Oh well.
Here are my thoughts on this:
1. Twitter isn’t real life. It is a bubble within the liberal media bubble. I used Twitter to follow what elite libtards are saying and to keep up with the news. It would have been amusing to watch our people return to Twitter and “own the libs” again, but the stakes were never high.
2. Twitter is an echo chamber. We’ve lost nothing since being banned en masse from Twitter. If the point of using Twitter was to “redpill the normies,” the last five years have shown that we don’t need to be on Twitter to accomplish this. The polls have shown that our ideas have spread further among those normies in the last three or four years of censorship than in the last thirty years.
3. As a Twitter addict, I would have probably just ending up wasting a lot more of my time there which is better spent on countless other things had the deal gone through. Social media in general is a time sink. I wasn’t planning to return to Twitter until I heard the news that Elon Musk was buying the company. I will just plod along and do other things instead.
Good take on the whole issue Brad! You are correct Twitter is lost to us and in truth there is nothing we can say there that reality can´t present in your face
Just living in America/The West today is likely what made most folks wake up and the worse it gets the more they will become
The idiots of the enemy are digging their own graves as we speak
Both great and terrible things are ahead as always throughout history
I live without social media but i don’t give a fuck. If one is determined to follow certain people, one follows them anyway. When they censored the youtube channel of Jared Taylor, i started to follow him directly on American Renaissance website and i continue today…… so no problem. I was banned from Amazon’s comment and today i buy nothing on amazon. The life continue……
With research showing that half of twitter accounts are bots, less than 10% of Americans are actually on twitter. He is trying to mainstream his fagmobiles, but as it turns out, twitter wouldn’t help him much, being as bots do not buy cars.
Perhaps this is a further negotiating tactic and he’s still interested, just not at the previously agreed price.
Could be
OT
COVID fear porn front and center on al.com:
Alabama COVID hospitalizations rise, fueled by BA.4 and BA.5 variants
I’m finding more people receptive to what I’ve been saying for some time now: the world will never be the same again — not in our lifetimes, anyway.
Alabama is one of the fattest states in the union (link) — in published data (assuming you accept all of that), obesity appeared to be a prime ‘comorbidity’.
I thought it was a done deal. Judging from the above video the usual suspects are creaming in their pants over this. “Diversity” and free speech are incompatible.
Musk is a con-man. Nothing new.
The big happening now is Sri Lanka revolution. Seems to be the first big revolution caused by the American war against Russia, due to fuel and food shortages. American media and NGOs are trying to bend the events in their favor by blaming China for the shortages (lol) and telling Sri Lanka to take more IMF loans, implement more neoliberal “reforms,” and sell more of their country to Western oligarchs. We will see if they are stupid enough to fall for it.
I’m thrilled that Zion Don will not be getting his twatter account back.
Musk just doesn’t want to buy high, he’s waiting for the recession.
Yes, this could end up being just more bargaining
Musk could team up with Andy Torba for a fraction of the cost. Meanwhile Torba keeps growing and making improvements while not giving up on free speech. Probably more free speech than Musk could handle.
1. Musk is a secular transhumanist with no interest whatsoever in aligning with religious extremists, which Torba certainly is. Torba’s also a pretty spicy person to associate with given his statements on Jews and his other explicitly far right positions. Honestly, just the transhumanist position of Musk & the traditionalist position of Torba is enough to preclude any alliance.
2. Torba’s deal would not give Musk complete ownership of Gab, unlike with Twitter. So it’s hardly an equivalent deal. He’d have to put a lot of trust in the Christian extremist Torba.
3. Torba’s too dogmatically Christian & divisive for him to ever make alliances with anyone outside the Christian population. He has made very explicit exclusionary comments about how non-Christians have no place on Gab nor the parallel economy (made for “the glory of God”) nor even the in the Dissident Right in general. So yeah, Musk is well-justified in wanting nothing to do with this guy.
4. Torba is a Christian first & foremost. I doubt Torba fervently believes in free speech (for better or for worse). He would definitely support censorship of anti-Christian dissent in some hypothetical Christian theocracy. He is free speech in the same way liberal Jews were free speech in the 60’s, 70’s & 80’s – i.e. pro-free speech as a means to erode the existing order, which is the usual strategy for the oppressed underdog. So Torba, to his credit, is correctly playing the role of the underdog. I may not like Torba but I do respect him. He’s playing the game smarter than anyone else on our side.
All that said, I’m not making a value judgement on Torba. I’m just saying Musk is justified in wanting nothing to do with him.
(((They)) don’t want the goy in major media, that’s the tribes monopoly.
They blocked Howard Hughes from buying ABC.
They blocked Ted Turner from buying CBS.
They push gentiles out of all major media institutions.
That wasn’t too hard to predict.
The “redpill the normies” case for using mainstream media was always exaggerated. People generally stay within their cliques on social media & talk among themselves. You have a better chance of reaching the normies with just casual conversations with them in meat space. You just gotta be chill, know your shit, and not come off as unhinged to normies.
Some of Elon Musk’s projects make it and some don’t…C’est la vie…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jlj2BW8AtUQ
He went to catch a [Twitter] bird,
And thought he could not fail,
Because he had a little salt,
To put upon its tail.
— Wikipedia: “Salting a bird’s tail” (minus [Twitter] in place of “dicky”), “The nursery rhyme Simple Simon, which dates to at least the 17th century and possibly earlier, includes the verse.”
Maybe Elon Musk is “putting salt” on Twitter’s tail… and if it cripples/kills liberal Twitter … great job! It would be a total success! Sylvester the cat finally eats Tweety-pie!
I have nothing against EV’s per se as I’m a supporter of technological progression. I’m just no longer convinced of their green credentials, given the strain they’ll pose on the grid, and the mining required for their lithium batteries, etc.
I’m suspecting Musk was trying to piss off the Left just to place himself in a more favorable position with the Right, so they’d move across to his EV’s more rapidly. It’s just a theory, but Must is a smart man who thinks years ahead.
Musk really believes he’s helping humanity in his own, unique way. I won’t hold that against him. Without people with that foresight and intelligence, we’d still be in caves.
I’ve regretted buying things in the past.
Its funny how at first they were ‘We don’t want Elon to buy it.’ Now they are desperate to unload it. Wonder why.
NYpost:
“Whoever controls the teleprompter is the real President!” tweeted Tesla billionaire Elon Musk.
Musk is right, on that point.
(Teleprompters should be outlawed.
if a politician can’t speak extemporaneously, then shut up.)
I never thought it was a good idea for Elon Musk to buy Twitter from the get go moment of the rumors. To net it out, for one, all that money and capital would better serve humanity and its near to mid term future in his other ventures, the opportunity cost argument, and for another, he would be getting bogged down in e-Iraq, in that he would be in a state of perpetual infatada warfare against the woke Twitter employees, the “deep state” of Twitter.
He’d have to contend with the Jewish-dominated ruling apparatus of the West constantly barraging him with negative press coverage, boycotts against his companies, & him being dragged into court for any possible infraction (both real & not real). He’d have to contend with being dragged in before Congress or whatever every time some deranged Twitter user went nutso & shot up a bunch of people. He’d have to contend with the liberal establishment creating an alternative replacement Twitter, which the libs would flee to, and Google replacing Twitter search results with the libtard alternative, as well as app stores banning Twitter. He’d have to contend with a multitude of countries around the world blocking Twitter for its free speech absolutism, and those countries all jumping ship onto the libtard Twitter alternative.
Moreover, the libs were WAAYYYY too calm about the Musk acquisition for me to really believe Musk would be able to achieve the goals he sought. I mean Twitter *WANTS* Musk to complete the purchase & is even willing to sue him for pulling out. That to me says it all.
Unless it’s all 4D chess, which I doubt, it would seem that Elon was a little in over his head.
>… dragged into court for any possible infraction (both real & not real).
Can you give an example, just one tiny example, of the kind of ‘infraction’ that might get Musk-owned Twitter ‘dragged into court’?
… he would be getting bogged down in e-Iraq, in that he would be in a state of perpetual infatada warfare against the woke Twitter employees, the “deep state” of Twitter.
That does not make much sense — if he owned Twitter he could just fire them; in fact, that was pretty much the whole point: to change the ‘culture’ of Twitter by owning it so he could change enough of the people there — it’s clear there is a ‘woke’ censorship culture at Twitter because of the people who set policy and work there — I’m sure Musk is aware of that — so just get rid of them, then develop and enforce new ToS..
… it would seem that Elon was a little in over his head.
I do not recall seeing a news story about Musk engaging an investment bank to advise him on the acquisition, e.g. on how to value Twitter as a company before making an offer — whereas Twitter (its board) had several, as the following article makes clear:
Goldman, JPMorgan could rake in $133M on fees if Musk Twitter deal closes
You got the impression Musk pulled the per share acquisition price out of his ass, his only criterion being that it had to be high enough above the current market price to make it difficult for the Twitter board to turn down, in the sense of its fiduciary duty vis-a-vis shareholders.
It’s clear Musk has not gone about this in a serious way — who knows if he was ever really serious, or if it was all social media theater to him — a publicity stunt.
link — Oh no! The “deal is on hold tweet” was not preceded (as I thought) by a call from Musk’s lawyers to twitter, but was just out of the blue! … This is like trying to do an M&A deal with Spongebob