Elon Musk: Always A Douche

[Admiral Yi]

I think the Republicans are pretty good at party discipline/disciplining people who step out of line with party opinion.

I assume you're talking about Lynn Cheney?  AFAIK she's still free to register as a Republican voter and still free to run as a candidate in the Republican primary.

[Sheilbh]

I assume you're talking about Lynn Cheney?  AFAIK she's still free to register as a Republican voter and still free to run as a candidate in the Republican primary.

There's informal and formal party discipline - I think the US has no formal discipline, but the Republicans are very good at the informal type. It's one of the ways I think they are basically a parliamentary party in a non-parliamentary system and that's a huge source of strength for them.

[Admiral Yi]

Please elaborate.

[Sheilbh]

Which bit?

[Admiral Yi]

Republicans are good at informal discipline.

[Sheilbh]

Formal = rule book etc. Formal internal controls, choosing to caucus with someone, in the UK context withdrawing the whip etc.

Informal = primaries etc. Mechanisms for exerting control and keeping people loyal to the party line (whatever that is) that don't operate formally but through other mechanisms.

The Republicans seem really good at getting rid of dissenters, RINOs, people who buck the party line (with a couple of relatively unique exceptions) - to keep politicians in line with what the party wants even if there are no formal controls (which would probably operate in the opposite direction getting rid of trouble-makers etc).

[garbon]

Informal = primaries etc. Mechanisms for exerting control and keeping people loyal to the party line (whatever that is) that don't operate formally but through other mechanisms.

Isn't that simply because they just let the next brand of crazy takeover?

[Barrister]

Formal = rule book etc. Formal internal controls, choosing to caucus with someone, in the UK context withdrawing the whip etc.

Informal = primaries etc. Mechanisms for exerting control and keeping people loyal to the party line (whatever that is) that don't operate formally but through other mechanisms.

The Republicans seem really good at getting rid of dissenters, RINOs, people who buck the party line (with a couple of relatively unique exceptions) - to keep politicians in line with what the party wants even if there are no formal controls (which would probably operate in the opposite direction getting rid of trouble-makers etc).

But I think that just shows how poor and powerless the political parties are.

In Canada keeping party discipline is just as much about keeping the fringe in line as it is about keeping the squishy moderates in control.  But in the US it's the fringe running the show half the time, and the moderates getting ejected from the party.

[Sheilbh]

Isn't that simply because they just let the next brand of crazy takeover?

Well I suppose it depends on who is the "party" - if it's the leadership then, yes.

But given that they don't have much formal control and can't really determine who's in or out, or what the platform is etc - it would seem weird to me to define them as the party. Though I think they clearly have influence through endorsements, fundraising, networks and the whole "the party decides" theory.

I think the party is probably better understand as the voters who are defining its candidates and shaping the direction it goes.

I don't think they left the next brand of crazy takeover; I think the next brand of crazy is the party and they're doing pretty well at whipping dissenters into line.

Edit: Basically I think party = leadership works in some ways in the US, but not generally (and less and less in recent years - probaby since 68) and is more suitable for Europe or Canada or Australia; because the US has such a decentralised system I think it's more accurate that generally party = base and this also occasionally happens in European systems (for example Labour under Corbyn with Momentum and mass movement politics).

[Baron von Schtinkenbutt]

Last three years was: 1.4B, -1.1B, -0.2B.  They haven't run one since 2019.
That year they got the benefit of a $1 billion tax credit.

Conversely, the loss in 2021 was driven by taking a $727MM special charge in Q3 for settling a shareholder lawsuit.  Our other quarters showed a net profit, and Q3 also would have absent the settlement charge.

That said, Q1 was kinda rough and would have been a loss without the sale of MoPub (and the $970MM in revenue from that).

[The Larch]

SEC rules and procedures bite Musk in the ass once again, possibly delaying his acquisition of Twitter until 2025.

Elon Musk and Twitter hit with lawsuit from shareholder to delay $44bn takeover


Elon Musk and Twitter Inc have been sued by a Florida pension fund seeking to block the Telsa CEO from quickly completing his planned $44bn takeover of the platform.

In a complaint filed in Delaware Chancery Court on Friday, the Orlando Police Pension Fund said that under Delaware law Mr Musk cannot complete the takeover until at least 2025 unless holders of two-thirds of shares not "owned" by him approved, according to Reuters.

The lawsuit said Mr Musk became an "interested stockholder" after taking a more than 9 per cent Twitter stake, requiring the delay.

Twitter and its board, including Chief Executive Parag Agrawal, are also named as defendants.

The lawsuit seeks to delay the merger's closing until at least 2025, declare that Twitter directors breached their fiduciary duties, and recoup legal fees and costs.

Twitter declined to comment. A lawyer for Mr Musk did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

This isn't the first time Mr Musk's planned takeover has been targeted in court. Last month, a group of Twitter shareholders sued Mr Musk claiming that he failed to disclose his 9.2 per cent stake in the company in the proper timeframe.

Federal law requires investors to inform the Securities and Exchance Commission about stakes exceeding 5 percent within 10 days of the purchase.

According to the earlier suit, Mr Musk hit the 5 per cent milestone on 14 March and thus needed to alert the SEC by 24 March. However, he did not do so until 4 April.

[garbon]

So he has said he would reverse Trump's ban.

[Jacob]

So he has said he would reverse Trump's ban.

As expected, unfortunately.

[CountDeMoney]

Moose and Squirrel will have to eliminate their account.

[DGuller]

Hopefully that would make Twitter go the way of Parler, which would be a good thing for society for many different reasons.