Again, you've decided, based on no evidence, that not only 50% of Twitters users but 50% of the revenue generation on Twitter not only dissaproves of Trump being held to the TOS but will respond by leaving Twitter. I keep pointing this out and you keep ignoring it because it doesn't fit your narrative. Yes I'm familiar with social media company metrics, but I've also started two successful companies so I'm even more familiar with the fact that metrics are meaningless compared to the bottom line. And I'm familiar with the ambiguity of running a business and the frequent "damned if you do and dammed if you don't" situations you face. Will this impact their bottom line? Maybe. Could doing nothing have impacted their bottom line more, espy over the next 10 years? Very possibly. I get that it all seems black and white to you now, but you're a smart guy and with some life experience you'll come to realize the world doesn't actually work that way and there frequently isn't a right answer.
I really don't know what your rant about news alerts and Trump's very important award from Morocco has to do with Twitter enforcing their TOS? At the end of the day, you are demanding the government tell private companies what they can and can't say because you don't think your guy is being lionized by the media like he should. Unlike all the idiotic cries about private companies being required to follow the First Amendment (they're not, read it!), what you're asking for actually does fly directly in the face of the First Amendment.
Again I have to ask if you actually read the Mueller report? Because it sure looks like you are spouting the Bill Barr and right wing media version of it rather than what it actually said. Not only was Pelosi accurate in her post, but her posts didn't lead to 5 people dying in an attack on Congress while ratifying the election! You're simply being obtuse if you continue to act as if you don't grasp the seriousness of that to the continuing existence of a stable, free country which, as it turns out, is also pretty damn important to Twitter's bottom line. They realize that even if you don't.
It is an interesting response when I point out you're cherry picking data you just start flailing around. So let's try this. Everyone in the Senate is old, Schumer however is 8 years younger than McConnel. Trump was 23 years older than Obama at inauguration. Absolutely, Pelosi is older than McCarthy. But then I hear constantly from the right that AOC has huge influence over the Democratic party and she's too young and inexperienced for the influence she and the other members of "the squad" have.
Its just an idiotic assertion to make that somehow the Republicans are younger and therefore somehow better, because not only is it generally not true but Republicans have and in the case of AOC and "the squad" still are criticizing Democrats for being too young! I get it, you're still a kid and you feel like old fossilized people in power don't represent you. That's probably true, but it's a problem across parties and you probably want to take the plank out of your own party's eye before turning to your neighbor as Mathew 5:7 tells us.
And yes, the stuff your party did when you were a kid did still happen even if you didn't experience it or remember it. I'm glad that you agree that the criticism relentlessly leveled at Obama by conservatives about his relative youth was uncalled for and wrong though. You're starting to see the light.
Last edited:
