Trump supporters, how are you ok with the social media history proposal?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Whatever happened to the Republicans who were against big government because they didn't want a surveillance state? Can we have those folks back? Step up and kick out the bums who want to spy on you.

Any Republican not speaking out against this is a problem.

Well, that is 100% of the Republicans in Congress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How would they even do this logistically? How would they know if what was submitted is real or what wasn't submitted or what if soemone doesn't even have any or says they don't -- will they just believe that?

Putting aside the liberal histrionics, this is my problem with this. It simply seems unworkable.

If you are not hysterical about it, then you don't get it.

As far as how "workable" it is... you don't get how terror works. You only have to terrorize and abuse a certain number to create widespread fear.

That is what is going on here, PP. Wake the f up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They don’t care. They like the idea of excluding people whose views they disagree with. They do not actually care about the First Amendment. They see it only as a tool for ensuring they themselves are not silenced. They are perfectly happy with a double standard as long as it benefits them.

It isn't just views they disagree with. It is pretext to bar anyone they want from entering the country. And they are totally fine with it. The goal is a white christian nationalist state.

Yeah, you guys act surprised about the behavior of people you’ve been calling fascists for a decade. Maybe that’s actually what they wanted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've been telling my teenagers not to associate their social media with their real names. Nothing good can come of it and their friends know who they are anyway.

This won’t help.

If you’re OK with this because you can think you can just choose which social media accounts to reveal, I think you’ll find that how this works is a lot different from what you were expecting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been telling my teenagers not to associate their social media with their real names. Nothing good can come of it and their friends know who they are anyway.

This won’t help.

If you’re OK with this because you can think you can just choose which social media accounts to reveal, I think you’ll find that how this works is a lot different from what you were expecting.

Explain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been telling my teenagers not to associate their social media with their real names. Nothing good can come of it and their friends know who they are anyway.

I don’t have Facebook, but my dog from 2007 does, RIP.

Does your dog have a different ip address than you?

Even if it does, how about the computer MAC address, and the pattern of website visits that distinguishes each of us?

Even if we are good about using VPNs, how many of us have created a digital fingerprint by visiting this site, a site related to our current neighborhood and a site related to our birthplace regularly? How many of us have fleshed out our profiles by providing advice about travel to our current homes and sticking up for our alma maters?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been telling my teenagers not to associate their social media with their real names. Nothing good can come of it and their friends know who they are anyway.

This won’t help.

If you’re OK with this because you can think you can just choose which social media accounts to reveal, I think you’ll find that how this works is a lot different from what you were expecting.

Explain.

Zuck knows who you are. He knows everything about you, from your birthday to what brand of feminine hygiene products your wife prefers. He knows when you’ve voted, can make a 98% guess of how you voted, and knows how much you make and where you’re employed. He knows you like giggly dancing girls, but especially the brown ones. He can predict when you’re going to get a dog with alarming accuracy. Where you do your online shopping. Pretty much anything that ties to your IP address.

When he and Peter get together, he gets access to your full employment history, any government claims or loans you even made, even where your kids went to preschool. The nanny you paid on the books back in 2017 - they know her too. Thanks to DOGE, if the government had it, Big Tech now has it. They know your face and can follow you offline, too.

If you think I’m making this up, just understand that I’m probably 5 years behind on current capabilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I won't talk about immigrants and human rights or ruined trade deals and the death of American farms or say "how is this America first."

All things considered, reviewing five years of a tourist's social media is not as horrific as other moves. But it suggests:

*utter disregard for the First Amendment
*our government going into mass surveillance mode
*a very predictable and costly negative effects on tourism (already happening!)

This fascism pure and simple. If a democrat had ever approximated any plans of this kind, you all would have lost your minds.

I want to understand how ANYONE who believes in civil liberties and core American principles can defend this.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-tourists-social-media-history-5-years-trump/

It'll keep antisemites who dare criticize allies like Israel outside of our country.

[Anonymous]

“Party of free speech”

[Anonymous]

MAGAs think Trump will never come for them. They think they’re special. Until they run out of money and start complaining. And then not so special anymore. Then the cult leader gets angry because suddenly, you don’t seem to enjoy life in the compound.

[Anonymous]

And thisis to apply only to the Visa Waiver Program countries. You know, the places where people are eligible for ESTA? So they will be asking for social media from French, Danish, British, and Israeli visitors but not Argentines or Colombians or Vietnamese . . .

[Anonymous]

I don’t have any workable social media accounts anymore. I have shell accounts to follow others, but they have no content.

My significant Reddit accounts got nuked a long time ago, I couldn’t even find my own posts if I wanted.

I guess if they want to find my posts here, they could try, but I don’t see how they could find them the way this board is structured.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Whatever happened to the Republicans who were against big government because they didn't want a surveillance state? Can we have those folks back? Step up and kick out the bums who want to spy on you.

Any Republican not speaking out against this is a problem.

Do you understand surveilling foreigners vs Americans?

PS historically neither party has an issue with this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MAGAs think Trump will never come for them. They think they’re special. Until they run out of money and start complaining. And then not so special anymore. Then the cult leader gets angry because suddenly, you don’t seem to enjoy life in the compound.

It’s really funny how this year they’ve exposed themselves as such beta cuck boot lickers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MAGAs think Trump will never come for them. They think they’re special. Until they run out of money and start complaining. And then not so special anymore. Then the cult leader gets angry because suddenly, you don’t seem to enjoy life in the compound.

Eh, they don’t even need to start complaining. If there is anything about their demographic that slightly annoys him, they are on the chopping block. Maybe they work in a field that he is being pressured to help but doesn’t want to bother with it. Maybe they are in a career he considers woke, which would be just about any that requires a degree. Maybe he doesn’t like their physical appearance. Maybe they live in a blue state or city.

The pettiness of this man cannot be underestimated.