Free Speech, Media

Will Musk Step Down After Twitter Poll? The Anti-Free Speech Movement Certainly Hopes So

Many of us have supported Elon Musk in his fight to restore free speech protections to Twitter despite concerns over decisions like the use of polls to determine if individuals should be allowed back on the social media site. He has now subjected himself to the same poll judgment in asking if he should step down as CEO. After more than 17.5 million users voted, 57 percent said yes. Unless Musk was looking for an exit, it was a mistake. He handed his critics an easy opportunity to remove him.

For the left, Musk has been a nightmare because he cannot be bullied like most corporate executives. He is an eccentric billionaire who has refused to yield despite a full mobilization of the political, media, and business establishment. That could now change.

While many on the left spent weeks dismissing Twitter’s polls as unscientific, they are now demanding that Musk follow through and step down. Some 42.5% of users wanted him to say.

On Twitter Sunday, Musk seemed to say that he would follow the results but expressed pessimism about the prospects for a new CEO. He said that the person “must like pain a lot” to run a company that “has been in the fast lane to bankruptcy.” He further noted that “no one wants the job who can actually keep Twitter alive. There is no successor.”

That is precisely why the left wants Musk out. As shown in companies like Disney, the left can muscle executives to take actions even against the interests of the company or shareholders. The left has strived to make such campaigns personal for executives, who often yield rather than risk being individually tagged and targeted.

That is why it was essential to remove Musk. The political and media establishments generally are unstoppable forces — but they met their first immovable object in Musk.

That immovable object has now taken a step to remove himself from the path of the establishment. One can hardly blame him, but, as Democratic members warned Facebook not to even consider following the path of Twitter, the prospect of Musk’s departure will strengthen the efforts to maintain censorship over social media.

It is hard to ask anyone to continue to stand against this alliance of political, media, and business forces. Musk has been made a persona non grata for seeking to reduce censorship on the site. He has put billions on the line for the free speech of others. One can certainly understand why he would want this cup to pass from his lips. However, if he stays the course, his work at Twitter could prove to be his greatest legacy in resisting the trend toward censorship and speech controls in social media.

206 thoughts on “Will Musk Step Down After Twitter Poll? The Anti-Free Speech Movement Certainly Hopes So”

  1. Has Hell officially frozen over?

    Speaking with the New York Times in a wide-ranging interview about his tenure as CEO of CNN, Licht called progressive reaction to his leadership “stunning.”

    “The uninformed vitriol, especially from the left, has been stunning,” Licht told the Times. “Which proves my point: So much of what passes for news is name-calling, half-truths, and desperation.”
    https://www.theblaze.com/news/chris-licht-vitrol-liberals-stunning

  4. They declare the damage that Elon has done to society as they ignore the damage they did to children with their lockdowns. I guess it gives them something of new found interest to talk about. Easily entertained.

    1. TiT,
      Seeing as how the education of the children under the lockdowns have pushed back or stalled their education, one would think that would be a concern for every one.
      Not the Leftists.
      They are fine with the dumbing down of children. The indoctrination of Leftists POV. Heck here is a woman declaring it proudly: https://www.thecollegefix.com/educator-brags-about-indoctrinating-kids-then-complains-about-right-wing-reporting-on-it/

      Home school!

  5. This is an incredibly biased article. You are spotlighting him “seeking to reduce censorship on the site”, with no mention of how he has censored those he disagrees with. There’s literally nothing in this article that speaks to the dangerous and destructive things he’s done with Twitter since the end of October.

    1. Claudia, my heart weeps. The wokesters weren’t allowed to doxx Elons kids. But they could doxx the kids of Supreme Court Justices. Cry me a river little Claudia. Boo hoo hoo. Partisan tears for little Claudia as her tears are dashed asunder.

  6. Twitter is good for business. All the companies that make money helping people to hide their IP address are making money hand over fist.

  7. The political and media establishments generally are unstoppable forces ….

    It is the holiday season where unstoppable forces know not the light that casts out all darkness…

    You know Dasher and Dancer And Prancer and Vixen,
    Comet and Cupid And Donner and Blitzen.
    But they were all of them deceived
    for another reindeer was made
    rudolph to lead them all,
    one nose to light them
    one glow to lead them all
    and through the dark night guide them

    https://twitter.com/joshcarlosjosh/status/1601304983617404928

  8. Well by George I just had an epiphany. We should form a committee that will gather all the names of the wives and children of the reporters who doxxed Elon’s kids and publish where their wives or husbands work and where their children go to school. If they can do what they do to promote their agenda why can’t we? Then damn my epiphany was shattered when ethics came into play.

    1. Anonymous, I know that you are so sad that the finale meeting of the witch hunt will soon occur. You are so hoping that one more witch will burn. You so enjoy the aroma.

        1. Best you got their Anonymous? As usual anyone who you do not agree with is a troll. First it was troll then you fell in love with stooge and lately your back to troll. I’m sure fat curmudgeon is on the horizon. Nah to long a word.

          1. You confuse different anonymous commenters. It’s Peter Hill / Seth Warner who uses “stooge,” not me.

            I disagree with lots of people whom I don’t call trolls. I call *you* a troll because that’s what you are.

      2. I do not think this will happen, but I hope that the GOP will continue the J6 committee
        reconstituted with members of both parties, and an actual adversarial process.
        I hope they bring most witnesses back to testify again – this time essentially with cross examination.
        I hope they release ALL the capital video from J6 and let the chips fall where they may.
        I hope theyy investigate the failures inside the Capitol – Why was the offer of the NG turned down ?
        And why weren’t the NG requested on J6. Contra the current committee the problem was NOT Trump or the executive.
        Trump had pre-authorized the NG days before. All that was needed to get the NG was for the Capitol police to call and ask for them.
        The entire Chain of command from the DC commandant through the Sec Defense all new that they already had the authority to just go on request.

        Forgotten in all of this is that the Capitol Grounds are outside the Jurisdiction of the executive Branch.
        They are essentially there own mini government that the Executive has ZERO authority over.
        No President can send the NG to the capitol on their own authority. It would be a violation of separation of powers.

    3. The J6 Committee is referring Trump, Eastman and others in criminal referrals to the DOJ. It is also referring 4 members of Congress for internal ethics investigations.

      1. and JTN has just revealed that DOJ was spying on Republican Congressmen and the Collusion Delusion investigation and staff in 2017.
        Even Derschowitz has said that is almost certainly unconstitutional in numerous ways.

      2. The J6 commite has always been a farce. it is now a lame duck farce.
        Only a few left wing nuts care.

    6. The report is worthless because one side was piling up on one guy using taped recordings so that they could leave out the parts that didn’t fit. But, more importantly, the J6 didn’t interview the most important persons related to J6. That would destroy the leftist claims.

      I listened to some of the hearings, and the J6 speakers didn’t bother using quotes, preferring to use their own words because the actual quotes didn’t fit their rhetoric.

      1. S. Meyer: True. It was clearly presented as a narrative for the masses, like a scripted television docu-drama. The very calculated and selective presentation of only that testimony which fit the narrative was actually quite laughable.
        -That does not mean that I support what Trump did. I only mean that the J6 presentation was like a summer stock production–but not intended for histrionic merit, but rather to buoy the support of captive general masses of voter blocs. They are soooo afraid of Trump and the queries that he could stir up…

        1. The power of the press and repetition is great, so I cannot be sure of the meaning of what you say in your words, “That does not mean that I support what Trump did.”

          Of course, not everything Trump did was pretty, but were the bad things so bad, and are some of them even true? It’s hard to figure things of this nature out when you have kangaroos doing the interview and other kangaroos reporting on the things that happened. On the blog, we have a lot of left-handed joeys who will run with whatever is fed to them by the jacks and jills.

          Overall, Trump did good with some poor turns. He did much better than expected and substantially better than most Presidents. Sure, one can’t support everything, but one can support a man who did much better than his predecessors and leagues better than the one now filling the seat in the Oval Office.

          1. S. Meyer: (1) In a perfect world, I do not think Trump could be found guilty/liable of these charges railed against him because of the likely absence of scienter, mens rea, criminal intent, etc. I do think his ego got in the way in making more rational decisions and/or listening to advisers–and I fault his advisers (eastman, etc.) for most of his troubles. Trump reminds me of a football player I knew. While people were talking to him, he would be looking beyond them at the TV screen to see if and how the cameras caught his big play of the night….
            But in an imperfect world, political agendas can trump justice…
            (2) I do believe that Liz Cheney’s motivation is narcissistic and more focused on winning and saving face than on any notion of justice. So also for Schiff.
            (3) I do not believe Trump was a bad president. In fact, I liked his transparency- faulted or faultless,- depending on the issue du jour. I voted for him because I liked the platform/agenda he presented. (My biggest issue is illegal immigration.) And he came through on a lot of it.
            (4) I would vote for DeSantis.
            I regret in advance if I have elicited ire in you with my opinions.

            1. “I regret in advance if I have elicited ire in you with my opinions.”

              Not at all, Lin. I welcome considered and intelligent opinions devoid of a mind filled only with ideological mush. DeSantis is a fine choice, so I consider us lucky to have excellent nominees for President, though not so much for our legislative body.

              “Trump reminds me of a football player I knew. While people were talking to him, he would be looking beyond them at the TV screen to see if and how the cameras caught his big play of the night….”

              That is true, but his biggest wins represent wins for the nation. He feeds off of doing good for the people and having people applaud. That is great. His interests align with ours.

              ” I do think his ego got in the way”

              Trump has a big one. What politician running for the Presidency doesn’t have an oversized ego, hidden or obvious? Let us use his ego for our benefit.

              In the realm of criminal, and moral liability, I think Trump is one of the most innocent. Joe Biden is unquestionably a crook and has been for years. Biden sold America down the drain. Trump, right or wrong, dedicated his office to making America great, and it shows. The J6 committee is a giant moral failure for all. It is a moral failure for our nation. Supposedly we are the leaders in moral jurisprudence, but that is something left outside of the J6 committee.

      2. I do not think it is worthless. It is just like yesterdays; referals.

        This is the evidence they are using to get from A to B.

        But it does not get from A to B.

        Eventually I will read it. Though most everything has been reported already and nothing reported has changed anyones mind.

        Democrats have effectively proven what everyone knows. Trump did everything legal and constitutional to overturn the result of the lawless and probably fraudulent and definitely rigged 2020 election.

        The gist of the J6 committee is “we think it is illegal to challenge democrats”
        The result everyone expected from the start.

        This will ultimately go down as the democrats HUAC.

        I hope that Republicans will revive the J6 committee and do it right.
        Open, public, transparent, let the facts out.
        All of them.

    7. I should add that the J6 committee was a kangaroo court typical of fascist regimes. ATS likes Kangaroo courts. They are part of his disposition.

      1. And there conclusion – we are angry as piss that anything would challemge a lawless, likely fruadulent election that we rigged,
        and we think that if you did that is a crime.

        Does this surprise anyone ?

    8. Ho hum.

      Repeatedly the J6 committee has promised a smoking gun.

      They have none. Turley and MacCarthy were interviewed on this. Bith said that even if there was a prosecution and a jury convicted Trump would win on appeal.
      There is no case here. Neither beleived DOJ would prosecute, or that the SC if these were refered to him would either.

      Why ? Because all this is. is political wishful thinking. There is no actual crime.

      I would separately note that the next head of the HPSCI has said that the J6 committee has done house republicans a great favor, they have substantially enhanced their power to not just subpoena both private parties and the administration but to compel compliance rapidly.

      Have fun living under your own rules.

  10. Brutus #1 “…If the constitution, offered to your acceptance, be a wise one, calculated to preserve the invaluable blessings of liberty, to secure the inestimable rights of mankind, and promote human happiness, then, if you accept it, you will lay a lasting foundation of happiness for millions yet unborn; generations to come will rise up and call you blessed. You may rejoice in the prospects of this vast extended continent becoming filled with freemen, who will assert the dignity of human nature. You may solace yourselves with the idea, that society, in this favored land, will fast advance to the highest point of perfection; the human mind will expand in knowledge and virtue, and the golden age be, in some measure, realized. But if, on the other hand, this form of government contains principles that will lead to the subversion of liberty — if it tends to establish a despotism, or, what is worse, a tyrannic aristocracy; then, if you adopt it, this only remaining asylum for liberty will be shut up, and posterity will execrate your memory”.

    A few Quotes from Patrick Henry

    “Congress may carry on the most wicked and pernicious of schemes under the dark veil of secrecy. The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them. “

    “He that hath a blind conscience which sees nothing, a dead conscience which feels nothing, and a dumb conscience which says nothing, is in as miserable a condition as a man can be on this side of hell.”

  11. And now they come standing up for the free speech of reporters and their right to expose Elon’s kid to danger. Where were they when the reporters from The New York post were banned from Twitter? Where were they when a doctor was banned for saying that the lockdown was damaging children. Now they burrow out of the woodwork to defend their own. Where the hell were they then. Now even the Atlantic Magazine admits that the lockdowns damaged children. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/03/what-coronavirus-will-do-kids/608608/. I repeat, were the hell were they then.

