20 ms·

Here's the part I don't understand: Peter Thiel has been a high-profile supporter of Trump for a long time, long after Trump publicly said and did the things th

by biztos 10y ago

Here's the part I don't understand: Peter Thiel has been a high-profile supporter of Trump for a long time, long after Trump publicly said and did the things that make many people see his candidacy as an existential threat to American democracy. I don't recall any Silicon Valley lynch mobs forming in all that time. Nor was there much noise about Thiel's support after the sexual-assualt-brag tape was released. It's only when he gives money that people are up in (very virtual) arms. Either Thiel's support for Trump makes him a toxic partner, or it doesn't. If it does, and you just started acting on that recently, then please forgive me for suspecting you may be an opportunist. [edit: speling]

cmurf 10y ago
Quite right. $1.25 million may very well be a drop in the bucket in comparison to appearing on stage at the Republican National Convention. That in-person appeal to Trump, I think, is much more problematic. Yet it has not generated a fraction of the outrage a campaign contribution has. So I'll charge Silicon Valley is obsessed with money. Big news there. Anyone who hasn't bothered to read Thiel's speech at the RNC, should do so because it's the singularly most coherent thing that happened there. The complaints are mostly all valid. The problem is the concomitant judgement that Trump is the solution to the problems, and I think Thiel is utterly tone deaf when he calls the culture wars fake, or that Trump is trying to end them, rather than take advantage of them with ever better dog whistles. To say Clinton is incompetent and that it's in plain sight, is ridiculous in comparison to 7.5 years of the unaccountable racist lie that the president is not a natural born citizen, and thus illegitimate, even questioned for 5 years after the birth certificate was produced; culminating in tonight's global fiasco of Trump questioning the trustworthiness and legitimacy of the American electoral system, in advance of the election. That this personality would eventually go there, is what has been in plain sight. The problem Republicans have, this is not limited to Peter Thiel by far, is how to extract themselves from this mess. It is really a triage moment, they have all been damaged by this, it's just a question of how much they try to paper over what has happened, or get dragged down in an irreparable way, i.e. Mike Pence is now irreparably damaged goods, unless of course we are in fact talking about an autocracy, in which case he's in a very good position. Maybe. Don't like Clinton? Fine. Vote for Eric McMullan, looks like he may very well take Utah. Write in your own name. It is not credible to support a candidate who considers elections a fraud just because he doesn't win.
- biztos 10y ago
  This is just idle speculation but it has occurred to me that Thiel may be in the "burn it down" camp. He's rich enough to probably make it through a bit of depression, anarchy and/or world war unscathed, and maybe reckless enough to yearn for that show.
  - cmurf 10y ago
    It's completely reasonable to be troubled by the lack of a repudiation, even if it's not appropriate to deduce motive. I don't think it's reasonable that he wait a week or two to state disagreement with such a complete departure from this norm. Thiel stuck his neck out, on stage, at the RNC. Today Trump is saying he'll accept the outcome if he wins. That is not the same thing as presuming a fair election, and complete willingness to concede if he's the loser. The language proposes, ipso facto the election is not fair, if he does not win. I do think Democrats can overstate their position by suggesting its so easy to challenge electoral outcome legitimacy with one candidate's bullshit rhetoric, however. For all its warts, the president is not directly elected, it's the electoral college that certifies the winner on Dec 19.

by biztos 10y ago

cmurf 10y ago

Quite right. $1.25 million may very well be a drop in the bucket in comparison to appearing on stage at the Republican National Convention. That in-person appeal to Trump, I think, is much more problematic. Yet it has not generated a fraction of the outrage a campaign contribution has. So I'll charge Silicon Valley is obsessed with money. Big news there. Anyone who hasn't bothered to read Thiel's speech at the RNC, should do so because it's the singularly most coherent thing that happened there. The complaints are mostly all valid. The problem is the concomitant judgement that Trump is the solution to the problems, and I think Thiel is utterly tone deaf when he calls the culture wars fake, or that Trump is trying to end them, rather than take advantage of them with ever better dog whistles. To say Clinton is incompetent and that it's in plain sight, is ridiculous in comparison to 7.5 years of the unaccountable racist lie that the president is not a natural born citizen, and thus illegitimate, even questioned for 5 years after the birth certificate was produced; culminating in tonight's global fiasco of Trump questioning the trustworthiness and legitimacy of the American electoral system, in advance of the election. That this personality would eventually go there, is what has been in plain sight. The problem Republicans have, this is not limited to Peter Thiel by far, is how to extract themselves from this mess. It is really a triage moment, they have all been damaged by this, it's just a question of how much they try to paper over what has happened, or get dragged down in an irreparable way, i.e. Mike Pence is now irreparably damaged goods, unless of course we are in fact talking about an autocracy, in which case he's in a very good position. Maybe. Don't like Clinton? Fine. Vote for Eric McMullan, looks like he may very well take Utah. Write in your own name. It is not credible to support a candidate who considers elections a fraud just because he doesn't win.

biztos 10y ago
This is just idle speculation but it has occurred to me that Thiel may be in the "burn it down" camp. He's rich enough to probably make it through a bit of depression, anarchy and/or world war unscathed, and maybe reckless enough to yearn for that show.
- cmurf 10y ago
  It's completely reasonable to be troubled by the lack of a repudiation, even if it's not appropriate to deduce motive. I don't think it's reasonable that he wait a week or two to state disagreement with such a complete departure from this norm. Thiel stuck his neck out, on stage, at the RNC. Today Trump is saying he'll accept the outcome if he wins. That is not the same thing as presuming a fair election, and complete willingness to concede if he's the loser. The language proposes, ipso facto the election is not fair, if he does not win. I do think Democrats can overstate their position by suggesting its so easy to challenge electoral outcome legitimacy with one candidate's bullshit rhetoric, however. For all its warts, the president is not directly elected, it's the electoral college that certifies the winner on Dec 19.