Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Wymsey

US Presidential Election 2020

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-55615214

 

Hang on...I thought right-wingers liked the free market? Nothing stopping Parler from finding their own server without having to beg for legal assistance.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55625707

 

You'd hope the Secret Service would be on the ball for this one.

 

 

They will just find somewhere else. Banning Parler is nothing but a PR stunt. Even if Parler goes bust the trump supporters will just go underground which could be worse imo. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Fightforever said:

They will just find somewhere else. Banning Parler is nothing but a PR stunt. Even if Parler goes bust the trump supporters will just go underground which could be worse imo. 

I agree that plenty of other platforms exist, which is why those supporters whining about free speech is moot.

 

WRT them going underground, I've heard this as an argument before but I'm struggling to think exactly how what they might do there is worse than on a more mainstream platform. Anyone who even vaguely watches events knows exactly who they are and what they are now, so I don't see the purpose of giving them more exposure for that sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I agree that plenty of other platforms exist, which is why those supporters whining about free speech is moot.

 

WRT them going underground, I've heard this as an argument before but I'm struggling to think exactly how what they might do there is worse than on a more mainstream platform. Anyone who even vaguely watches events knows exactly who they are and what they are now, so I don't see the purpose of giving them more exposure for that sake.

Prehaps but if they say moved to the dark web or started getting smart about how the go about organizing due to being kicked off mainstream platforms it makes it much more difficult to combat them and any plans they could hatch. Better to keep them where you can monitor them easily imo. But I can see why companies don't want the negative press of hosting such people. 

 

A little theory I have is since their views if they go under ground will get less mainstream attention they won't be as afraid to spread more radical ideas. And since trump supporters are such a large part of the American population that could be dangerous. It could become the start of something bad. Its a bit like how getting rid of youth centers makes it more likely kids end up taking part in anti-social behaviour on the streets.

 

Also once they eventually go underground they could be exposed to much more extreme stuff. Even on the surface web places like 4chan is horrific getting millions on trump supporters on those sorts of websites will not turn out well in the long run. And imagine if they go underground to the dark web which makes 4chan look like a rose garden.

 

Time will tell though. Although I can see the potential for this to backfire. 

Edited by Fightforever
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Fightforever said:

Prehaps but if they say moved to the dark web or started getting smart about it due to being kicked off mainstream platforms it makes it much more difficult to combat them and any plans they could hatch. Better to keep them where you can monitor them easily imo. But I can see why companies don't want the negative press of hosting such people. 

 

A little theory I have is since their views if they go under ground gets less mainstream attention they won't be as afraid to spread more radical ideas. And since trump supporters are such a large part of the American population that could be dangerous. It could become the start of something bad. Its a bit like how getting rid of youth centers makes it more likley kids end up taking part in anti social behaviour on the streets.

 

Time will tell though. Although I can see this backfiring.

That's all fair enough.

 

My own position would be that people truly serious about doing bad stuff would be using encrypted and secret platforms anyway, Trump supporters have hardly been afraid to spread their ideas anyway, and those platforms can be monitored by sufficiently skilled operatives in any case.

 

As such, I think giving them the sunlight of attention isn't going to help from that perspective, nor from sunlight acting as a disinfectant as pretty much everyone knows the score these days - the events of last week saw to that.

 

But as you say, only time is going to tell if this is the right call.

Edited by leicsmac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

That's all fair enough.

 

My own position would be that people truly serious about doing bad stuff would be using encrypted and secret platforms anyway, Trump supporters have hardly been afraid to spread their ideas anyway, and those platforms can be monitored by sufficiently skilled operatives in any case.

 

As such, I think giving them the sunlight of attention isn't going to help from that perspective, nor from sunlight acting as a disinfectant as pretty much everyone knows the score these days - the events of last week saw to that.

