As you know, not Twitter's decision. Parag is a servant of big corp. and the Zhou regime. He's not gonna push back. Parag has no backbone. What a shame.
Ugly, but also stupid. "Peter and the Wolf." On the off chance that one of their acolytes might be influenced, highly, unlikely, they are turning off additional thousands that they might hope to influence, and maybe provide them some financial advantage. Even the intelligent among their faithful followers, if there are any, must be aware that they are an echo chamber and not a source of information.
Stupid but also desperate. The criminals are in fact afraid of getting caught. They are not all powerful, they are only very narrowly powerful, they have the power to for example suspend Twitter accounts, and thus we see them wield their power. But in so welding it, they demonstrate their fear.
On Just the News I saw that the founder of the site, John Solomon, had his twitter account suspended following a post on: "... the legal distinctions between Pfizer's fully approved and emergency use authorization (EUA) COVID-19 vaccines, which could affect the legality of vaccine mandates."
Government, big media, big tech, all trying to squelch information not sympathetic to their narrative. I'm seeing more articles, however, where the citizens are pushing back, even Dem governors like CT's who, when asked about a mask mandate, stated that NYC's mask mandate wasn't working too well given its infection rate, so why would he try that again...
On state migration patterns - I've seen these population trends reported triumphantly on multiple sites, but all I can see is this:
1) blue states divested of citizens will retain their representative and electoral college clout as derived from the 2020 census, despite significant population losses, for the next ten years
2) blue states have driven their populations into red states, where these new citizens will continue to vote for blue folly
Of course not, but the spread of blue rot is a well-established trend, is it not?
I was tempted to include some caveats, but chose a more succinct statement instead. However, one significant caveat could be that the population trends represent people gasping for liberty and rationality, implying of course that the people moving are either reliably conservative or somewhere on the red pill journey.
As you know, not Twitter's decision. Parag is a servant of big corp. and the Zhou regime. He's not gonna push back. Parag has no backbone. What a shame.
Ugly, but also stupid. "Peter and the Wolf." On the off chance that one of their acolytes might be influenced, highly, unlikely, they are turning off additional thousands that they might hope to influence, and maybe provide them some financial advantage. Even the intelligent among their faithful followers, if there are any, must be aware that they are an echo chamber and not a source of information.
Stupid but also desperate. The criminals are in fact afraid of getting caught. They are not all powerful, they are only very narrowly powerful, they have the power to for example suspend Twitter accounts, and thus we see them wield their power. But in so welding it, they demonstrate their fear.
On Just the News I saw that the founder of the site, John Solomon, had his twitter account suspended following a post on: "... the legal distinctions between Pfizer's fully approved and emergency use authorization (EUA) COVID-19 vaccines, which could affect the legality of vaccine mandates."
https://justthenews.com/accountability/cancel-culture/twitter-suspends-just-news-founder-report-legal-distinctions-between
Government, big media, big tech, all trying to squelch information not sympathetic to their narrative. I'm seeing more articles, however, where the citizens are pushing back, even Dem governors like CT's who, when asked about a mask mandate, stated that NYC's mask mandate wasn't working too well given its infection rate, so why would he try that again...
On state migration patterns - I've seen these population trends reported triumphantly on multiple sites, but all I can see is this:
1) blue states divested of citizens will retain their representative and electoral college clout as derived from the 2020 census, despite significant population losses, for the next ten years
2) blue states have driven their populations into red states, where these new citizens will continue to vote for blue folly
I think I understand: There is a one to one correspondence Blue state resident:Dem voter, therefore all Blue state refugees = continuing Dem voters.
Of course not, but the spread of blue rot is a well-established trend, is it not?
I was tempted to include some caveats, but chose a more succinct statement instead. However, one significant caveat could be that the population trends represent people gasping for liberty and rationality, implying of course that the people moving are either reliably conservative or somewhere on the red pill journey.