I'm thinking that abandoning Twitter is a win for the right wing

[UTUSN]

21. If he takes it over, it's not *THE* (only) speech venue. If it goes Wingnut, it won't be "prominent"

either.

Just by him or anybody's taking possession of it will make it a different thing, even if it stayed the same otherwise, not to mention any changes he might or likely *will* make of any kind.

Just that he (alone) will replace the (Moderators/rules) supposedly in the name (code name) of "free speech" is the biggest change of what it is now, never mind what's in-the-air of "reinstating" whomever.

*** Wingnuts and anybody are perfectly able to Tweet now the way things are now, no? So long as they don't break some basic rules.

So if he reinstates previous rule-breakers (who were mostly wingnuts?) it amounts to undermining *rules* period.

I barely have even looked at Twitter, but the things that have seeped through to my level don't seem to be a "Liberal" (only) place.

*** But somebody taking it over and making *his* top-down authority is Authoritarian in its bones.


So if becomes a Wingnut venue, it's not a matter of us yielding the field. It comes down to the futility of "debating". How did our own experiment here of having a "conservative" mirror of DU work out?

If some Libs want to stay and "debate" endlessly/futilely, so be it for them. There are those places readily available NOW and there will be Twitter-Redux places to go to, too. My totally subjective guess is that it will fail under him, be a "Free Republic" type place.