
Scott Adams Shadowbanned from Twitter for Supporting Trump - empressplay
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/151301555066/the-week-i-became-a-target
======
avmich
This is a poster child of the case when you can completely disagree with
opinion but should be really worried about the possibility of silencing it.

Wonder if Scott Adams can satisfy the search for intelligent Trump supporters
- [http://omniorthogonal.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-quest-for-
int...](http://omniorthogonal.blogspot.com/2016/10/the-quest-for-intelligent-
trump.html) .

~~~
ZeroGravitas
The slatestarcodex blog linked to above, and it's follow up are good reads:

[http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/09/28/ssc-endorses-clinton-
jo...](http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/09/28/ssc-endorses-clinton-johnson-or-
stein/)

[http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/10/01/he-kept-us-out-of-
war/](http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/10/01/he-kept-us-out-of-war/)

Intelligent conservatives' comments on Trump fascinate me. I like reading
between the lines as they realise they have to explain things very slowly for
a big portion of their audience, who they thought were appreciating their
intellectual arguments, but it turns out they just thought they were in the
same tribe.

For more from this genre, see also Sam Harris podcasts available on Youtube,
where he goes into great detail about why Trump would be a disaster.

------
robotresearcher
He claims that the backlash against his support of Trump cost him $1M in
speaker fees in the coming year. That is 20 years of the median wage for full
time work in the US.

I respect Adams' creativity and he's made a significant cultural contribution,
but the late-stage Adams career of self-proclaimed genius too smart to be
fooled by political correctness is unpleasant. It's very easy to be a
libertarian when you won everything.

~~~
jakeogh
Record numbers of ordinary people are voting for Trump.

[http://img.ccrd.clearchannel.com/media/mlib/15172/2016/06/de...](http://img.ccrd.clearchannel.com/media/mlib/15172/2016/06/default/gop_primary_popular_vote_0_1465386905.jpg)

[https://i.sli.mg/erfcMO.jpg](https://i.sli.mg/erfcMO.jpg)

~~~
robotresearcher
Those links show 13 million people voted for Trump in the Republican primary.
In a voting population of 241 million, that's 5.39% of eligible voters. More
people voted for Clinton, and very nearly as many voted for Sanders
(Trump/Sanders = 1.0071).

Official popular vote count in 2016 primaries, in numerical order:

Clinton 16,914,722

Trump 13,300,472

Sanders 13,206,428

Cruz 7,637,262

Poll-based predictions for the general election currently:

[http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-
forecast/?...](http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-
forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo)

~~~
jakeogh
2012: Barack Hussein Obama II 65,918,507 Willard Mitt Romney 60,934,407

~~~
robotresearcher
Are you proposing those GA results for comparison with the primary results?

The 2012 primary results were:

Obama: 6,158,064

Romney: 10,031,336

The Dems' nomination of the sitting president was a foregone conclusion so no
need to get out the vote.

~~~
jakeogh
The point is the GE was delta 5M. That's almost down in the noise. Small
changes in turnout (or huge changes this case) matter.... and that's ignoring
the significant crossover vote in the Rustbelt.

~~~
robotresearcher
It looks like a wash in delta-primary-turnout nationally. The link posted
above showed Dems down a lot in primary turnout in a short list of states.
Nationally turnout was high on both sides, but a record for neither. That list
of states was carefully chosen to make a certain impression, I guess.

[http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/06/10/turnout-
was-...](http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/06/10/turnout-was-high-in-
the-2016-primary-season-but-just-short-of-2008-record/)

It'd be interesting to look at relative delta-turnout in swing states only.

~~~
jakeogh
"but a record for neither". Incorrect. Trump got more primary votes than any
Republican in history.

[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/1/donald-
trump-...](http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/1/donald-trump-drives-
republican-turnout-to-record-d/)

~~~
robotresearcher
Turnout is the number of votes cast, not the number cast for a single person.
Rep turnout was not a record. Trump's votes received were indeed a Rep record.

~~~
jakeogh
As a share of eligible voters, Rep turnout does appear to be a record.

