.

 

[Kane2207]

The irony of you accusing rabish12 of posting spin is just... wow. That's a lot to take in.

You're focusing on the one incident that you can spin to try defending Trump's racism but you're ignoring his history of racist attitudes and statements. And the really sad part is that you don't even get why you're wrong about the way he's denigrating Mexican immigrants. He characterized all illegal immigrants from Mexico as criminals and rapists. And he framed immigration from Mexico as a problem of that country deliberately sending us their worst people. And when addressing that crowd he hammered on the idea that Mexican immigrants are different from them - note the repetition of "they're not sending you." It's a clear, unambiguous message from Trump to his supporters that identifies them as good people, and ethnically different immigrants as bad people. Unless you endorse that racism and are just so accustomed to it that you don't recognize its evils and just see those attitudes as normal, there is no honest way to say that he wasn't being racist.

Ok, then, give more examples.

MEanwhile, he did not say that all illegal Mexicans are rapists and criminals, to correct you. He qualified his comment. Even if he had, to be racist he would have to say, or imply, that rape and criminality is a Mexican quality, which he also did not say. Rather, that's your prejudiced inference that the facts do not support. And sure, he may have had some of his facts wrong, I don't dispute that, but it's you who are characterising him as racist rather than him characterising Mexicans as criminals.

The fact is that there is no substantiated evidnece that he is racist. And his comments are simply misrepresented by his prejudiced opponents, as above, to make him out to be racist etc.

It's even got to the point where people started calling him a fascist and Hitler. Which is simply absurd.

The fact is that many Mexicans did vote for him. Because they weren't so stupid as to be taken in by media misrepresentation. Same for other minority groups.

^^ Meth - it's one hell ov'a drug, huh?

 

[dlux]

Meth - it's one hell ov'a drug, huh?

 

[Baron von Robber]

I don't know, regardless of stated policy, does anyone really see Twitter banning the POTUS?

Well, he is the POTUS and tweets should be treated as a matter of public record.
And he recently deleted some tweets from about Strange from his account............*gasp* oh my. Deleted records.

 

[Baron von Robber]

Twitter is nothing more than an extension of the propaganda department of the socialists lefties.

And Trump their most popular account! Pfthahaha
Yes propaganda, the 'socialist lefties' thing makes that odd.

 

[Encryptomaniac]

This day in history - November 9th, 2020 2024:
Social media network Twitter files for bankruptcy.

FTFY

 

[Goatous]

This day in history - November 9th, 2020 2024:
Social media network Twitter files for bankruptcy.

FTFY

Politics aside, natural causes are certain to claim him long before then.

 

[Digital Sherpa]

What a cowardly move for Twitter to make.

The very fact POTUS is threatening via Twitter makes it newsworthy. If he weren't on Twitter it wouldn't be newsworthy.

 

[dlux]

This day in history - November 9th, 2020 2024:
Social media network Twitter files for bankruptcy.

FTFY

You signed up a year and a half ago, and THAT was your first post?

 

[RonnieBarzell]

Is Donald Trump really it’s most popular user? Justin Bieber has 3 times as many followers.

Trump may not be the most "popular" user but he is Twitter's most important user. When was the last time a Justin Bieber tweet made news? Trump's tweets reach not just his own followers, but everybody who reads the New York Times or watches Fox News when those organizations report on Trump's tweet. No user in the history of the service has ever brought as much attention to Twitter as Trump.

 

[THavoc]

This day in history - November 9th, 2020 2024:
Social media network Twitter files for bankruptcy.

FTFY

You signed up a year and a half ago, and THAT was your first post?

I'm wondering why he thinks President Bernie Sanders will be the death of Twitter after his first term is completed?

 

[itsastickup]

Ok, then, give more examples.

I just did. Read the fucking article I just linked to you.

Calm down, dear.

