• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

2024 Republican Primary

Segnosaur said:
Well when he first got banned from twitter, trump tried to use other accounts (the official POTUS account, and one from one of his workers). The posts were removed by twitter and (in the case of the worker) their account was suspended.

Twitter would likely do the same to any account that "parroted" trump.

So whomever wanted to post Trump's rantings would have to filter them, which would probably mean a drop in interest.

Sent from my LM-X320 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Well I am not on twitter to know how that works normally but the news is full of people giving statements that are reported all throughout social media- even the worst of terrorists and criminals get quoted.

Is there something special that get people saying "Trump said this today and I think this about it" banned? Whether or not they agree or disagree?

I would think that would be very over the line into censorship.
 
Sherkeu said:
Well when he first got banned from twitter, trump tried to use other accounts (the official POTUS account, and one from one of his workers). The posts were removed by twitter and (in the case of the worker) their account was suspended.

Twitter would likely do the same to any account that "parroted" trump.
Click to expand...
Well I am not on twitter to know how that works normally but the news is full of people giving statements that are reported all throughout social media- even the worst of terrorists and criminals get quoted.

Is there something special that get people saying "Trump said this today and I think this about it" banned? Whether or not they agree or disagree?
Click to expand...
I suspect it would likely be a judgement call on the part of the administrators over at Twitter.

Something like a reporter repeating Trump's comments from a press conference or interview would probably not be a problem.

But, if it were someone who: 1) had a close association with Trump, such as a campaign worker, family member, or someone who Trump pardoned, 2) had a majority (or at least a significant number of posts) all starting with "Trump says..." or something similar, and 3) did nothing to provide any sort of commentary to show that they were expressing their own thoughts, then they might be seen as a Trump sock puppet and either banned, or any "Trump says..." posts removed.
I would think that would be very over the line into censorship.
Click to expand...
As has probably been explained to you... No, this is not censorship, because it is not the government doing it. Trump's free speech is not being affected at all.

Trump has the right to free speech... he could stand on the street corner and tell people walking by that "aliens are really running the deep state", and he would not be arrested. He could try publishing his own newspaper and say the same thing. Twitter is a private company.... they have the right enforce any sort of 'terms of service' on their user base, and if they want, to ban you from using the service. It is not 'censorship' if Twitter, Facebook, or any other service decides they don't want you as a user. The right to free speech does not mean that any company is should be forced to carry that speech.

XKCD

free_speech.png
 
As a matter of interest, and possibly a silly question or two, but can convicted criminals stand for president? After they've been released, or even while doing time? And if they are doing time and win, does their sentence get suspended while they are out presidenting? Can they stand while out on bail? And, again, what happens if they win?

Just asking for a bloke who shares his name with a duck...
 
SteveAitch said:
As a matter of interest, and possibly a silly question or two, but can convicted criminals stand for president? After they've been released, or even while doing time? And if they are doing time and win, does their sentence get suspended while they are out presidenting? Can they stand while out on bail? And, again, what happens if they win?

Just asking for a bloke who shares his name with a duck...
Click to expand...

Yes.

- Natural Born Citizen
- Resident of the US for at least 14 years
- Over 35 years of Age

Are the only requirements the Constitution puts down in order to run for and hold the office of President.
 
SteveAitch said:
As a matter of interest, and possibly a silly question or two, but can convicted criminals stand for president? After they've been released, or even while doing time? And if they are doing time and win, does their sentence get suspended while they are out presidenting? Can they stand while out on bail? And, again, what happens if they win?

Just asking for a bloke who shares his name with a duck...
Click to expand...
Yes they can.

For example, Lyndon LaRouche was convicted of Fraud in 1988, but ran as a candidate for the Democratic primaries in 1992 while still in prison. And Eugene Debs ran as a socialist candidate despite being convicted of defying a court order.

See:
Wiki (Lyndon LaRouche)
Wiki (Debs)
 
And I've always been of the opinion that sooner or later we're going to have a if not Constitutional Crisis at least Constitutionally Adjacent Heated and Spirited Legal Debate over the requirements to be President.
 
dudalb said:
FLynn is too much damaged goods, frankly.
Click to expand...

Flynn may be too damaged to win the popular vote. But he's got the sort of "damage" that the conspiracy wing of the Republican party feeds on. And more and more they are running the show.

Also, the popular vote is becoming less and less relevant to the Republican party's ability to get a president elected.

Craig4 said:
I've heard McChrystal speak a couple of times since he retired. I think there is zero chance of him running as a Republican. My impression of him was that he was a scholar general in the Eisenhower mold. Absent a complete turnaround in the GOP's anti intellectualism stance he won't have much appeal.