Just to add have you ever been on 4chan its horrific what sort of ideas can be pushed on places with no moderation. Thats what I fear people who support trump will go to seek a place to talk. Those ideas infecting a good chunk of the USA's population would be horrific. Trumps antics in a few years all of a sudden would look like a walk in the park. I would rather have a criminal in the sunlight of attention to a criminal lurking in the shadows. Banning Trump supporters doesn't get rid of them it just creates the illusion that the problem has gone away. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Fightforever said:

Just to add have you ever been on 4chan its horrific what sort of ideas can be pushed on places with no moderation. Thats what I fear people who support trump will go to seek a place to talk. Those ideas infecting a good chunk of the USA's population would be horrific. Trumps antics in a few years all of a sudden would look like a walk in the park. I would rather have a criminal in the sunlight of attention to a criminal lurking in the shadows. Banning Trump supporters doesn't get rid of them it just creates the illusion that the problem has gone away. 

I have had the unfortunate pleasure of seeing 4chan in general and /pol in particular, yeah. And believe me mate, I understand the argument that you're making. I just think that keeping such ideas in the mainstream and as such giving them a bigger audience and a veneer of legitimacy is worse than such ideas being kept in the shadows, even if those shadows are more difficult to see into.

 

I could be wrong though, and whatever course of action is chosen I hope it's the right one, because as you say the consequences for getting it wrong could be terrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The benefit of taking them off mainstream is that it reduces the number of easily manipulated that will join them.

 

The down side is as mentioned and increase in outrageous lies (if that is possible)

Im laughing away because im sure that one of the  government 3 letter organisations will surely create a "new Twitter" especially for the disaffected which will just completely feed them everything they need. (If the CIA hasnt already created one ill be amazed.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, StanSP said:

 

 

 

In years to come someone will make a documentary about all of this and events like this people will either think it’s a comedy or so far fetched it couldn’t be true.

It’s scary that people like this are in power and democratically elected. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-55615214

 

Hang on...I thought right-wingers liked the free market? Nothing stopping Parler from finding their own server without having to beg for legal assistance.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55625707

 

You'd hope the Secret Service would be on the ball for this one.

 

 

70 million people voted for Trump.  More than the UK population.  If you think the free market took him off Twitter you are an idiot, and I know you are not an idiot.  No doubt Trump's behaviour since the election loss has been shocking, but banning the president from Twitter is in many respects more sinister and alarming than a desperate fool doing his best to give himself a I was robbed narrative to live on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ozleicester said:

The benefit of taking them off mainstream is that it reduces the number of easily manipulated that will join them.

 

The down side is as mentioned and increase in outrageous lies (if that is possible)

Im laughing away because im sure that one of the  government 3 letter organisations will surely create a "new Twitter" especially for the disaffected which will just completely feed them everything they need. (If the CIA hasnt already created one ill be amazed.)

What happened to winning the argument?  Banning the other side becuase you don;t like their argument is nonsense.  Why if it so obvious that the Democrats are in the right is it so hard to wint eh argument?  I genuinely don't understand why Dems struggle to win so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

What happened to winning the argument?  Banning the other side becuase you don;t like their argument is nonsense.  Why if it so obvious that the Democrats are in the right is it so hard to wint eh argument?  I genuinely don't understand why Dems struggle to win so much.

You cannot win such an argument, when each side possesses its own preferred truth, the win requires abolition of one of those truths. To abolish that truth is to further disenfranchise that side, and shift them further from reconciliation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

You cannot win such an argument, when each side possesses its own preferred truth, the win requires abolition of one of those truths. To abolish that truth is to further disenfranchise that side, and shift them further from reconciliation.

