Most liked posts in thread: American Election

He also starts repeating the proven false claims about election fraud according to the interviewer which means I already don't trust this persons judgement

@Aaron Baker If thats what he got banned for then thats patently ridiculous, if it was of a similar vein to what youve posted in the blm tweets then I don't think anyone would complain. He's said much more controversial stuff than that in the past and I would say telling people to liberate places is on a similar level to the blm tweets there, so whist this decision in itself is wrong, I imagine its more them dumping him at the first chance they could get than applying a weirdly inconsistent moral code

 

I wasn't aware that these kind of incitements were being bandied around with the BLM events. I still believe that the majority of the violence in the George Floyd protests was spontaneous, rather than premeditated, but there's no doubt in my mind that those tweets were incitements to violence.
I've no idea why those tweets weren't taken down and/or the accounts suspended, but it's my belief that they should have been. I can't accept a double standard on this - those tweets were irresponsible and dangerous in exactly the same way that Trump's were.
The only differences are that Trump's immeasurably greater profile meant they will have hit more people, and the assumption that we normally expect the POTUS to adhere to high standards of behaviour, not sink to the gutter like Trump repeatedly does.

 

And those Tweets were just from the official BLM account - If I'd done some proper digging into the more underground factions of the protests I'm sure I would be able to find much more numerous and explicit incitements. There will have been an element of spontaneity but it definitely indicates there was guidance and incitement.

But I agree with you, there is clearly a double standard and an inconsistency which is impossible to justify long term.

 

Again I dont think he can feel too hard done by or that he's being treat unfairly, given the outrageously free ride they've let him have over the prior four years and arguably at times before that also. I also think you're still putting an unfair onus on them to act impartially . If they want to favour someone then that's entirely up to them as a private entity. They aren't a regulatory body or a government agency so provided it isn't illegal which banning someone from twitter for spurious reasons isn't, I don't think its that deep

 

weirdly Trump was all for them keeping their exemption as not a publisher

 

Trump himself shot down leg9islation around that actually happening

 

Well that's it Biden installed and promising lots of change,

 

Amen to that.

 

Going by his and Harris' obvious left wing views, not all changes for the better. I think Harris will be pulling a lot of the strings, far more than a deputy would normally do so

 

You won't see this in your 'Guardian'
We don't care who's President: Antifa rioters smash windows at Oregon's Democratic Party headquarters in Portland, burn American flags in Denver and vandalise stores in Seattle just hours after Biden took office

Antifa demonstrators smashed the windows of the Democratic Party headquarters in Portland, Oregon; burned American flags and spray-painted graffiti onto storefronts in Denver and Seattle; marched in Columbus, Ohio; and wielded shields and clubs while protesting in Sacramento hours after President Joe Biden's inauguration. A group of protesters carrying anti-Biden and anti-police signs were marching Wednesday in Portland streets and damaged the headquarters of the Democratic Party of Oregon, police said. The group in Portland smashed windows and spray-painted anarchist symbols at the political party building. It was one of at least four groups planning to gather in the city on Inauguration Day, police said.

 

Yes, there are ridiculous extremists at both ends of the political spectrum in many countries. In other news, bears have been known to shit in the woods.
The difference is that Biden won't be encouraging extremists to smash things up and subvert democratic processes, unlike the Orange Ego.

 

He'll certainly have the desire. The power to address them is more problematic, because the Republicans are likely to use the fillibuster to block him taking the necessary radical steps.
Of course what you think is necessary to address these problems and what I think are likely to be very different.

 

You are at least partially wrong. In today's Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/21/portland-leftwing-protesters-democrats-headquarters?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

 

You shouldn't have gone to so much trouble lol ..

 

I didn't. I just opened the Guardian app and there it was.

 

Do you pay for it yourself?

 

What do you mean?

 

Sorry just curious if you subscribed or was paid for maybe by work etc, No inference implied just curious

 

Seems like Trump did call for a national guard presence on the day of the Capitol riots.... Lot of egg on face if it's true.

 

Get real.

Donald Trump literally activated the national guard and military police to cross a road and enter a church, forcibly dispersing protestors a few months prior to the capitol riots. It was his prerogative to do so.

Trump could have activated the same presence, or greater, at any point leading up to the capitol riots but chose not to.

The fact the White House tweeted something that effectively legalised the deployment of the national guard and military police is not the same as mandating their presence in order to defend the capitol.

There's literally no need for this 'if true', Trump didn't bother because he didn't have a well-orchestrated plan in mind to stop the riots.

Sources:

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2021/01/07/this-is-why-the-national-guard-didnt-respond-to-the-attack-on-the-capitol/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/01/trump-george-floyd-protests-military-deploy