I confess to back pedaling into Trump territory when I wanted to leave discussions about him in the garbage can. My thread on the read-only break room site has 9,600 replies so I thought I'd bring up a new one.
He's not going away.
Haberman's book is out based on interviews. I won't read it, but the excerpts are interesting. Especially what he says about McConnell, a description that's against the Terms of Service here, but I actually don't disagree with. LOL
Quote
“At one point, Trump made a candid admission that was as jarring as it was ultimately unsurprising. ‘The question I get asked more than any other question: “If you had it to do again, would you have done it?”’Trump said of running for president. ‘The answer is, yeah, I think so. Because here’s the way I look at it. I have so many rich friends and nobody knows who they are.’ … Reflecting on the meaning of having been president of the United States, his first impulse was not to mention public service, or what he felt he’d accomplished, only that it appeared to be a vehicle for fame, and that many experiences were only worth having if someone else envied them.”
Trump was not banned for his free speech and posting of "facts" but you are certainly able to believe that silencing him on their platform doesn't promote free speech. I believe he was banned for violating their policies more than once.
Twitter now known as X just like this forum is a private platform and they make the rules. Apparently given the thoughts of the vitriol there now have a different set of rules. It's the owner's right.
Most here know this story. I elect to stay on this platform knowing I can be banned for the things I say. Years ago there was a dreadful rich person (she chose to tell us she was a millionaire) that was very condescending to me and I called her a name and got censored and elected to take a 2 year sabbatical. I wasn't pushing the envelope, I knew it was wrong (I used to be an administrator here and I know the Terms of Service) and knew the consequences, and ultimately it felt right to me. I don't think my free speech was violated when I was told the rules ahead of time and I never complained.
The policies here haven't always been welcome. An offshoot group of Nurse Anesthetists created their own website and forum because they claimed they didn't have free speech here. I lurked there a time or too and the vitriol was annoying. I'd rather give up a little free speech and be in a more peaceful place.
Facts and truth, and just being decent, don't need a community note do they?
All great points. AN doesn't have millions of subscribers nor does it have a significant amount of people getting information about political topics.
I partially agree with Harris. Large media platforms that can facilitate mass amounts of information, whether disinformation or facts, have a position of responsibilitie that sets a bar far higher than small private businesses like AN. How to regulate this is beyond me.
Trump's final tweets before being banned
Quote
n one, he wrote: "The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!"
Quote
To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th."
Apparently this was "glorifying violence ".
Violence is not mentioned once or even suggested. Twitter exploited their TOS as they were emboldened and relied of the events and emotion of Jan 6. Then proceeded to ban Trump affiliates. Then Google banned the alternate forum Parler followed by several other media platforms.
I think this is a blatant breach of free speech and plain censorship. If you have some counter points please share with me. (This is a genuine request).
No facts don't need community notes. Nor does being a decent human being. Blatant racism and vulgarity already notes itself as garbage.
However "vaccines will kill you" most certainly does. I would rather see a community note with facts proving that false rather then just censoring it.
All great points. AN doesn't have millions of subscribers nor does it have a significant amount of people getting information about political topics.
I partially agree with Harris. Large media platforms that can facilitate mass amounts of information, whether disinformation or facts, have a position of responsibilitie that sets a bar far higher than small private businesses like AN. How to regulate this is beyond me.
Trump's final tweets before being banned
Apparently this was "glorifying violence ".
Violence is not mentioned once or even suggested. Twitter exploited their TOS as they were emboldened and relied of the events and emotion of Jan 6. Then proceeded to ban Trump affiliates. Then Google banned the alternate forum Parler followed by several other media platforms.
I think this is a blatant breach of free speech and plain censorship. If you have some counter points please share with me. (This is a genuine request).
No facts don't need community notes. Nor does being a decent human being. Blatant racism and vulgarity already notes itself as garbage.
However "vaccines will kill you" most certainly does. I would rather see a community note with facts proving that false rather then just censoring it.
We can just agree to disagree. I think there are some ideas that need to be removed and not have a community note. Yes, it is censorship but I feel a private organization has the right to do that on their own website, because as you say they have a greater responsibility to their larger members rather than the individual.
I did scratch my head the other day at his two final posts that caused them to make the decision to ban him but those two are just two out of a context of many ahead of them and they apparently were done with him. I still support their right to censor and ban whom they choose. Who can blame them for banning the man that without proof said he won the election. If I don't like it or agree with it, I can certainly object and then choose whether to frequent that site or not.
I did scratch my head the other day at his two final posts that caused them to make the decision to ban him but those two are just two out of a context of many ahead of them and they apparently were done with him. I still support their right to censor and ban whom they choose. Who can blame them for banning the man that without proof said he won the election. If I don't like it or agree with it, I can certainly object and then choose whether to frequent that site or not.
It's very likely the decision to ban him had already been made when he posted those final comments. As frequently as he spits out posts on social media, if anyone is looking for what triggered his ban they should probably look at all the posts that led up to the ones being quoted here.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Crusades said:
Yes and long ago as a free country we wrote in the right to free speech.
Long ago agencies who determined that mercury and lead in cosmetic was the best medical practice, would not have been challenged and more people would have been harmed without freedom of speech. The CDC couldn't of become what it is because the opposition would not allow it. However because of freedom of speech, we know now because the people had freedom to question and challenge the current medial practice of the time. Without this freedom, mercury and lead would have killed many people.
Medical science is always to be challenged and developed. It's fundemental to develop and discover new treatments and cures. We would not have the advanced medical technology we have today if medical science was not constantly being challenged. It's call the scientific method.
Not saying stupid post on social media is the same thing but it's still applies to the fundamental idea of freedom of speech.
Our constitution states that we are to question our government and hold it accountable to the people. It is no longer a free country when it is forbidden to question our government. It leads to tyranny. Source-history.
I'm not certain what the point of your first two paragraphs is.
Trump's everyday free speech is riddled with outright lies, misrepresentations, disinformation and s delusional thinking.
We are nurses, we understand and use the scientific method. We know that vaccines work and that wearing masks reduces the spread of upper respiratory illnesses. Listening to pseudoscience opinions on TikTok or YouTube and defying public health guidance is not an example of using the scientific method.
Who is saying that we shouldn't question our government or is that another strawman?
I wonder though, do you remember when a member of a presidential administration DID say that presidential authority wouldn't be questioned? That guy is a tyrant wannabe, he admires despots and dictators
Quote
The end result of this, though, is that our opponents, the media and the whole world will soon see as we begin to take further actions, that the powers of the president to protect our country are very substantial and will not be questioned.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Crusades said:
That's a real reputable source. Is it from the CDC?
"Verbal vomit" must be a new medical term. Will be in medical journals soon? Nah. It's propaganda.
You are welcome to ignore the evidence of Trump's cognitive decline and mental illness but your persistence in doing so doesn't make you appear as a center of right individual, especially after your insistence that Biden was too demented to run.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Crusades said:
All great points. AN doesn't have millions of subscribers nor does it have a significant amount of people getting information about political topics.
I partially agree with Harris. Large media platforms that can facilitate mass amounts of information, whether disinformation or facts, have a position of responsibilitie that sets a bar far higher than small private businesses like AN. How to regulate this is beyond me.
Trump's final tweets before being banned
Apparently this was "glorifying violence ".
Violence is not mentioned once or even suggested. Twitter exploited their TOS as they were emboldened and relied of the events and emotion of Jan 6. Then proceeded to ban Trump affiliates. Then Google banned the alternate forum Parler followed by several other media platforms.
I think this is a blatant breach of free speech and plain censorship. If you have some counter points please share with me. (This is a genuine request).
No facts don't need community notes. Nor does being a decent human being. Blatant racism and vulgarity already notes itself as garbage.
However "vaccines will kill you" most certainly does. I would rather see a community note with facts proving that false rather then just censoring it.
