4 ms·

I think you drastically overestimate his name recognition; he's famous in the tech bubble, outside of that few would know his name. Everyone knows facebook, th

I think you drastically overestimate his name recognition; he's famous in the tech bubble, outside of that few would know his name. Everyone knows facebook, that doesn't translate to everyone knows Zuck. Beyond that, he's on record saying all his users are idiots and he has virtually no social skills; Zuck is not a politician and probably couldn't be. Trump didn't win on name recognition anyway, he won on racism, pure and simple. He tapped into white middle class racist conservative American's anger about losing their place in the world by saying what they think and normalizing their racism. That his opponent was a women also helped due to their misogyny that he also tapped into. This isn't the kind of thing Zuck or any left leaning billionaire can replicate. Zuck has the power and influence to be a king maker, but he'll never be King, he's not suited for it. In fact, Trump nor any business titan is suited for it, government isn't a business and the president isn't a CEO and Trump is only proving that truism; the president is a diplomat and requires a professional diplomat, not a businessman.

cgriswald 10y ago
> I think you drastically overestimate his name recognition; he's famous in the tech bubble, outside of that few would know his name. Compare to who? Warren Buffett? I honestly can't think of a single person I know who doesn't know who MZ is, probably by name, but if not, they at least know the face and recognize him as "the Facebook guy." Getting name recognition will not be a problem for him. I'm not sure if he could win or not, but it would not surprise me to see millennials vote in swarms for one of their own. I don't see MZ as a politician, but I'm not sure why you think that means he couldn't win. Anti-establishment sentiment is at an all-time high. Trump won on it. Sanders campaigned on it, and had it not been for his own party's corruption, may have won. > Trump didn't win on name recognition anyway, he won on racism, pure and simple Trump didn't win. The left lost. The left lost on their own corruption, both real and perceived, and the consequences of that corruption. He won on the left's identity politics and the insistence that anyone who disagrees with them is ignorant, racist, misogynistic, homophobic, stupid, or a million other pejoratives. He won on (actual, not reported) unemployment by a class of people who have seen their standard of living in sharp decline under the last two administrations, but who the left does not include in its list of deserving. Edit: Spelling.
- gnaritas 10y ago
  Not compared to anyone, you don't need to compare to someone to make a statement that outside of tech, Zuck isn't that well known. It would surprise me to see millennials vote in swarms at all, that fact that young people generally don't vote is one of the big problems and always has been. Young people don't choose government, they're too busy being young; it's older people that show up and vote and largely always has been which explains the demographic of congress. MZ isn't a politician, and I don't think he could win because he doesn't have the personality required of a politician and diplomat. Trump didn't win on anti-establishment, he won on racism pure and simple and that was born out by the numbers. He ran a nasty divisive campaign invoking the worst in people and it was just enough with our wacky electoral system to win despite losing by millions of votes overall. As for your summary of the left, well, it's just an unhinged partisan rant not grounded in any facts and not worth arguing with.
  - cgriswald 10y ago
    > As for your summary of the left, well, it's just an unhinged partisan rant not grounded in any facts and not worth arguing with. It's grounded in the experience of actually talking to people with differing opinions, rather than trying to claim they are racist or "not worth arguing with" or declaring them a "partisan" without even knowing their political leanings, much less their positions on individual issues.
    - gnaritas 10y ago
      Try reading more carefully, I said it was a partisan rant, and it was. I don't have to know your political leanings to know what you said was clearly a partisan rant. Talking to people who behave like racists, doesn't make them not racists. Refusing to call out racism because it might offend the racists simply isn't something decent people should be willing to do. If you can't see truth in the lefts claims of racism, and they are true, it's very likely because you yourself don't recognize racism when you see it likely because you're so normalized to it or you're unaffected by it and unwilling to understand your experience isn't the same as everyone else's. The left didn't lose because they called people out on their racism/etc, they lost because so many people are racist/etc that Trump was able to find an audience and combined with an electoral system that favors rural voters and thus land over people, he was able to win while getting far less votes than his competitor; he literally won on a technicality. Trump is a straight up racist who demonstrated this fact time and time again, so much so he got the KKK's endorsement and support from ignorant folk from all over the country. That you blame those pointing out the problem instead of those who are the problem is quite telling. I have no problem talking to people of different opinions and do so often, but racism isn't merely a difference of opinion, it's a form of oppression and violence and can't simply be ignored by slapping a euphemism of "different opinion" on it. When you oppress other people, whether it be women or people of color, you are not just having "different opinions" and it's dishonest to attempt to label it as such.

