Who thinks Trump will win?

schmittel

schmittel wrote: »

I don't think Outlaw Pete is talking about politicizing mask wearing?!

He's claiming it was biased moderation and implying it relates to political views. Mask wearing is not a political view but he's viewing it as such, clearly.

drunkmonkey

Deleted User wrote: »

It's not a political view that the post was removed for.. it was misinformation on safe practises during a pandemic. It really shows the stupidity that has taken off, trying to politicize mask wearing during a pandemic...

Bidens politicized masks, he's talking about mask laws if he's elected...mad mask fanatics will definiteley vote for him. Trump is listening to Atlas which is a good thing.

He's really sowing it to trump with the 2 masks...:)

Outlaw Pete

Deleted User wrote: »

It's not a political view that the post was removed for.. it was misinformation on safe practises during a pandemic. It really shows the stupidity that has taken off, trying to politicize mask wearing during a pandemic...

First of all, that wasn't my point - I was referring to Twitter's political stance in general and the fact that the user in question will support them no matter what they do as a result of that.

Secondly, the wearing of masks has been politicized and only the very naive would feel it has not:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mW07aBp5TxY

I've already posted clips and articles which make it clear there is a lot of political theatre going on:

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/oct/1/wendy-ullman-pa-lawmaker-plans-face-mask-political/

Overheal

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Bidens politicized masks, he's talking about mask laws if he's elected...mad mask fanatics will definiteley vote for him. Trump is listening to Atlas which is a good thing.

He's really sowing it to trump with the 2 masks...:)

Not really though. If you pair a surgical mask with a n95+coolflow you have the best protection for wearer and bystanders with good comfort, namely easy exhalation.

Overheal

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

the fact that the user in question will support them no matter what they do as a result of that.

That isn't a fact Pete, that's slander, conjecture, and speculation on "what woulda coulda shoulda." And so was your entire last post. The fact is I'm not the topic, and you didn't really acknowledge my point: Twitter is a private company and has rights. All you did was gripe and moan at me, none of which does anything to defy the fact that they are a private company and they have rights.

Billy Mays

Overheal wrote: »

Not really though. If you pair a surgical mask with a n95+coolflow you have the best protection for wearer and bystanders with good comfort, namely easy exhalation.

I doubt the poster is aware of this

extra gravy

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Bidens politicized masks, he's talking about mask laws if he's elected...mad mask fanatics will definiteley vote for him. Trump is listening to Atlas which is a good thing.

He's really sowing it to trump with the 2 masks...:)

"Mad mask fanatics" - sounds like some juvenile term used by covidiots who think wearing a piece of cloth over their mouth is an infringement of their "freedom." Thankfully Biden isn't one of those idiots and sets an example of how to be socially responsible during a pandemic, unlike President Superspreader.

drunkmonkey

Will Trump take California?

https://twitter.com/kayleighmcenany/status/1317929348674940929?s=20

Overheal

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Will Trump take California?

https://twitter.com/kayleighmcenany/status/1317929348674940929?s=20

Well if a Trump spox says it it must be true. Biggest Parade Ever, Period. You heard it hear folks, bigly yuge.

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

Well if a Trump spox says it it must be true. Biggest Parade Ever, Period. You heard it hear folks, bigly yuge.

Still though, there does seem to be a massive difference in actual visible support on the ground..

Yeah, I know..the pandemic etc..

But still..

Phoebas

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Will Trump take California?

So that's where the username comes from.

drunkmonkey

extra gravy wrote: »

"Mad mask fanatics" - sounds like some juvenile term used by covidiots who think wearing a piece of cloth over their mouth is an infringement of their "freedom." Thankfully Biden isn't one of those idiots and sets an example of how to be socially responsible during a pandemic, unlike President Superspreader.

When you make it law it's an infringement, Atlas said they do not work, so have plenty of others. Biden will hoover up the pandemic hardline vote as they literally think the other side are crazy and going to kill everyone.

what Atlas said was:

Masks work? NO: LA, Miami, Hawaii, Alabama, France, Phlippnes, UK, Ireland, Spain, Israel. WHO:"widesprd use not supported" + many harms; Heneghan/Oxf CEBM:"despite decades, considerble uncertainty re value"; CDC rvw May:"no sig red'n in inflnz transm'n"; learn why https://t.co/1hRFHsxe59

Plenty of people here have the same view it all depends on what science your listen to. Big believer in real world fact based evidence myself.

km991148

The idea that Twitter is censoring as part of some kind of lefty agenda is laughable.

Twitter, YouTube etc have very reluctantly agreed to cut some of the misinformation in this election cycle. They have no desire to do this whatsoever. This should be so obvious it doesn't have to be said, but yet it does.

Overheal

Deleted User wrote: »

Still though, there does seem to be a massive difference in actual visible support on the ground..

Yeah, I know..the pandemic etc..

But still..

And I'm sure the important demongraphic of dozens of boat owners will really tip California or wherever over the edge. :pac:

Nobody doubts thousands of people will come out to a Trump rally, that's been easily demonstrated. Thousands in line, color me shocked, his Tulsa Rally even got 'several thousand' people at it - and the attendance was still lackluster (and Herman Cain still died RIP)

km991148

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Plenty of people here have the same view it all depends on what science your listen to.(sic)

That's not how science works.

km991148

km991148 wrote: »

That's not how science works.

He's basically peddling the same rhetoric that is used to deny climate change and evolution.

drunkmonkey

km991148 wrote: »

The idea that Twitter is censoring as part of some kind of lefty agenda is laughable.

Twitter, YouTube etc have very reluctantly agreed to cut some of the misinformation in this election cycle. They have no desire to do this whatsoever. This should be so obvious it doesn't have to be said, but yet it does.

Twitter don't censor Carl Heneghan so why censor Atlas when he referenced him. It's not misinformation, it's fact based evidence he's referring to.

Outlaw Pete

km991148 wrote: »

The idea that Twitter is censoring as part of some kind of lefty agenda is laughable.

Twitter, YouTube etc have very reluctantly agreed to cut some of the misinformation in this election cycle. They have no desire to do this whatsoever. This should be so obvious it doesn't have to be said, but yet it does.

lol. Twitter has most conservative accounts shaddowbanned and YouTube's demonetized almost all conservative channels that are popular.

Welcome to the party, Pal.

Call Me Jimmy

km991148 wrote: »

The idea that Twitter is censoring as part of some kind of lefty agenda is laughable.

Twitter, YouTube etc have very reluctantly agreed to cut some of the misinformation in this election cycle. They have no desire to do this whatsoever. This should be so obvious it doesn't have to be said, but yet it does.

But it was censored before it was deemed disinformation? Nobody has disputed the veracity of the information yet.The idea that it's disinformation is itself from an unverified source. The FBI haven't commented on whether they had or had not done an investigation. They haven't even said if they received the laptop.

What do I have wrong? Like when that unsourced article about Trump saying the troops were losers came out, how did Twitter confirm that was okay?

km991148

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

lol. Twitter has most conservative accounts shaddowbanned and YouTube almost all conservative channels that are popular.

Welcome to the party, Pal.

Absolute bs. There are plenty of conservative, right and alt right (and everything in between) channels out there as I am sure you know.

They have very little interest in banning. Why would they? Why would they actively cut off their main source of income?

Would you give up your income, pal?

km991148

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

But it was censored before it was deemed disinformation? Nobody has disputed the veracity of the information yet.The idea that it's disinformation is itself from an unverified source. The FBI haven't commented on whether they had or had not done an investigation. They haven't even said if they received the laptop.

What do I have wrong? Like when that unsourced article about Trump saying the troops were losers came out, how did Twitter confirm that was okay?

I think in the specific case of the emails they might have jumped the gun initially because it came from a tabloid and the mail's in the article look like bs (is screenshots). I wouldn't be surprised if it was some automated algo based off of number of complaints. That's why the censorship came with a weird message that didn't really explain it.
By the time a human got involved, the article and the censoring if it was already a news story, so they kept with it (and started apologising for the weird message).

Overheal

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

But it was censored before it was deemed disinformation? Nobody has disputed the veracity of the information yet.The idea that it's disinformation is itself from an unverified source. The FBI haven't commented on whether they had or had not done an investigation. They haven't even said if they received the laptop.

What do I have wrong? Like when that unsourced article about Trump saying the troops were losers came out, how did Twitter confirm that was okay?

Not an apple to apple comparison. The source of the "losers" reporting was not surreptitious swiping of someones alleged hard drive contents. The closest parallel would have been reporting when Hofeller's hard drive was publicized:

https://twitter.com/SHofeller/status/1202938238681407488?s=20

Except in that case it was his daughter and the data was directly available for persual.

Among the many things that I learned from my father, is that civil litigation was time consuming and unpredictable. With this in mind, I made copies of the drives before turning them over to Arnold Porter.

And Dad was right. Arnold Porter still has the drives that I turned over to them. No, they didn't give them back to me. No, I don't have them, I have my copies, that's what I have, that's what I've published.

Needless to say, GOP lawyers went to extreme lengths attempting to prevent The Hofeller Files from being authenticated and admitted into evidence. They failed. Even after the authentication, the RNC and my father's former business partner, Dalton Lamar "Dale" Oldham, demanded that the files were, illegally obtained, improperly obtained, proprietary, covered by attorney-client privilege, and/or represented "trade secrets" of the firm, Geographic Strategies and the Republican National Committee.

In the summer of 2019, with the election and the census looming, motions by the GOP defendants included the suggestion that the external drives themselves should be destroyed...

(Keep in mind, that the actual computers containing the files, remained and still remain in the possession of Geographic Strategies, now Dale Oldham. Mr. Oldham relentlessly dodged subpoena after subpoena, and has yet, to this day, responded to any subpoena, or turned over the original, "Hofeller Files").

The motion to destroy the files prompted me to begin aggressively distributing copies of the files to journalists, many of whom wrote informative exposes, but limited by liability issues, found themselves unable to publish the files, in their original state.

Frustrated, and plagued with a sense of urgency, I decided to publish the files myself. This proved to be as daunting a task as I predicted. Along with the sheer volume of the data, complications included my father's indelicate co-mingling of personal and professional files (a tactic often employed to evade discovery).

The task confounded several hosting companies, with my own Google Drive proving to be the only platform that could, even for a few days, handle the traffic.

Even the Google Drive, however, eventually succumbed to the pressure after six days. Fortunately, by then, we had several hosts mirroring the content, as well as parties making and seeding torrents.

Overheal

km991148 wrote: »

I wouldn't be surprised if it was some automated algo based off of number of complaints. That's why the censorship came with a weird message that didn't really explain it.
By the time a human got involved, the article and the censoring if it was already a news story, so they kept with it (and started apologising for the weird message).

This would make more sense. What would make even more sense is if NYP did something with the article, link, or page to ensure that it was flagged, even as a false positive, by Twitter's algorithm, to manufacture a Streisand Effect.

km991148

Like, the volume of data Twitter control is huge. It's not like there is someone going over each account saying yes or no. Even if you look at the more famous accounts (left or right) there are still sh**loads.

So things only get banned when enough users hit the report button (and even then they probably have algorithms to look at how many reports per minute etc). So if something gets a lot of reports very quickly (and from a source that probably already gets a few people reporting them) then they would play it safe and shut it down (temporarily or permanently).

But generally speaking, it takes a lot of action to shut something down as these guys thrive on content and particularly controversial content as it generates most as revenue.

So you can sit all day speculating on why X got banned and Y never and maybe you will think you see patterns that corresponds with (or against) your own world view, but the correspondence is not as black and white as you think and most likely nothing to do with twitter's own take on the actual content (as they really don't care, as long as it makes people stay on the platform).

drunkmonkey

Things are starting to unravel pretty quick for Biden.

https://twitter.com/kayleighmcenany/status/1317960566703415297?s=20

Ukraine also have a second laptop, https://www.thedailybeast.com/rudys-russian-agent-pal-teases-second-laptop-with-hunter-biden-kompromat

I don't see how Biden is going to recover from all this..

km991148

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Twitter don't censor Carl Heneghan so why censor Atlas when he referenced him. It's not misinformation, it's fact based evidence he's referring to.

I typed a longer reply above, but basically it's inconsistent because the banning of accounts is user driven.. IE deepening in how many hit report and the account owners history etc

Outlaw Pete

km991148 wrote: »

Absolute bs. There are plenty of conservative, right and alt right (and everything in between) channels out there as I am sure you know.

They have very little interest in banning. Why would they? Why would they actively cut off their main source of income?

Would you give up your income, pal?

Eh, wut? I never said they were banned. They demonetize the vast majority of high profile accounts and make them almost impossible to find. They do it under the guise of stopping misogyny, or homophobia, or preventing misinformation. It's just not something that would be on your radar. It's why Dan Bongino set up Parler.


https://twitter.com/dbongino/status/1110977343105966080

hetuzozaho

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Things are starting to unravel pretty quick for Biden.

https://twitter.com/kayleighmcenany/status/1317960566703415297?s=20

Ukraine also have a second laptop, https://www.thedailybeast.com/rudys-russian-agent-pal-teases-second-laptop-with-hunter-biden-kompromat

I don't see how Biden is going to recover from all this..

Why is she tweeting this article from may? Why is this big news today?

Unravelling terribly slowly by the sounds of it? Or what am I missing?

4068ac1elhodqr

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Things are starting to unravel pretty quick for Biden.

https://twitter.com/kayleighmcenany/status/1317960566703415297?s=20

Ukraine also have a second laptop, https://www.thedailybeast.com/rudys-russian-agent-pal-teases-second-laptop-with-hunter-biden-kompromat

I don't see how Biden is going to recover from all this..

A handover to KH if it gets any worse?

Not sure if that's even possible at this late stage, transfer of votes etc, also assumes people would be voting for a party(policy) not a personality.

She's gonna have to take over from stand-in Joe at some stage, can't see him lasting 4years, months.

km991148

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Eh, wut? I never said they were banned. They demonetize the vast majority of high profile accounts and make them almost impossible to find. They do it under the guise of stopping misogyny, or homophobia, or preventing misinformation. It's just not something that would be on your radar. It's why Dan Bongino set up Parler.


https://twitter.com/dbongino/status/1110977343105966080

Fair enough, I misread, can you share more on this? I don't know what Parler is, but that tweet just hints at someone getting upset but nothing to back it up.

From what I've seen recently there is plenty of YouTube channels that have plenty of openly mysogynistic, homophobic and racist comments and nothing done. Look up Alex Belfield in the UK for example. Guy is clearly a shill buy the comments are golden.