Teddy Eagle
Member
- Country
Scotland
Do some more research.
-
Existing user of old message board?
Your username will have transferred over to this new message board, but your password will need to be reset. Visit our convert your account page, to transfer your old password over.
Musk
- Topic starter DANGERCLOSE
- Start date
eaglesdare
Member
- Country
England
I can't see the posts. But I can imagine what you have to reply too. 😅
Wisbech Eagle
Member
- Location
- Truro Cornwall
- Country
-
England
Not true.
Expressing opinions about anything which is open to doubt will always be OK.
It’s the deliberate posting of disinformation which is intended to deceive and encourage reactions which isn’t. There must be a regulator, who is demonstrably independent of government, tasked with the job of flagging up such postings with clear warnings that the content is regarded as untrustworthy. Possibly by it being highlighted in red with an explanation on why it is so regarded. A version of Ofcom needs to oversee the whole social media scene, both written and video, who have the power to fine, and eventually to close down, any platform whose moderation policies allow too many red flagged posts to exist on their site. No site being permitted to operate without effective moderation.
This is a big task but in a world in which AI can perform many complex tasks very quickly not an impossible one.
This is not any kind of restriction of free speech. It is only the protection of the public from deliberate disinformation, with a high bar being set on what meets that description.
Wisbech Eagle
Member
- Location
- Truro Cornwall
- Country
-
England
No. I am content that I found the information.
There are several estimates but the biggest one is shown here:-
Alphabet Inc Profile: Summary
Alphabet Inc organization profile. Contributions in the 2024 cycle: $12,249,459. Lobbying in 2024: $7,260,000. Outside Spending in the 2024 cycle: $0.
www.opensecrets.org
If you have other information then share it. I have shared mine but won’t do your work for you.
Teddy Eagle
Member
- Country
-
Scotland
I don't need to. I'm not the one challenging anything. If you don't believe it that's up to you.No. I am content that I found the information.
There are several estimates but the biggest one is shown here:-
Alphabet Inc Profile: Summary
Alphabet Inc organization profile. Contributions in the 2024 cycle: $12,249,459. Lobbying in 2024: $7,260,000. Outside Spending in the 2024 cycle: $0.
If you have other information then share it. I have shared mine but won’t do your work for you.
Wisbech Eagle
Member
- Location
- Truro Cornwall
- Country
-
England
But you do.
You made a claim which you are refusing to substantiate. It could have been plucked from thin air and without evidence seems likely to have been.
I did an extensive search to try to determine what the basis was but found nothing even remotely close. I found evidence of sums given by the staff totalling around $1million and by the Company around $20 million, from the article I linked to.
If your claim has any merit then it can be backed up. I have provided the evidence for my challenge.
It’s not simply that I don’t believe it! I cannot find any evidence to support it and have found evidence to disprove it.
So now it’s down to you to provide the evidence for your claim, or if you cannot have the honesty to admit it and stop prevaricating.
Teddy Eagle
Member
- Country
-
Scotland
No I don't. Believe it or not. I don't care. How many times do you provide evidence for any of your assertions? And how many times do you dismiss that provided by others? If Musk donating money to one candidate upsets you so much then no amount of evidence will suffice.
Wisbech Eagle
Member
- Location
- Truro Cornwall
- Country
-
England
If you truly don’t care why do you bother to post?
If you use it as an excuse not to substantiate your claim then you risk losing any credibility. I doubt you don’t care about that!
I always provide evidence for my claims because I check the facts before I post and then share the links. I dismiss the claims of others only when they refuse to back them up with supporting evidence. I may though argue about interpretation or context because they are so often misplaced.
The only conclusion to be drawn is that you cannot back up what you suggested, presumably because when you went to check it you realised it was wrong.
Wisbech Eagle
Member
- Location
- Truro Cornwall
- Country
-
England
The idea that Musk is simply using his money for the public good and not to interfere with the election is blown to pieces with the news that he is effectively bribing people to vote for Trump in the most critical of all the swing states, Pennsylvania.
If this isn’t stealing the election then what is it? New depths of corruption have been reached:-
If this isn’t stealing the election then what is it? New depths of corruption have been reached:-
Elon Musk pledges to give away $1m per day to Pennsylvania voters
The winner will be chosen from those who sign a petition by the tech billionaire's Trump-supporting campaign group.
www.bbc.co.uk
Teddy Eagle
Member
- Country
-
Scotland
I don't care whether you believe something or not.
More billionaires have donated to Harris than to Trump. Do you believe that?
Eaglehamster
Member
- Location
- Storrington
- Country
-
England
Having a lottery of $1m per day for those promising to vote for Trump (that's effectively what it is), isn't quite the same as donating to the cause. It's bribery.
Teddy Eagle
Member
- Country
-
Scotland
Yes, it is. No arguments on that. I guess a question is why is Musk doing it? Is it just protect his interests?
Stirlingsays
Member
- Country
-
England
Kinda, however it's no worse than what donors to both parties get....which is whatever they want.....in return for their millions and no one says anything about that.
Hell, the Democrats import voters they know would vote for them on mass.
Musk should not be allowed to do this, it's clearly wrong and just shows how screwed up party funding law is.
Then again don't Labour and the Democrats offer enticements? Both parties are known for expanding the public payroll and Labour has been very generous to the unions isn't that also an incentive?
eaglesdare
Member
- Country
-
England
Stirlingsays
Member
- Country
-
England
If he's actually serious I don't disagree.
However, the whole system is so corrupt and full of paid influence that doesn't get called out so we can hardly take complaints from the left seriously.....they are as bought and sold as anyone.....If they were actually ethical about this kind of stuff then the conversation could be had but they only care if they are losing.
And they are losing.
Wisbech Eagle
Member
- Location
- Truro Cornwall
- Country
-
England
I really don’t care whether you are interested in my beliefs. I care about the truth.
Which is why I care whether what you claimed is true. From all I can determine it isn’t. You have been asked to prove otherwise but have repeatedly deflected with tame excuses.
I have no idea on whether more billionaires have donated to Harris than Trump. We aren’t discussing them. Introducing another diversion to avoid facing up to the fact that Musk is trying to use his wealth to influence the election isn’t going to deflect me from concentrating on it.
This thread is about Musk.
Wisbech Eagle
Member
- Location
- Truro Cornwall
- Country
-
England
That Labour has been “generous “ to the unions is a perception rather than a fact.
That said every political party tends to favour its ideological support base.
That’s a political reality and quite different to what Musk, the richest individual in the world, is trying to do. One man one vote must be the standard. Not one man buying as many as he can.
Teddy Eagle
Member
- Country
-
Scotland
We're not in court and you're not a judge. Nor do you decide on the direction a thread might take.
If you think it's a diversion then ignore it.
Kamala Harris Has More Billionaires Prominently Backing Her Than Trump—Tyler Perry, Bill Ackman Weigh In (Update)
The likes of Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates have shied away from offering endorsements like their ultrarich counterpart Elon Musk, but they have shared some thoughts about the two candidates.
www.forbes.com