Leftists are decrying free speech as a threat to democracy after Tesla CEO Elon Musk announced Thurs

It's not enough: "Twitter mgmt expressed optimism on their ability to grow users (by YE '23) at an accelerated pace vs prior periods - however, we remain below that forecast."

I'd like to make a prediction that the institutional investors are going to take Musk's offer:

Elon Musk on Twitter: " https://t.co/PfqYpLiuVd" / Twitter

 

If Trump wins in 2024, they will let him back. They don’t ban world leaders.

 

If Musk buys Twitter, I'll make a Twitter account.

 

We may settle for taking over one of yours!

 

I didn't know Twitter had any credibility.

 

These are part of the 30% that think Biden is doing well.

 

I did in 2014 when Obama destroyed Libya and liberals never said anything and in 2020 when Clinton smeared Tulsi Gabbard as a Russian asset.

 

Was your bid for Twitter successful?

 

To have "Free" free speech, as in, you can't moderate or censor, then you must equally have robust libel and slander laws.

So by all means say whatever you want, just make sure you have sufficient evidence if you're taking to court. That way, you would have "cleaner" free speech as opposed to just immature accusations and trash talk.

 

A requirement of responding to a post is to read everything and understand context.

You did see the part where I said "and Free Speech in general" right?

Not that it matters. That comment alone shows that that person believes that speech should be "moderated". That people having a voice is considered a danger to Democracy.

Every single person that has ever died trying to preserve our Rights is rolling in thier graves at such a comment.

Democracy dies by silencing voices. Doesn't matter if it's the government doing it or jackbooted thugs at a private company.

I know you want to dismiss this as "it's a private company" but here's something you should probably study. The early history of unions and how private companies tried to shut them down to prevent people from being heard. While you're at it read up on how Hitler, before he became the leader of Germany, became the leader of Germany. Hint: it was partly through silencing opposition...done before he was a part of the government.

 

Will you guys please read what the first ammendment says?
This is really exhausting. This has absolutely nothing to do with the first ammendment and certainly absolutely nohting to do with free speech "as defined in the first ammendment". You guys are either dishonest or stupid when you employ that tack.
As to Musk buying Twitter, could not care less.
You know who must be ******** their pants right now? DWAC and Trump.
All the people who were hesitating to join their Ersatz Twitter are probably thinkning they will stick to Twitter now that one of theirs is going to be buying it (not that Musk is in any way shape or form, but somehow the MAGA heads have convinced themeslelves that that is the case)
Pretty funny.
I am terrible at making predictions (thought Gore and Hillary were going to be president) but I am betting that Musk does not end up buying Twitter, just going to suck in that publicity and see his stock value rise.

 

I wish I was that rich, lol, happy for what I got, but being that rich is not in the cards for me

 

Do you know why conservatives keep bringing up the 1st Amendment? Its because they understand that the Bill of Rights was not of the government granting Rights. Its a list of (some) Rights that pre-exist government. That people have Rights outside of the government. That the BoR's was written to prevent the government from interfering in Rights held by everyone. Indeed many of the Founding Fathers didn't even want to write the BoR's because they were afraid that people would some day advocate that the Rights listed in it would be the only ones acknowledged. At the time they could not imagine anyone BUT the government being able to interfere in a persons Rights. Because to them, no one had the possibility of getting so big that they could influence the people to a degree just as large, if not larger, than the government. (indeed Twitter alone has more followers than the entire population of the US, which makes them just as powerful as the Federal government when it comes to the influence of speech) The only reason that they did end up writing the BoR's is to satisfy demands from certain States that were afraid of the Federal government becoming so large that they could usurp State governments. (and lo and behold that has come to pass, thanks in large part to the Civil War and the 14th Amendment incorporation to the States)

 

so Twitter has never had any credibility.

yeah I don't think that's why. Because again there is Twitter and Facebook and YouTube and they have way more conspiracy theorists.

Doubtful. First off if you would rage quit Twitter because someone's on there you cannot be considered moderate, throwing a temper tantrum is not moderate.

Second I remember back when George Bush was running for president all these people talked about moving to Canada.

But if a bunch of these children rage quit Twitter that one probably be one of the best things that ever happened to Twitter.

 

The fact that anyone believes free speech is limited on social media platforms fails to understand the Constitution of the United States.

I hate the garbage rhetoric too, but all you have to do is tune to CNN to hear it. Of course, even Fox News has their garbage rhetoric. It is all called pundit spin.

If I want to post on my social media (and I don't) that Trump won the last election, people have to be smart enough to understand fact from fiction. Twitter, Facebook, and other platforms are not the speech police and shouldn't be, with the exceptions of threats and hate speech. Saying Trump won the last election is not hate speech nor does it threaten anyone.

Is this hateful or threatening rhetoric? “We don’t want your f—ing money! We don’t want your f—ing taqueria, owned by f—ing white men!”

These were not posted on social media, but statements made by BLM during a rally in Brooklyn. If a white man said the same thing replacing one word, white to black, he would undoubtably be labeled as a white supremacist. Is it free speech or hate speech? Because it cannot be free speech as stated at the rally and hate speech if a white man says it about black men.

I despise the rhetoric!

 

a partisan taking over a social media site is not pushing free speech

Musk should create his own site... if he is capable that is

 

So why does Putin still have an account?

 

Twitter can’t ban conservatives for being “dangerous” while keeping leaders of nations that commit mass murder on or allowing groups like BLM to spout lie after lie while causing billions in damage across the country as well as the deaths of multiple cops…and also directly manipulating elections by censoring what they think is the truth. Twitter has a very unusual definition of truth or free speech.

Twitter has become a leftist echo chamber and it needs to be purged. This is why Leftists and Twitter employees are so frightened. They won’t be able to deny it anymore. As usual Leftists project all their lies on others while THEY are the ones committing all the atrocities.

Just watched a report on it on ABC and the slant from them is pathetic as usual.

 

Ironic much?

Why go through all the trouble when you can just buy one that already has all the infrastructure in place? Also, considering his credentials... Pretty sure he's capable, that you mock him by saying that is the height of arrogance. What have you done to come close to matching him? Oh right...

 

Twitter is a public social media that was designed to hear all points of view. Apparently liberals don't want discourse. Hearing the same like minded message is the same as brainwashing. Is that healthy for a democracy?

 

I agree with you, I'm happy with what I have. Having billions of dollars wouldn't make me happier, and I don't want the money anyway.

 

Yes I’m still laughing because that doesn’t mean they are credible. Sorry, but with who they continue to allow to be on their platform…. They still have no credibility.

 

The liberal hive is the real cult who wants to imprison political opponents.

 

They already did. They banned Trump while he was president. So yes, they do ban world leaders.

 

Democrats are ever the petty tyrants the dream of being in real life. You know when democrats talk about "factual precision" what they really mean is a compliant platform for only their propaganda. Leftists universally cheered when Bezos bought a flagship newspaper and infested it with his wokism... Max Boot, what a hoot. or is that loon? How dare the flyover peons get a voice.. Yes, this is what the democratic party are.