Elon's america party

#151
#151
chuckiepoo said:
“Robert A. Heinlein originally coined the term grok in his 1961 novel Stranger in a Strange Landas a Martian word that could not be defined in Earthling terms, but can be associated with various literal meanings such as "water", "to drink", "to relate", "life", or "to live", and had a much more profound figurative meaning that is hard for terrestrial culture to understand because of its assumption of a singular reality.“ - wiki

Grok - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...
So it's cannibalism then. Thanks for being vague.
 
#152
#152
TVOLS said:
Musk had an inside look how .gov operates recently and not an elected official. He's a smart guy and doing something he thinks could be good for the country. I don't see how anyone could ridicule him at this point in his endeavors.
Click to expand...
Elon does what he thinks is good for Elon which isn’t different than 95% of everyone in DC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol and chuckiepoo
#156
#156
walkenvol said:
And got Clinton elected as the majority of those voters were republican leaning.
Click to expand...
that was always the narrative. I don't remember if there was any data researched which showed that conclusively.
 
#158
#158
McDad said:
To be candid, that progression mirrors my own. As a younger man, I was more idealistic and absolutist. And I still am on some issues. But my idealism on free speech has softened over time.
Click to expand...
I think we are talking less than a year here.

so either he had absolutely no concept of what he was claiming he was, and a little bit of info changed his mind. or he is playing politics.

I know he is on the spectrum somewhere, but he is functional enough in society to understand "absolutist"; so I lean towards the second. His actual beliefs aren't changing, he is changing what he says to meet whatever he needs at that time. he probably doesn't have a strong held belief one way or the other on the matter.
 
#160
#160
MontyPython said:
Heh. Truth is it's far more profitable for Elon to not filter content.

His $44B purchase of Twitter has been a financial disaster. So, yeah, shocking I know but billionaires are motivated solely by $.
Click to expand...
He didn't buy Twitter for financial reasons. I think he bought it to become a political and cultural influencer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OrangeTsar
#161
#161
dalton_vol said:
The Democratic (communist) party will not go away, as long as American citizens continue being more morally depraved and godless, they will always have a place in the Democratic Party
Click to expand...
Oh I agree. Maybe I should have phrased it as „the Democratic Party as it is constituted today“. The organization known as the DNC will soon fracture into its different wings. I fully expect the far left loonies to organize a new party; probably calling themselves „Social Democrats“.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dalton_vol
#162
#162
LouderVol said:
I think we are talking less than a year here.

so either he had absolutely no concept of what he was claiming he was, and a little bit of info changed his mind. or he is playing politics.

I know he is on the spectrum somewhere, but he is functional enough in society to understand "absolutist"; so I lean towards the second. His actual beliefs aren't changing, he is changing what he says to meet whatever he needs at that time. he probably doesn't have a strong held belief one way or the other on the matter.
Click to expand...
could be. He isn't a politician, so I don't default to suspicion of ulterior motives.
 
#163
#163
LouderVol said:
yeah, and?

either he is a free speech absolutist or he isn't. I don't particularly care which way he leans, but if he is going to make the claim he needs to back it up. otherwise stfu and stay out of politics.
Click to expand...
I don't understand the complaint. You can be a free speech absolutionist and be ok with private companies regulating how their platform is used
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#165
#165
volfanhill said:
I don't understand the complaint. You can be a free speech absolutionist and be ok with private companies regulating how their platform is used
Click to expand...

When Musk was talking about free speech absolutism in the tweet Louder shared, it was in reference to what he did with StarLink. For several months he was shouting about free speech and it was always in reference to Twitter before and after he owned it. It's clear he meant the entire concept of free speech and not specifically free speech protections from the government.

And when asked to define free speech, he said free speech is determined by the democratic laws of the land....so yeah, he has no idea what free speech even is.
 
#166
#166
n_huffhines said:
When Musk was talking about free speech absolutism in the tweet Louder shared, it was in reference to what he did with StarLink. For several months he was shouting about free speech and it was always in reference to Twitter before and after he owned it. It's clear he meant the entire concept of free speech and not specifically free speech protections from the government.

And when asked to define free speech, he said free speech is determined by the democratic laws of the land....so yeah, he has no idea what free speech even is.
Click to expand...
Meh. Business owners change their minds and public positions all the time. You want to nail him for that then have at it. If you want private business to have to bend a knee to public speech then with all do respect F off
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, SayUWantAreVOLution, Vol since 77 and 2 others
#167
#167
volfanhill said:
Meh. Business owners change their minds and public positions all the time. You want to nail him for that then have at it. If you want private business to have to bend a knee to public speech then with all do respect F off
Click to expand...

I don't even know what you're talking about, LOL. He can definitely do whatever he wants with his business. This thread is about his politics and my point is that he is a hypocrite and totally clueless about basic civics which seems pretty pertinent to the subject of his political party.
 
#168
#168
McDad said:
I think he pulled 11% of the votes cast. Best showing for a 3rd party candidate in my lifetime.
Click to expand...
19%, and would have been higher had he not temporarily dropped out in July for a couple of months. He was a strange guy and it killed the momentum he had. He was actually leading in some national polls in May/June 1992.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo and McDad
#169
#169
05_never_again said:
19%, and would have been higher had he not temporarily dropped out in July for a couple of months. He was a strange guy and it killed the momentum he had. He was actually leading in some national polls in May/June 1992.
Click to expand...
It was 19%???? Are you sure that was votes cast and not polling?
 
#170
#170
n_huffhines said:
I don't even know what you're talking about, LOL. He can definitely do whatever he wants with his business. This thread is about his politics and my point is that he is a hypocrite and totally clueless about basic civics which seems pretty pertinent to the subject of his political party.
Click to expand...
Moment of clarification.

For me this thread isn't about Elon's politics. It is about the political party he is supposedly founding. He could be a devout Marxist and as long as the party is true to fiscal responsibility, individual freedom, and low taxes, I don't care what Elon believes.

It may be unreasonable to think he founds a party radically different from his own views, and I would accept that point without argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo
#171
#171
05_never_again said:
19%, and would have been higher had he not temporarily dropped out in July for a couple of months. He was a strange guy and it killed the momentum he had. He was actually leading in some national polls in May/June 1992.
Click to expand...
Holy cow. I just looked it up.

You are absolutely correct. 18.9%

Well done, sir.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo and 05_never_again
#172
#172
McDad said:
Moment of clarification.

For me this thread isn't about Elon's politics. It is about the political party he is supposedly founding. He could be a devout Marxist and as long as the party is true to fiscal responsibility, individual freedom, and low taxes, I don't care what Elon believes.

It may be unreasonable to think he founds a party radically different from his own views, and I would accept that point without argument.
Click to expand...

All fair.

I will say that the America party candidates who will likely have the best shots at winning anything will be the ones who are well-funded by Elon and endorsed by Elon, which is another reason I think his personal politics factor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo and McDad
#173
#173
McDad said:
Holy cow. I just looked it up.

You are absolutely correct. 18.9%

Well done, sir.
Click to expand...
I had to look it up again myself. I knew it was higher than 11% off the top of my head, but was thinking something more like 14-15%. I had forgotten it was that high, and he was polling at 30% nationally the summer before the election. He briefly was leading in some polls in California and Texas. I don't think he would have won if he didn't do that weird drop out, but it would have been far more interesting.

The thing about Perot is that although I agreed with some of his politics, and if I could vote in 1992 I probably would have voted for him, I'm not sure exactly how good of a President he would have been. Being a good President is about more than just having good policy. He was a strange guy, control freak, who didn't work well with others. That's one thing to be that way in the business world (especially at a company you started) but quite another to be that way when President. Our current President falls into that category too.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#174
#174
05_never_again said:
I had to look it up again myself. I knew it was higher than 11% off the top of my head, but was thinking something more like 14-15%. I had forgotten it was that high, and he was polling at 30% nationally the summer before the election. He briefly was leading in some polls in California and Texas. I don't think he would have won if he didn't do that weird drop out, but it would have been far more interesting.

The thing about Perot is that although I agreed with some of his politics, and if I could vote in 1992 I probably would have voted for him, I'm not sure exactly how good of a President he would have been. Being a good President is about more than just having good policy. He was a strange guy, control freak, who didn't work well with others. That's one thing to be that way in the business world (especially at a company you started) but quite another to be that way when President. Our current President falls into that category too.
Click to expand...
I agree. The only similarity between a huge business and government is the bureaucratic lag. It's just more expanded and layered in government.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo and 05_never_again
#175
#175
McDad said:
could be. He isn't a politician, so I don't default to suspicion of ulterior motives.
Click to expand...
I still believe he is a Bond villain. so I have been 100% on the ulterior motives this whole time.

like with a lot of Bond villains I could see some goals being for the good, but far outweighed by the bad.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top