To limit the amount of places he can corrupt with his special brand of fascism. They're afraid he'll stoke the flames of insurrection again by reaching out to his voter base through other means. And no one wants to have their platform turned into a hive of conspiracy theorists plotting violence. It's just good business sense.Raven said:
They're a buncha cowards, that's why. They'll claim they value freedom of speech and avoided banning him for that reason, but really they feared him turning his base against them (IMHO). Look what happened with Fox News: a ton of Trump's followers turned against them when Trump did, which is expected to lead to a drop in ratings, which means less money and influence for Fox News going forward. You don't want bad PR from someone who has a cult following.
No, it isn't actually. Trump has the right to speak his mind, but there's nothing anywhere in the constitution that says he has to have the right to speak said mind on someone else's platform. It's like how we're not allowed to scream "FIRE!" in the middle of a crowded theatre. Intentionally causing fear and confusion among the masses using lies isn't a form of protected speech, and thus, Donald Trump shouldn't be allowed to continue doing so.
It's their platform and they are free to ban whoever they wants, However, He still didn't break any rules besides twitter's. I don't think it has anything with good business sense, Just taking a side. They also did it, right after twitter. So it does feels weird regardless. I think everyone is questioning these series of bans, Honestly if i were a US republican individual, I would feel oppressed and my voice is censored and this goes against US values that all i'm saying. It also can impact future of US elections, If these platforms are just being anti republicans not just anti trump.
Yep, what Trump is doing is encouraging insurrection and violence, and no site wants to deal with that can of worms. Even app stores like Google and Apple have banned Parler for not moderating talks of violence.
Nothing but shoe on the other foot for these hypocritical scum. A white right winger commits mass shooting, it's lone wolf and prayers and thoughts. A person that looks like a Muslim (but is not a Muslim) knives someone, and it's wanting to build a wall and ban Muslims and whatnot.
I would stress a few points:
It's testament to his continuous inability to follow rules. If he won't follow them on the biggest social media platform, he won't follow them on a smaller ones. If I ran a McDonald's and an employee was shitting in the fry hopper and I fired him for it, then he doesn't get to cry foul whenever Burger King or Wendy's decide they don't want him there. It's got nothing to do with being fair. It's got everything to do with following someone's behavior over a period of time and using it to predict their future behavior. Trump isn't a victim here.Raven said:
Not to Democrats/Leftists of any stripe. It doesn't feel weird to anyone that's not a fan of racism or the attack on the capitol. And that's the majority of Americans.
A couple of points:
Neither of them want anything to do with Trumplicans, who are migrating to that place to promote Q-Anon conspiracies and sow more hatred which will lead to more violence. It is, once again, good business sense.I think you do have a point of them being cowards, but they are already losing many of his supporters and they are jumping to another platform that start with p or something, which makes me wonder if it has anything to do with google play store and apple store banning apps from their stores that trump supporters are using. Maybe they try to zone and force republicans to certain platforms not to lose them. Sounds like a good plan to me. They won't find a place to go eventually
Just like social media, it would be up to the discretion of that particular network. They have to ask themselves "Do we want to be complicit in Donald Trump reaching out to his install base and influencing their actions on our platform? What if another violent attack happens thanks to the words he says while we have him on one of our shows?" NO ONE is obligated to give Donald Trump a soapbox.[/QUOTE]
Not really. Many anti trumps, Find this move plotted, unprofessional and against freedom of speech.
Except they are in the right. You're entitled to your opinion, but we can't tolerate intolerance. Trumps base are already a lost cause, there's no need to worry about pushing them away. We have the majority. We don't NEED them to see things our way.Raven said:
Okay, so here's why it's not against freedom of speech:
The emote implies you're being sarcastic, so I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that's the case lol.The only honest & legit poster in the thread ^
again, you say that after you have posted unproven things that turned out to be false without even acknowledging it.
I can understand that logic, but I think the situation right now is so out of hand that this step makes sense. We have to stop the unregulated perpetuation of conspiracy theories somehow.
Possibly, but certainly, you dont owe up to mistakes when your often very strange claims are debunked.
That is another claim you make. The problem is that your worldview is formed by lots of unsubstantiated claims you read that do not have a real basis.
100% wrongThe only honest & legit poster in the thread ^
This is a general problem of the far left.100% wrong
and you of all people aren't the one to comment on who's honest and legit and who's not, given how majority of your posts are full of lies or unsubstantiated claims that are often easily debunked. If you care about USA like you and other republicans love to pretend, then you shouldn't be supporting Trump and should be okay with social media sites and networks choosing (as is their right) to take away his voice to create dissent and violence.
Also, I believe I said this before, but Trump and his ilk got away for too long on these sites, despite breaking numerous rules numerous times. Had anyone else spread hateful rhetoric, lied consistently, or bullied happily, they'd have been suspended. Hell, minorities like women, LGBT+ people, and people of color who defend themselves get suspended while their harassers don't. Kaepernick was blacklisted from the NFL for kneeling, even. If you really care about free speech, then you should be opposed to both situations.
But we all know republicans don't care about free speech, they care more about what they like to hear. In ways, that's worse than what the left want.
On a different topic to anyone but right wingers and people defending Trump/"freedom of speech," anyone else annoyed with how the left expect their politicians or people they support to be perfectly aligned with their beliefs and expect things to happen quickly? Like, a lot of AOC and Bernie supporters turned on them as soon as they threw their hat in with Biden, and a lot of them have criticisms for decent politicians simply because they're Zionists (which is a shitty view, but still). They also get mad that stuff like M4A isn't happening immediately, and it's dangerous because all this anger helps republicans.
This isn't what Biden is aiming for tho, He wants to heal the division and unite the nation. I know trump supporters aren't in the right mental but you aren't in the right mental too.
You should have more faith in the people like Biden.haha, I agree :PThe only honest & legit poster in the thread ^
If you think it's getting out of hand then how you think these bans will fix anything not making pro trumps more angry and violent? I only see it as aggravating factors. Like pushing it to the point of causing a civil war.
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
you are the last person to make a comment like that100% wrong
First of all: Trump fans cannot really get more angry and violent, not due to this. One reason they ARE angry and violent is that trump and others spur them on. Making that harder might make them angry rn, but if the people who bang the drum have less reach, that means LESS anger.