True for those really committed, but not for the easily swayed which apparently are at risk reading this stuff on social media.  Surely those people can be convinced by either side.  I just don't see that each side building their own echo chambers helps anyone, surely it makes it worse.  I wouldn't be surprised if this makes everything worse on Friday not better,

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jon the Hat said:

True for those really committed, but not for the easily swayed which apparently are at risk reading this stuff on social media.  Surely those people can be convinced by either side.  I just don't see that each side building their own echo chambers helps anyone, surely it makes it worse.  I wouldn't be surprised if this makes everything worse on Friday not better,

Fair, I was coming from a standpoint, perhaps unfairly, that most of those on the right seem already so disenfranchised that they can only be reached by reference to their beliefs However, you must be correct that there exist some not fully engaged in this alternate truth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

What happened to winning the argument?  Banning the other side becuase you don;t like their argument is nonsense.  Why if it so obvious that the Democrats are in the right is it so hard to wint eh argument?  I genuinely don't understand why Dems struggle to win so much.

Trump wasn't removed from twitter because people thought he was wrong, he was removed because he was seen to be inciting violence. If he was being removed for spreading false information he'd have been kicked of years ago. Twitter obviously felt that he had gone beyond spreading lies and he gone on to making dangerous statements to rally people to commit violence. You wouldn't question this if it were say an Iman posting stuff that incited violence would you?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Trump wasn't removed from twitter because people thought he was wrong, he was removed because he was seen to be inciting violence. If he was being removed for spreading false information he'd have been kicked of years ago. Twitter obviously felt that he had gone beyond spreading lies and he gone on to making dangerous statements to rally people to commit violence. You wouldn't question this if it were say an Iman posting stuff that incited violence would you?

I think there is a difference between an elected President with 88 million followers and a religious leader for a start.  I think people are letting their hatred of Trump get the better of their judgement on this one.

I do appreciate Twitter etc had a tough call to make, and perhaps in their frame of reference it was the correct one, I just don't think we should be in a position where these platforms which claim to be neutral can mute one side of the political spectrum like this (while claiming to be a platform not a publisher).  You would be screaming if it was the left being muted.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Fair, I was coming from a standpoint, perhaps unfairly, that most of those on the right seem already so disenfranchised that they can only be reached by reference to their beliefs However, you must be correct that there exist some not fully engaged in this alternate truth. 

Still it can only make it worse imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jon the Hat said:

I think there is a difference between an elected President with 88 million followers and a religious leader for a start.  I think people are letting their hatred of Trump get the better of their judgement on this one.

I do appreciate Twitter etc had a tough call to make, and perhaps in their frame of reference it was the correct one, I just don't think we should be in a position where these platforms which claim to be neutral can mute one side of the political spectrum like this (while claiming to be a platform not a publisher).  You would be screaming if it was the left being muted.

But surely it worse when someone with such a large following is doing it? They haven't silenced his side of the argument, in fact they let him post baseless accusations regarding the election for the past two months. As you say he has 88m followers and is inciting them to commit violence, the fall out of which we saw last week. He's free to make his argument, hes not free to do what he did.

 

I would be screaming if someone was muted from putting forward their argument, but once they start asking people to start rioting I don't care who they are they need curtailing. I've argued for people like Nick Griffin to be allowed on Question Time in the past, hes allowed to put his side across, and have it challenged, but once anyone starts using the platform for other means like has happened with Trump then that platform should be taken away.

 

I can't believe you can't see the difference. Hes really not being silenced, hes just being stopped from causing more harm. If he can promise to stop inciting violence I'm sure they'd let him back.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

I think there is a difference between an elected President with 88 million followers and a religious leader for a start.  I think people are letting their hatred of Trump get the better of their judgement on this one.

I do appreciate Twitter etc had a tough call to make, and perhaps in their frame of reference it was the correct one, I just don't think we should be in a position where these platforms which claim to be neutral can mute one side of the political spectrum like this (while claiming to be a platform not a publisher).  You would be screaming if it was the left being muted.

 

Not if Biden had incited a ****ing insurrection at the Capitol!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aus Fox said:

In years to come someone will make a documentary about all of this and events like this people will either think it’s a comedy or so far fetched it couldn’t be true.

It’s scary that people like this are in power and democratically elected. 

As most of us now view Hitler who was also democratically elected initially.

Edited by WigstonWanderer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...