3 ms·

Am I the only one who finds the whole situation bizarre? Edit: I will be more blunt since some replies show they don't understand what I find weird: Why do yo

Am I the only one who finds the whole situation bizarre? Edit: I will be more blunt since some replies show they don't understand what I find weird: Why do you need a private social media company to stop your president from planting terrorism in your own country because he thinks the election is fake instead of congress/government/whatever??!

stevehawk 6y ago
You mean that in 2021, the man with the "nuclear football" is banned from the 2 of the largest social media platforms? No that's not bizarre at all.
- rconti 6y ago
  To be fair, all previous presidents were effectively banned from social media because they had the sense not to use it. Nothing prevented this president or any other president from just opening a 24x7 conference call line where he can just blather whatever he feels like at any time to anyone listening. But, none of them did.
psyc 6y ago
That’s what you get when you elect a tabloid celebrity billionaire to the most important office in the world. I’ve been mostly disappointed with our selection of candidates for a long time, but I never thought I’d see that. It’s as if nobody outstanding even wants the job. Literally Idiocracy.
- giarc 6y ago
  >It’s as if nobody outstanding even wants the job. I think the issue in 2016 was too many people wanted the job. You can agree/disagree whether the primary field included 'outstanding' people, but the sheer number of candidates allowed the loud mouth to stand out.
  - gremlinsinc 6y ago
    Just about anybody else running then had more decency and common sense and aptitude for the job. The problem is, Trump = big ratings for the media on both sides. MSNBC is as much to blame as Fox. It's also imho partially the DNC's fault (the left has less choices), and they picked a flawed candidate who would've never won against any of the RNC choices. She had a criminal on-going investigation, which true or not should've been like, woah, let's maybe put someone else in, who might not be indicted. The entire system is fubarred and there's plenty of blame to go around, I don't know where we go from here, and I highly doubt a Biden administration is going to bring much joy either to a lot of American's who are suffering. I do hope we make it harder for something like this to happen again (for fascists to take such strong control in America).
  - marcusverus 6y ago
    You're right. The unspoken tragedy is that a large number of candidates should be a good thing. Any primary system that can't endure a significant number of candidates is the wrong system. Both parties have broken primary systems that need to be thrown out and re-made for the modern era.
    - alistairSH 6y ago
      Exactly. The primary system we have in place is an abomination - it's tailor-made to elect lunactics. Some sort of approval voting or instant-runoff would probably provide better outcomes.
      - giarc 6y ago
        In Canada (where I'm from) our party leaders are elected by the party members. Whenever there is a change in leader, there is some party convention and paying members of the party are asked to vote. Anyone can pay to be a member, but it's not a public vote like in the states. I wonder if this produces better or worse candidates? With our parlimentary system, we also don't vote for our Prime Minister, we vote for our local representative. I think it's obvious if the US worked this way, the Republican party wouldn't have selected Trump. Perhaps you end up just electing the same old boring white guy time and time again.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
murat124 6y ago
Not since the inauguration is coming. It's because social media companies realized that they may be overseen by Dems now.
Shivetya 6y ago
While I never liked the man I never found my self in the rabid dislike corner that I think far too many existed within. However I have no sympathy for him as his actions are ridiculous on any level let alone as President. Being a Libertarian I am not a fan of big government and I am certainly not a fan of anyone suggesting what he has with how to do deal with an election outcome he does not like. Sorry, this is not how we are supposed to work and I am actually disappointed that Congress hasn't just pulled the plug as a whole since the debacle started to unfold. Pence has shown he can be put in place, he will be a modern day Ford if not for a short period of time but he should take mantle if not just for the few weeks we need him. The sad part is this elections are frauds has been building for years and both sides are to blame for creating an environment so poisoned that all elections that don't turn out right are considered unjust. Now we have reached the final stage which is violence.
vkou 6y ago
> World's most powerful country's president is peddling fake election conspiracy theory I mean, even back in 2016, he made it clear that he won't accept the results of any election he didn't win. (And then went on to spend the next year spreading lies and conspiracy theories about how he actually won the popular vote.) He's just following through on past behaviour. In a country with less robust civic systems, this is the sort of rhetoric that you can leverage into becoming dictator-for-life.