  12. After spending the past six years attempting to crush all dissenting speech, the media reportedly experienced a change of heart after realizing that they might have to play by the rules they have created. “After being suspended from Twitter for doxxing a man right after his child was threatened, I now know what it was like for doctors who were kicked off Twitter for disagreeing with the government’s COVID narrative,” said Aaron Rupar. “I never spoke up for all the other people banned from Twitter the past few years – but having now basically experienced imprisonment on Alacatraz, I am going to right those wrongs.”
    https://babylonbee.com/news/journalists-call-for-constitutional-amendment-granting-everyone-free-speech

  13. OT,
    “The uninformed vitriol, especially from the left, has been stunning,” Licht said during a series of interviews with The New York Times published Sunday. “Which proves my point: so much of what passes for news is name-calling, half-truths and desperation.”

    https://justthenews.com/accountability/media/cnn-head-says-uninformed-vitriol-especially-left-has-been-stunning

    We see it here on the good professor’s blog nearly everyday.

  14. 1) Musk uses these polls to bait internet bots into revealing themselves. This allows Twitter to permanently ban each bot that votes. It’s just a clever way for Musk to remove bots from Twitter. All of his “polls” had this in mind. He could tell quite early that leftists used bots quite extensively on Twitter to skew things. This is how he gets rid of them.

    2) Musk is not CEO of any of his companies. He always hires a CEO to do the mundane day to day work for him, while he takes all the PR glory of “running” the company. Musk always planned to get a new CEO for Twitter. His poll is just a cute way to get rid of bots, gain some more PR for himself, etc. He knew before the poll was issued that the leftist bots would overwhelm the poll and stack it against him.

    3) Musk will be firmly in control of twitter after he hires a new CEO. He will still be calling the shots. He wanted this initial period of time to acquaint himself with the company, come to understand how it works and what its challenges are. He always planned to hire a new CEO

    4) God I hope he offers the job to Jared Kushner. That would make the leftist heads explode.

  15. Yep. Elon musk is in a tight spot. The poor fellow only has a net worth of 163.7 billion dollars. He could sell off everything, pay off the 44 billion for Twitter and walk away with 119.7 billion. Poor fellow is in a tight spot. The only thing tight about Elon is his stomach due to his uproarious laughter at those who say he’s in a tight spot. The tight spots are in the brains of those who say he’s in a tight spot. Har har har.

  16. If Elon steps down, I strongly suggest former Attorney General Bill Barr. Can’t hurt asking him.

    If Barr says no, Bari Weiss or Glenn Greenwald. There are a number of heroic possibilities, and the new CEO can get any number of good business advisors. Business acumen is less of a requirement than backbone and vision.

    No CEO’s other than Elon have backbone. That’s the problem in this country. Beijing has either coopted them, or Beijing uses its useful idiots on the left to cow them. Where is my country??

      1. Bill Barr is an outstanding man who is one of the few who actually abided by the law at all times in the Trump administration. He is thoroughly and completely conservative, and ideologically, would be perfect. He has no interest or ability in running a Tech company, though. If Barr refused to prosecute someone, it was because the law was not on his side. Period.

        1. “He has no interest or ability in running a Tech company, though.”

          I suspect you’re right, but I’m hard pressed to think of a single corporate suit who would defend the Constitution.

        2. Let’s see. James Comey absconded with classfied FBI materials, shared them with those who had no clearance to view them, leaked them to the press, and lied to FBI agents about it.

          That’s at least 4 crimes. The IG’s report was damning, and recommended prosecution. Barr refused to prosecute.

  17. I wouldn’t be surprised to discover Musk was looking for data showing what % of the population support censorship. If it’s censorship they want, then give it to them, good and hard.

  18. Perhaps Musk has simply set himself up to show everyone some ultimate chutzpah by resisting the majority and whatever tyranny it intends.

  20. Musk is in a tight spot. His co-investors who helped him buy Twitter want it competently run. The advertisers are losing interest in the brand. Musk’s reputation has already suffered — it’s now a question of how much more it will slide before this episode fades.

    JT, please stop gushing about “free speech” and “censorship” — you haven’t given us any operational definitions of these terms that allow the sane, centered majority to conduct its dialog out in the open while maintaining standards of civility and truth-seeking. If anything, your vague standard hands over the public square to the zealot, the neurotic exaggerator, the angry misanthrope, the anonymous shirker of personal responsibility, the militant guerilla-politics ad-hominem attacker, the corporate toadie-flak, and the professionally-trained PsyOps practitioner.

    JT, freedom of speech carries parallel responsibilities for honesty, goodwill and trustworthiness. You seem naive about the corrosive impact of deceitful infowarfare and the mounting of intimidation campaigns seeking to scare off and silence opposing points of view.

    1. FWIW, Musk has said what he means by free speech:
      “By “free speech”, I simply mean that which matches the law. I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law. If people want less free speech, they will ask government to pass laws to that effect. Therefore, going beyond the law is contrary to the will of the people.”

      His actions on Twitter are clearly not consistent with that definition.

      Agreed about JT.

      1. I think what Musk means by this is that, generally, no speech of a kind that is protected by the first amendment should be censored by government or private companies. That means that only a very limited set of types of speech can be banned. Musk has gone slightly beyond this by prohibiting doxxing (though this may not in fact be protected speech), Ye’s anti-Semitic tweets, and free advertising of other sites. There may be other prohibitions of which I am not aware.

        The closer Musk can come to the first amendment standard, the better. Any user who is offended or unhappy about anyone’s tweets can always block him.

        1. He hasn’t banned doxxing. He has selectively prohibited the sharing of location information on Twitter. Case in point – allowing the posting of images of himself at the World Cup: https://www.businessinsider.com/twitter-users-joke-elon-musk-doxxed-himself-world-cup-final-2022-12

          This is of course his prerogative as it is his company, but it cuts against any moral argument about evenly applying Twitter policy. How is a Tweet of Elon’s location at the WC not the same thing as a Tweet of his plane’s location? It is nonsensical.

          1. What a nonsensical comment. He HAS banned doxxing. When a person chooses to share his location on the internet, that IS FINE. That is not revealing the current location of SOMEONE ELSE AGAINST THEIR WILL.
            Honestly, the inability of leftists to think – even in the tiniest matters – is appalling.

            1. The current policy would prevent a reporter from noting in real time that Biden is sitting in the Oval Office. That is not doxxing.

              1. Anonymous, there are two airplanes that the President uses to travel. No one knows which airplane he will be using in advance. Perhaps you think that it would be alright to post which airplane he would be traveling on. That would be a fine piece of doxxing that I’m sure you would approve of.

                1. TiT, the ElonJet account reports the flights all of his jets and doesn’t say whether or not he’s on them.

                  I know you’re disappointed. You’d much rather believe your delusions about me, as that’s much more comfortable for you. You are free not only to delude yourself but to share your delusions here.

                2. BTW, TiT, “Twitter is working on a plan that would force users to opt in to targeted ads, removing a years-old privacy setting that gives users more control over their data, according to a report in the Platformer newsletter. But that’s not all! The new strategy may mandate that you share your location information and let Twitter sell your [location] data to third-parties.” I’m sure that you approve.

              2. You are demonstrating a lack of smarts because you don’t seem to understand what is and what is not dangerous. Don’t go outside after dark.

            3. The policy would ban a third party, such as a news organization, tweeting a picture of him at the WC.

          1. When you develop a bit of business acumen you will figure out Musk is easing his way into the best way to prevent Twitter from becoming a cesspool. Of course you might like cesspools, so you would object. Musk is doing a fine job in a relatively short time frame.

    2. pbinca, the only responsibility of speech that you want is speech that is dictated by the FBI. The real responsibility regarding speech is the responsibility to assure that our right to speak remains one of our freedoms. We know that your desire is to be the superior arbiter of what we can or can not say. In your quest to do so you bring out the “responsibility” argument. No one is calling fire in a crowded theater. However, you have called for fire in Seattle and Minneapolis. Now you speak to me concerning responsibility in a hallowed voice. Get thee behind me pbinca.

    3. What total nonsense! I am trying to figure out if you are actually an American, or some foreigner who simply believes that leftists can speak, and conservatives need to stay silent. Go examine left wing speech online, and you will find that the one thing they lack is “honesty, goodwill, and trustworthiness”. And sorry, either you are woefully ignorant of what real public debate looks like – which is often NOT honest, as when Obama said “You can keep your doctor” or when Joe Biden said that America is a systemically racist country. LOTS of things liberals say would be shut out of the public conversation given your rather childish, perfectionist views of allowable speech. Free speech means you get to say whatever is on your mind, regardless of whether it hurts someone’s feelings, or is deemed “dishonest” by some person who thinks they alone can judge whether something is dishonest or full of goodwill.
      It is frightening that someone could have such a failure to understand the basic mechanisms of democracy, who believes they are their friends should be able to stop others from speaking. You have a shameful and a rather childish and immature conception of free speech.

    4. Musk has too many businesses and family commitments to be a Twitter CEO for long. His poll was. I suspect, contrived to give him an exit. The advertising value of Twitter is directly tied to the number of users and that number is growing steadily. I have become a great admirer of Elon Musk!

Comments are closed.