Parler - Why Would You Want To Post There?

[Checkerboard Strangler]

You make a good point, here:

"Would you really want to join Parler, and sully your reputation?"

Our associations effect our personal & professional lives, as the insurrectionists found out. It's one thing to be part of a diverse multi-dimensional association, that happens to have a minority share of negative individuals. Twitter, DP, etc., are examples.

But, what about those orgs that cater more narrowly to problematic individuals. The KKK? Or, Proud Boys?. That's a whole different story!

As long as Parler is predominantly Trumpers, and the more hard-core at that, I wouldn't want to associate with it.

It's never going to be anything else but...

 

[Chomsky]

It's never going to be anything else but...

I suspect . . .

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Well, you did spur me on to re-examine my numbers. The last I checked, maybe 4-5 weeks ago, I saw an approaching 90% number - for Trump approval within the Republican Party.

It seems that has slipped to 82%.

So he did drop from low 90's to low 80's over the last several months. And it is interesting that with 82% Gallop approval, Newsmax shows quite different numbers. To be honest, I'm not sure what to make of Newsmax' poll. They were pushing the 'stop the steal' spiel, until they got sued. So as a news org, I'm not trusting of them.

Anyway, here's the Gallop Poll I use:

Presidential Approval Ratings -- Donald Trump

Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as president?

news.gallup.com

If the party is shrinking, WHICH IT IS, approval numbers within the party are sure to go up.

 

[Chomsky]

If the party is shrinking, WHICH IT IS, approval numbers within the party are sure to go up.

Actually though, those numbers did seem to drift downward a bit - even with some recent party exodus. So, that's not a good thing for Trump - at this moment.

 

[CaughtInThe]

be patient. Parler is gonna backfire on a lot of folks.

 

[Decypher]

A safe space for Trumpists to type the things they’d never say to someone’s face. Handy if all the deplorables are in one place. Maybe the FBI can identify the next Dylann Wolf or Patrick Crusius before they do something terrible.

 

[Callen]

I joined out of curiosity. What a hateful, vitriolic venue. The lies are epic and they go unchecked, instead are amplified. What is it that attracts people to sites like this, to Tucker, to Rush. Why do they need so much hate? Why do they so readily accept the lies without verification? Even when the lies are uncovered they push on. I am convinced it is some sort of character flaw or personality disorder.

 

[MaryP]

I saw this thread about Parler re-opening and I admit that I found the idea behind wanting to post on Parler baffling. Not because I personally object to the content (I do, but that's beside the point) - But posting on a site with all those suspicious eyes on it, known for having massive security flaws that will expose who and where you are, while the echo chamber encourages you to post the most outrageous and inflammatory things you can think of, seems like a terrible idea.

Maybe it's because I have been on forums and other forms of social media for more than 20 years, and seen dozens of people lose their jobs, or get sued over things they've said, seen lives and relationships destroyed, simply because people were being a little less than careful with what they say online. [No matter what anyone tells you, what you write on the internet is forever.] But it strikes me that a site like Debate Politics, which prides itself on protecting people's anonymity, is probably better off for you. There are people who posts things on this site that, if their name could be assigned to it would absolutely result in their losing their current employment (stuff that goes far beyond a difference of opinion on political matters) . So I'm unclear as to why one with views that they know to be a bit, let's say, outside of what is currently considered socially acceptable, would want to jeopardize their livelihood, for the sake of some brief social media notoriety. There's rarely any long term money in being a right wing media martyr, unless you have some really big financiers behind you.

So, if you're someone who ascribes to Parler's ideology, why do you feel do you need to post there? Aren't you concerned about your employment currently, or in the future? Surely, your form of expression isn't simply defined by being the biggest possible edgelord. [See where that type of mindset gets you.] I understand that Parler prides itself on being a free speech haven, but being that it's also owned by the Mercers, you might as well just hang out in the Breitbart comment section to get your fill. I'm not saying that to be dismissive, I'm just suggesting that the crowd is likely to overlap quite a bit. But, please tell me that whatever you want to say on Parler extends further than an attempt to "own the libs." That way of life is a meaningless stance that says more about the insecurity of the person living it than any set of individuals they claim to oppose.

Parler isn't anonymous?

 

[eohrnberger]

Well, you did spur me on to re-examine my numbers. The last I checked, maybe 4-5 weeks ago, I saw an approaching 90% number - for Trump approval within the Republican Party.

It seems that has slipped to 82%.

So he did drop from low 90's to low 80's over the last several months. And it is interesting that with 82% Gallop approval, Newsmax shows quite different numbers. To be honest, I'm not sure what to make of Newsmax' poll. They were pushing the 'stop the steal' spiel, until they got sued. So as a news org, I'm not trusting of them.

Anyway, here's the Gallop Poll I use:

Presidential Approval Ratings -- Donald Trump

Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as president?

news.gallup.com

Wouldn't the job approval poll also bake in reactions to his personality?
It doesn't really bring to light what level of support the 'America First' stance / policy / whatever you want to call it has.

I spent some time looking for current poll results on this, but didn't find any summarized by what I already know wouldn't be a source you'd except, so I guess that means such a poll doesn't exist, or isn't being reported on. My guess would be that it is very popular and highly supported, and that's why it's not being reported on. Just guessing here.

 

[Chomsky]

Wouldn't the job approval poll also bake in reactions to his personality?
It doesn't really bring to light what level of support the 'America First' stance / policy / whatever you want to call it has.

I spent some time looking for current poll results on this, but didn't find any summarized by what I already know wouldn't be a source you'd except, so I guess that means such a poll doesn't exist, or isn't being reported on. My guess would be that it is very popular and highly supported, and that's why it's not being reported on. Just guessing here.

Well, I used 'approval ' as my barometer. Which makes the most sense, to me. 82% approved of Trump, as he exited the White House. So, they had plenty of time to see everything sink in.

 

[pocket aces]

Oh feel the unity.
And you wonder why political discourse has degenerated to it's present level.

Do you not realize that you are painting with an overly unfair and overly broad brush there?

I didn't say shit about unity. I don't want unity with violent and stupid Trumper's.

 

[Deuce]

Parler's ideology - FREE SPEECH!

Parler bans you for being liberal.

 

[Deuce]

Participation in or support of the Republican party or Republican candidates and politicians is on a voluntary basis.

There are many who are in support of the 'American First' idea, and not necessarily Trump the persona. The two things are different.

I don't agree with putting any politician or public figure on a pedestal (this includes the Hollywood types as well - or especially). These are all human beings, same as any other, and put their pants on in the morning one leg at a time, same as anyone else.

"America First" was a phrase widely adopted by American nazi sympathizers prior to WW2, and that just isn't a coincidence.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Parlerwatch over on Reddit has been a hoot since Parler came back up.

Freaks are now advocating assassinating journalists and bombing news studios.

The best part is that they think they're safe in saying so. It's amazing.

Parler's like a hotline to the security services. The "Brian Morans" flag themselves up, while the Mercers steal their data and monetise them.

 

[US&THEM]

There is a issue with their re-opening in I'm sure they caved to the demands of big tech. IOW, they sold out

If you are dumb enough to take any money from Bongino, you have a shit organization.

 

[Hamish Howl]

Parler's like a hotline to the security services. The "Brian Morans" flag themselves up, while the Mercers steal their data and monetise them.

I'm totally okay with this entire thing. I encourage it.

 

[eohrnberger]

"America First" was a phrase widely adopted by American nazi sympathizers prior to WW2, and that just isn't a coincidence.

The present populist 'America First' has nothing to do with 'American nazi sympathizers prior to WW2'. Your so called 'coincidence' simply isn't, and is little more than Godwining.

Why shouldn't a government put it's Nation's interests and it's citizens interests first, ahead of other Nation's interests and their citizens interests first?
Shouldn't every government be an advocate for Nation's interests and it's citizens interests?

 

[eohrnberger]

Well, I used 'approval ' as my barometer. Which makes the most sense, to me. 82% approved of Trump, as he exited the White House. So, they had plenty of time to see everything sink in.

Well, as it is the only 'barometer' available we may not have a choice, but I don't think it would indicate the difference that I'm looking for, sadly.