cgriswald 10y ago

> I think you drastically overestimate his name recognition; he's famous in the tech bubble, outside of that few would know his name. Compare to who? Warren Buffett? I honestly can't think of a single person I know who doesn't know who MZ is, probably by name, but if not, they at least know the face and recognize him as "the Facebook guy." Getting name recognition will not be a problem for him. I'm not sure if he could win or not, but it would not surprise me to see millennials vote in swarms for one of their own. I don't see MZ as a politician, but I'm not sure why you think that means he couldn't win. Anti-establishment sentiment is at an all-time high. Trump won on it. Sanders campaigned on it, and had it not been for his own party's corruption, may have won. > Trump didn't win on name recognition anyway, he won on racism, pure and simple Trump didn't win. The left lost. The left lost on their own corruption, both real and perceived, and the consequences of that corruption. He won on the left's identity politics and the insistence that anyone who disagrees with them is ignorant, racist, misogynistic, homophobic, stupid, or a million other pejoratives. He won on (actual, not reported) unemployment by a class of people who have seen their standard of living in sharp decline under the last two administrations, but who the left does not include in its list of deserving. Edit: Spelling.

gnaritas 10y ago
Not compared to anyone, you don't need to compare to someone to make a statement that outside of tech, Zuck isn't that well known. It would surprise me to see millennials vote in swarms at all, that fact that young people generally don't vote is one of the big problems and always has been. Young people don't choose government, they're too busy being young; it's older people that show up and vote and largely always has been which explains the demographic of congress. MZ isn't a politician, and I don't think he could win because he doesn't have the personality required of a politician and diplomat. Trump didn't win on anti-establishment, he won on racism pure and simple and that was born out by the numbers. He ran a nasty divisive campaign invoking the worst in people and it was just enough with our wacky electoral system to win despite losing by millions of votes overall. As for your summary of the left, well, it's just an unhinged partisan rant not grounded in any facts and not worth arguing with.
- cgriswald 10y ago
  > As for your summary of the left, well, it's just an unhinged partisan rant not grounded in any facts and not worth arguing with. It's grounded in the experience of actually talking to people with differing opinions, rather than trying to claim they are racist or "not worth arguing with" or declaring them a "partisan" without even knowing their political leanings, much less their positions on individual issues.
  - gnaritas 10y ago
    Try reading more carefully, I said it was a partisan rant, and it was. I don't have to know your political leanings to know what you said was clearly a partisan rant. Talking to people who behave like racists, doesn't make them not racists. Refusing to call out racism because it might offend the racists simply isn't something decent people should be willing to do. If you can't see truth in the lefts claims of racism, and they are true, it's very likely because you yourself don't recognize racism when you see it likely because you're so normalized to it or you're unaffected by it and unwilling to understand your experience isn't the same as everyone else's. The left didn't lose because they called people out on their racism/etc, they lost because so many people are racist/etc that Trump was able to find an audience and combined with an electoral system that favors rural voters and thus land over people, he was able to win while getting far less votes than his competitor; he literally won on a technicality. Trump is a straight up racist who demonstrated this fact time and time again, so much so he got the KKK's endorsement and support from ignorant folk from all over the country. That you blame those pointing out the problem instead of those who are the problem is quite telling. I have no problem talking to people of different opinions and do so often, but racism isn't merely a difference of opinion, it's a form of oppression and violence and can't simply be ignored by slapping a euphemism of "different opinion" on it. When you oppress other people, whether it be women or people of color, you are not just having "different opinions" and it's dishonest to attempt to label it as such.