14.8%(2016) vs 11.8%(1980)

[http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-
content/uploads/sites/12/20...](http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-
content/uploads/sites/12/2016/06/FT_16.06.08_primaryTurnout.png)

~~~
dragonwriter
National primary turnout (as a whole or for any one party) is neither really
meaningfully comparable across elections (because of changes in methodology of
particular primaries, changes in timing between primaries, differences in the
course of elections which change the perceived value of voting in later
primaries, etc.) nor predictive of general election turnout (so pointing to
primary turnout as evidence of a party's or its nominee's strength in the
general election is meaningless.)

------
GFK_of_xmaspast
Why would twitter ban Adams and not any of the thousands of other jerks on
there?

~~~
slededit
His theory:

> All things considered, I had a great week. I didn’t realize I was having
> enough impact to get on the Clinton enemies list.

------
fred_is_fred
Predating Trump support, Scott Adams is and was a nut-bag misogynist, so my
hanky is pretty dry right now.

~~~
DiabloD3
Cite? Because I only know him from his comic that is about as funny as
Garfield.

~~~
fred_is_fred
Feel free to find other sources but this goes way back, he's got a blog where
he says lots of crazy shit about women.

This is one of the better non-blog sources I found, google will find you
plenty more:

[http://www.macleans.ca/culture/movies/whats-with-dilberts-
cr...](http://www.macleans.ca/culture/movies/whats-with-dilberts-creator/)

He also mansplains harassment:
[http://freethoughtblogs.com/indelible/2014/11/10/scott-
adams...](http://freethoughtblogs.com/indelible/2014/11/10/scott-adams-
mansplains-why-feminists-are-wrong-about-street-harassment-or-something/)

You can also search for the fun stuff he said about rape and salary
inequality.

Here's one of the rape ones: [http://jezebel.com/5813290/dilbert-creator-
scott-adams-weigh...](http://jezebel.com/5813290/dilbert-creator-scott-adams-
weighs-in-on-rape-now)

He's since deleted the original post.

~~~
mzw_mzw
>mansplain

Please don't use sexist language on HN.

------
NotSammyHagar
Can't he just use his powers of persuasion and hypnosis to make twitter do
what he wants? More seriously, I am curious what he actually did. Is he
constantly an asshole or threatening people or something? Twitter is not the
same thing as free speech, but I know a lot of conservatives get their panties
in a bunch, being so afraid of being oppressed by the (wo)man.

The article doesn't really say what he posted.

~~~
EJTH
> The article doesn't really say what he posted.

> Why did I get shadowbanned?

> Beats me.

> But it was probably because I asked people to tweet me examples of Clinton
> supporters being violent against peaceful Trump supporters in public. I got
> a lot of them. It was chilling.

It was literally the second paragraph of the article...

~~~
ZeroGravitas
He's also been saying recently that he supports Clinton, because if he didn't
then he'd be assassinated.

So it's quite possible that he's actually mentally ill. On the other hand, it
could just be a schtick, as I saw him bring interviewed recently on a right
wing video blog and he was much more subdued than his written 'character'.

~~~
EJTH
Why make the assumption that he is mentally ill? As I see it it is just a
reference to the very popular conspiracy (theories?) that several of Hillarys
problematic staff and opponents has died under wierd circumstances, like shot
in the back of the head during a robbery with nothing stolen from the victim,
shotgun suicides, guccifer hung in his cell in Russia and much more.

Furthermore Hillary has suggested that Julian Assange should be dronestriked:
[http://www.snopes.com/julian-assange-drone-
strike/](http://www.snopes.com/julian-assange-drone-strike/)

~~~
GFK_of_xmaspast
Dude, your snopes link has a big red "UNPROVEN" right up there at the top.

~~~
EJTH
Unproven != Disproved

~~~
dragonwriter
Yeah, unproven is different than disproved, but a source noting that a claim
is unproven is hardly support for the claim being true, which is how you
offered it.

~~~
EJTH
How did I offer this as truth when I mentioned that it could very well be
conspiracy theories?

$0.10 was deposited to your CTR account.

~~~
NotSammyHagar
It was just unsubstantiated. If you want to suggest something might have
happened, linking to a debunker website that says its unproven makes your
claim less likely, right?

