This is just sad. It’s like a victim of dv who quickly corrects themselves when they say something their abuser doesn’t like.

Sure, speaking in terms of why he could bring more votes:

• He was a teacher for 20 years and has a Midwestern small town vibe that could appeal to a lot of voters
• He has so much charisma and isn’t afraid to call out far right leadership, but he does it in a way that does not alienate that voter base. He has even taken his message to fox news.
• He started the whole “weird” thing that is now being used effectively to nullify Trump and Vance’s empty rhetoric.
• His record as gov in Minnesota speaks for itself
• He’s very popular among labor unions

You really need to listen to him speak to understand his potential impact. Here’s a 10 min video containing a few of the interviews I’ve seen (after the short intro): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1-nR3dRCAM

Not a terrible pick, but Tim Walz makes so much sense.

Lina Khan is fantastic

Did I say “do it our way”? No, I said be critical where it is deserved, both parties. These protests target the Democrats.

Both parties are on the wrong side of this issue.

This is an oversimplification that ignores important context. Pushing the sphere doesn’t open the door if the sphere is not in power.

That’s a dangerous assumption in an election year where even if they do not vote R, they may not vote at all (this is a position voiced by many, and prevalent in pop culture) which could hand the election to “America’s Hitler”.

This year, criticism should be levied against both parties, and that’s not happening. Republicans in congress literally just applauded the genocide.

Next year, assuming Harris wins, continue to protest their position.

Where were they at the RNC, hmm?

“Whatabout US companies”

US companies have seen similar criticism, antitrust suits, and billions in fines.

It is true that US tech companies have horrendous practices when it comes to data privacy and security, and that the US needs better federal regulation similar to GDPR to protect the consumer. This must be corrected.

It’s also true that the location of the parent company of a social media platform does not protect that platform from bad actors and adversarial abuse. See: Facebook in 2016

However, there is a big difference between selling bits of redacted data to ad companies, and providing raw database access to a foreign adversary with malicious intent.

Add to that the fact that kids/teens use tiktok more than any other platform, and their habits are exposed without their knowledge or consent.

The possibilities are endless, but to name a few concerns:

• The CCP is using this app as a social engineering experiment to attempt to influence public opinion in the next generation of Americans.
• Imagine how much easier it will be to influence the next generation of US politicians who have no privacy whatsoever, and whose thought patterns are well documented.

The EU has already fined them for their negligent privacy practices: https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/15/tech/tiktok-fine-europe-children/index.html

It’s not enough. I don’t think a ban is the right solution, but the problem is clear.

Is it really such a stretch to say a Chinese owned company managing the feeds of the most active social platform would use that platform to sow division and hatred in the US?