Or, "if you're a public figure, or plan a public campaign supporting someone who is controversial, don't expect there to be zero criticism of your position because it's somehow sacred".
it's sort of strange that a mainstream candidate with enough support to win the whole election is considered controversial, plenty public figures endorsed hilary and none received the level of backlash that palmer did. max temkin even funded a similarly cringey billboard campaign:
unless we are to enforce a standard of public apoliticism for public figures across the board, uniquely singling out endorsements on one side regardless of wealth doesn't seem like a good way to generate effective discourse
>No? You don't recall the decrying of "Hollywood elites" by right wing media and supporters?
This is generalized, and it's not an active campaign of literal harassment to make it difficult for specific individuals to work. For whatever reason, the Right is much less interested in seeing their political enemies suffer than the Left. Perhaps it's because the Right sees the Left as naive, whereas the Left sees the Right as human garbage.
The literal inventor of JavaScript, totally irreplaceable and undeniably the most qualified person for his role, is forced out from Mozilla over a campaign contribution to another mainstream political cause (which also won). He had silently made that contribution 7 years prior, and it was only discovered due to campaign finance disclosure laws. Major sites like OKCupid ran blackouts against Firefox users to punish them for running a browser associated with Brendan Eich. Unlike Luckey, he was not trying to get involved publicly, and only quietly exercises his rights as a citizen.
Now, the guy who "kickstarted" the multi-billion-dollar modern VR revolution is harassed and chased out of his position for committing a slightly-more-public form of heresy against the Silicon Valley dogma.
The "criticisms" are not comparable across the aisle.
You should fact check your fake news [1] before parroting it, when you try to justify Trump bragging about grabbing women by the pussy without their consent [2] by making a false equivalence. An no, that wasn't just "locker room talk", so don't parrot that line either.
Wowee, I looked at your posting history, and all those racist and sexist remarks you've made certainly shed light on where you're coming from and what you believe, and why you follow the people whose lies you parrot. So don't bother trying to defend Trump sexual assaulting women by parroting pizzagate conspiracy theories, either.