Also, he endorsed Biden. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/01/us/politics/stanley-mcchrystal-biden.html

Something of a deal breaker.
Click to expand...

I mentioned his endorsement of Biden in my first post about him. That said, if McChrystal runs he would be running in the mold of an Eisenhauer or Powell - moderate policy positions but running on the strength of Republican love for the military. Even a failed candidacy could be a tool in the effort to recenter the GOP.
 
crescent said:
Flynn may be too damaged to win the popular vote. But he's got the sort of "damage" that the conspiracy wing of the Republican party feeds on. And more and more they are running the show.

Also, the popular vote is becoming less and less relevant to the Republican party's ability to get a president elected.


I mentioned his endorsement of Biden in my first post about him. That said, if McChrystal runs he would be running in the mold of an Eisenhauer or Powell - moderate policy positions but running on the strength of Republican love for the military. Even a failed candidacy could be a tool in the effort to recenter the GOP.
Click to expand...
From the way they've been banging on about Trump's "75 million votes! More than any president in history!" you'd think they've decided that the only time the popular vote is relevant is when the guy with the fewer votes automatically wins.
 
we have to finish seeing what happens in 2022. There will be some changes in the party, but if the Trump people persist, we might have another Trump forced in.

Had discussions elsewhere about the Trump effect, and it will still be working in 2022. People do not change political views easily, and hate to admit loss. Trump had a slightly bigger influence over races overall, as the Trump vote kept Republicans in office. The ones in borderline states tend to be even more extreme. In red states you can be republican simply by opposing abortion and taxes.

So we will see a strong Trump involvement for 2 years so he can get revenge on Republicans that betrayed him. And the GOP will benefit from turnout. We may see Mitch rule for another 2 years. But never after 2024. He will just finish his 6 yers.
 
Last edited:
Mitt Romney has weighed in....

From: NBC News
Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, who voted in favor of convicting former President Donald Trump in his second impeachment trial, said Tuesday that Trump would likely beat the GOP field if he decides to run in the 2024 presidential election.
 
Tero said:
we have to finish seeing what happens in 2022. There will be some changes in the party, but if the Trump people persist, we might have another Trump forced in.

Had discussions elsewhere about the Trump effect, and it will still be working in 2022. People do not change political views easily, and hate to admit loss. Trump had a slightly bigger influence over races overall, as the Trump vote kept Republicans in office. The ones in borderline states tend to be even more extreme. In red states you can be republican simply by opposing abortion and taxes.

So we will see a strong Trump involvement for 2 years so he can get revenge on Republicans that betrayed him. And the GOP will benefit from turnout. We may see Mitch rule for another 2 years. But never after 2024. He will just finish his 6 yers.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Trump lives for revenge. He never forgets and he never forgives.
McConnell will be 85 when this term is over. I highly doubt he will run again.
 
1. He no longer is the richest
2. His support is fickle
3. If he can't pick a company that can succeed, how is a able to pick a winning candidate?
4. DeSantis hasn't declared - and Musk doing it for him makes him look like a puppet of a billionaire
 
Warp12 said:
Because when the richest man on the planet supports you, it's a bad thing.

So damn funny.
Click to expand...

Hardly funny. The party of Lincoln has become so morally bankrupt that its would be leaders must sell their souls to the highest bidder.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
1. He no longer is the richest
2. His support is fickle
3. If he can't pick a company that can succeed, how is a able to pick a winning candidate?
4. DeSantis hasn't declared - and Musk doing it for him makes him look like a puppet of a billionaire
Click to expand...


Counterpoint: You are substantially wrong.


These articles from this month claim he is still the richest. Maybe they are off? Seems pretty high on the list, to me.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/worlds-richest-man-elon-musks-065742670.html

https://www.investopedia.com/articl...ext=Image courtesy Getty Images/Saul Martinez.

We don't know the long-term outlook for Twitter. But it is his baby, and a huge platform. It doesn't make DeSantis look like a puppet at all; he isn't spending his time riding Musk's jock.

I get how if someone spends a lot of time in liberal echo chambers, they might think the whole world hates Elon Musk. Sorry to tell you, but this is simply not true.
 
Last edited:
Let's wait and see, shall we?
I think DeSantis is clever enough not to acknowledge Musk's "support" in any way m,shape or form.
 
Musk still being at the top is an accounting artifact from buying Twitter at $44 billion and immediately taking it private, leaving an unrealistic evaluation on the books.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom