0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
As a billionaire, he can afford the expense.
Bullshit @BassWrangler You judge Trump's actions by the way the wind is blowing on anonymous Internet forums. I judge the former President's actions by their content. With a little luck, someday you'll be mature enough to know the difference.
Name one action of Trump’s that you disagreed with.
I've played this game for years @HoustonSam And, I've answered this question ad nauseam. Please, go play with someone else. Thanks.
Only because Trump is entirely consistent in his behavior.You guys are also predictable. Your lips are so firmly attached to his backside, you can't see his massive personality flaws.
He doesn't have "75 million supporters."Remember that a good sized chunk of those supporters didn't support him; they just opposed the Democrat. The number of true-blue, die-hard supporters of Trump himself is probably closer to the 14 million who voted for him in the 2016 primaries. Let's say 20 million, just to factor in any non-Republicans.I'm just failing to see here what a Trump social network is going to appeal to. How much of that core is going to bother with another social media account? If this is just going to be a vehicle for Donald Trump to put out what otherwise would be going into tweets... that's not really social media at all, that's just a blog.The reason Parler was starting to take off before it got kneecapped was it offered something that a sizable chunk of social media users were looking for: posts in chronological order (instead of an algorithm) and not interfered with by biased "fact checkers." I was seeing people I know who were only mildly political signing up for Parler. It was on its way to building that critical mass I've been talking about.Will Trump's "social network" offer that? Probably not. If it's going to be a top-down model, it poses the same problems and complaints that we have with current social media, just in a different flavor.By the way, I'm just as skeptical of the Attention Hogg's pillow company as I am with this. So it's not just the person himself.
In other words, you have no counter to his argument.
Surely we can tolerate a few words of face-saving bravado from one prudent enough to abandon an unwinnable fight.
She hasn't abandoned anything! And very likely won't. Her posting history tells the tale.
This is the third time she's abandoned an argument with me; in this case it's more accurate to say she declined it.I actually have a lot of respect for her passion, intelligence, and loyalty; were I in a foxhole she's the kind of person I'd want with me.
While such consistency from other members is considered being principled.
That's because it's based on... well, principles.
So you keep saying.'Cept where Reagan is concerned?
.....rather than personal loyalty, as admirable as loyalty might be.
Indeed, where Reagan is concerned too.
Then we all share those kinds of principles. One's that understands and accepts that in this world compromise is often necessary.
I never said that it wasn't.