I didn't see the link (I'm color blind). et's take the first example:

"He attacked Muslim Gold Star parents"

Actually, the parents attacked him, using their son's death as a pretext. He was right to attack back.

next: "He claimed a judge was biased because “he’s a Mexican”"

And indeed even now, people claim that a white jury will not try a black man fairly. If you accept that, then you have to accept that a Mexican judge might not be as impartial as a non-Mexican to try such a case. This isn't a case of racism but common sense on human prejudice that everyone accepts.

Next: "The Justice Department sued his company ― twice ― for not renting to black people"

One of his companies. But not Trump himself. Even if it were Trump's policy, it doesn't prove racism but rather is a likely product of pragmatism. Ie, that the flats would not sell well. It;s also historical. Trump has a track record of changing his views. If you are accusing him of racism now, you need to find up to date examples.

The examples following that also don't prove anything, and are highly presumptive. He can't be condemning every organisation that the Twittermob go after, or that the Press misrepresent, as they do frequently. Even a simple free speech protest was represented as "White Supremacist", when it was not. Anyone of any maturity knows that you reserve your opinions unless you are confident of your facts. And the facts were mixed.

Keep in mind that article predates the election, so it doesn't even include Trump's refusal to condemn literal fucking Nazis who murdered a woman in the name of white supremacy. And if you want examples of Trump being fascist and his refusal to condemn actual swastika-wearing, Nazi-flag-waving, Nazi-saluting, Nazis isn't enough for you, how about this past weekend's events in which he tried to use his official power to illegally force athletes to put on patriotic displays at the expense of their free speech? As a reminder, choosing to stand at attention for our flag is patriotism, being forced to under threat of government power is fascism.

You mean those athletes used the flag for political purposes. He was right to condemn them. They are hijacking the US for their own narrow purpose instead of a traditional protest. Who next is going to hijack the flag for their particular issue? Everyone should be turning on them.

I say all these things and I'm not actually a Trump supporter. I don't trust him, and I think he's naive and unwise.

But I'm not as dumb as you young folk in being taken in by blatant misrepresentation and spinning every little thing in to racism, misogyny, sexism, etc etc, that is making life in the Anglo-Saxon world a minefield for ordinary people. Your liberties are going up in the smoke of your self-righteousness.

And it's that that caused Trump to gain power, not Trump. You.

 

[dlux]

natural causes are certain to claim him long before then.

There is nothing 'natural' about autoerotic asphyxiation.

 

[dlux]

But I'm not as dumb as you young folk in being taken in...

Just. stop. digging.

 

[itsastickup]

But I'm not as dumb as you young folk in being taken in...

Just. stop. digging.

just. grow. up.

Or else give a meaningful reply.

 

[dlux]

Or else give a meaningful reply.

Calm down, dear.

 

[itsastickup]

The actual, full context is that he's claiming that Mexico is deliberately sending rapists and criminals to the United States in order to get a competitive advantage, and that the people coming to the US from Mexico are primarily criminals and rapists because of it. Nothing involving leaflets (which would be bizarre, given that - as far as I can tell - that was an issue about ten years before he made that speech). Nothing specifically about illegals. Just a general message of "other countries are bad, immigration is bad, everyone else and especially Mexico is dumping their worst on us".

BS, Rabish. The Mexican government published a leaflet, and that was the context. And Trump's criticism was of the Mexican Authorities trying to dump their criminals on the US.

Well, he may have had his facts wrong, and for sure it was a presumption, but it doesn't make what he said racist. That's your prejudice making you lap up anything anti-Trump in the Media/Press. You need to take a step back from what you are told and think with your own mind. If you have one.

The fact that you think I'm applying spin when you try to add the "context" of a minor furor from 2005 to a speech Trump gave in 2015 makes me want to vomit.

Don't let me stop your self-righteous, bigoted hatred from making you feel ill.

 

[itsastickup]

Or else give a meaningful reply.

Calm down, dear.

I think your originality module has failed.

Tsk, tsk. Politically correct robots. So reliable in may ways, and yet so boring.