Do you want the government to get involved in deciding what content the private media company should publish? You said the private company is censoring people. Do people have a right to publish their content on a private social media platform?
No. Blatant racism and vulgarity have a huge fan base in the Trump voting base and Trump employs them regularly. Lots and lots of Trump's fan base appear incapable of discerning when Trump's remarks are racist, those comments clearly need a note.
It's my experience that conservatives want to publish nonsense, spin and lies and then claim that they're being censored when the information is identified as false or misleading. Conservative speech shouldn't be synonymous with misinformation.
You are welcome to ignore the evidence of Trump's cognitive decline and mental illness but your persistence in doing so doesn't make you appear as a center of right individual, especially after your insistence that Biden was too demented to run.
I think Crusades has claimed that Trump is no more cognitively different than four years ago. I would agree that it is kind of hard to tell since he never has been wrapped too tight in my opinion.
But others are seeing signs like you are.
Quote
My MSNBC colleague Zeeshan Aleem presented a persuasive answerthis week: "Trump has been embedded in the public consciousness as a rule-breaker for so long that it can be easy to forget how far he is from fulfilling the basic requirement of a politician to speak clearly. Trump's speeches seem to be growing more discursive and difficult to comprehend by the day.”
The New York Times' Jamelle Bouie made a related case, arguing that the Republican presidential hopeful is unable "not just to speak truthfully about a topic, but speak coherently about any topic. ... Trump hasn't just deteriorated, he's clearly cognitively impaired, and it is bizarre to me that this isn't just a major story.”
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
mtmkjr said:
It's very likely the decision to ban him had already been made when he posted those final comments. As frequently as he spits out posts on social media, if anyone is looking for what triggered his ban they should probably look at all the posts that led up to the ones being quoted here.
Trump supporters would much rather not look at the all of the posts. That's why we get cherry picked examples.
Tweety said:
I think Crusades has claimed that Trump is no more cognitively different than four years ago. I would agree that it is kind of hard to tell since he never has been wrapped too tight in my opinion.
Specializes in Vents, Telemetry, Home Care, Home infusion.
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
Quote
CEASE & DESIST: I, together with many Attorneys and Legal Scholars, am watching the Sanctity of the 2024 Presidential Election very closely because I know, better than most, the rampant Cheating and Skullduggery that has taken place by the Democrats in the 2020 Presidential Election. It was a Disgrace to our Nation! Therefore, the 2024 Election, where Votes have just started being cast, will be under the closest professional scrutiny and, WHEN I WIN, those people that CHEATED will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the Law, which will include long term prison sentences so that this Depravity of Justice does not happen again. We cannot let our Country further devolve into a Third World Nation, AND WE WON'T! Please beware that this legal exposure extends to Lawyers, Political Operatives, Donors, Illegal Voters, & Corrupt Election Officials. Those involved in unscrupulous behavior will be sought out, caught, and prosecuted at levels, unfortunately, never seen before in our Country.
...In other words, projection can help a person with a narcissistic personality shift responsibility or shame for something they've done onto someone else.
Crusades
1,655 Posts
All great points. AN doesn't have millions of subscribers nor does it have a significant amount of people getting information about political topics.
I partially agree with Harris. Large media platforms that can facilitate mass amounts of information, whether disinformation or facts, have a position of responsibilitie that sets a bar far higher than small private businesses like AN. How to regulate this is beyond me.
Trump's final tweets before being banned
Apparently this was "glorifying violence ".
Violence is not mentioned once or even suggested. Twitter exploited their TOS as they were emboldened and relied of the events and emotion of Jan 6. Then proceeded to ban Trump affiliates. Then Google banned the alternate forum Parler followed by several other media platforms.
I think this is a blatant breach of free speech and plain censorship. If you have some counter points please share with me. (This is a genuine request).
No facts don't need community notes. Nor does being a decent human being. Blatant racism and vulgarity already notes itself as garbage.
However "vaccines will kill you" most certainly does. I would rather see a community note with facts proving that false rather then just censoring it.