stevehawk 6y ago

You mean that in 2021, the man with the "nuclear football" is banned from the 2 of the largest social media platforms? No that's not bizarre at all.

rconti 6y ago
To be fair, all previous presidents were effectively banned from social media because they had the sense not to use it. Nothing prevented this president or any other president from just opening a 24x7 conference call line where he can just blather whatever he feels like at any time to anyone listening. But, none of them did.

psyc 6y ago

That’s what you get when you elect a tabloid celebrity billionaire to the most important office in the world. I’ve been mostly disappointed with our selection of candidates for a long time, but I never thought I’d see that. It’s as if nobody outstanding even wants the job. Literally Idiocracy.

giarc 6y ago
>It’s as if nobody outstanding even wants the job. I think the issue in 2016 was too many people wanted the job. You can agree/disagree whether the primary field included 'outstanding' people, but the sheer number of candidates allowed the loud mouth to stand out.
- gremlinsinc 6y ago
  Just about anybody else running then had more decency and common sense and aptitude for the job. The problem is, Trump = big ratings for the media on both sides. MSNBC is as much to blame as Fox. It's also imho partially the DNC's fault (the left has less choices), and they picked a flawed candidate who would've never won against any of the RNC choices. She had a criminal on-going investigation, which true or not should've been like, woah, let's maybe put someone else in, who might not be indicted. The entire system is fubarred and there's plenty of blame to go around, I don't know where we go from here, and I highly doubt a Biden administration is going to bring much joy either to a lot of American's who are suffering. I do hope we make it harder for something like this to happen again (for fascists to take such strong control in America).
- marcusverus 6y ago
  You're right. The unspoken tragedy is that a large number of candidates should be a good thing. Any primary system that can't endure a significant number of candidates is the wrong system. Both parties have broken primary systems that need to be thrown out and re-made for the modern era.
  - alistairSH 6y ago
    Exactly. The primary system we have in place is an abomination - it's tailor-made to elect lunactics. Some sort of approval voting or instant-runoff would probably provide better outcomes.
    - giarc 6y ago
      In Canada (where I'm from) our party leaders are elected by the party members. Whenever there is a change in leader, there is some party convention and paying members of the party are asked to vote. Anyone can pay to be a member, but it's not a public vote like in the states. I wonder if this produces better or worse candidates? With our parlimentary system, we also don't vote for our Prime Minister, we vote for our local representative. I think it's obvious if the US worked this way, the Republican party wouldn't have selected Trump. Perhaps you end up just electing the same old boring white guy time and time again.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

murat124 6y ago

Not since the inauguration is coming. It's because social media companies realized that they may be overseen by Dems now.

Shivetya 6y ago

While I never liked the man I never found my self in the rabid dislike corner that I think far too many existed within. However I have no sympathy for him as his actions are ridiculous on any level let alone as President. Being a Libertarian I am not a fan of big government and I am certainly not a fan of anyone suggesting what he has with how to do deal with an election outcome he does not like. Sorry, this is not how we are supposed to work and I am actually disappointed that Congress hasn't just pulled the plug as a whole since the debacle started to unfold. Pence has shown he can be put in place, he will be a modern day Ford if not for a short period of time but he should take mantle if not just for the few weeks we need him. The sad part is this elections are frauds has been building for years and both sides are to blame for creating an environment so poisoned that all elections that don't turn out right are considered unjust. Now we have reached the final stage which is violence.

vkou 6y ago

> World's most powerful country's president is peddling fake election conspiracy theory I mean, even back in 2016, he made it clear that he won't accept the results of any election he didn't win. (And then went on to spend the next year spreading lies and conspiracy theories about how he actually won the popular vote.) He's just following through on past behaviour. In a country with less robust civic systems, this is the sort of rhetoric that you can leverage into becoming dictator-for-life.