https://subium.com/profile/jacobtlevy.bsky.social/post/3l4a2mbqpqy2j
In the discourse, a heckler's veto is a situation in which a party who disagrees with a speaker's message is able to unilaterally trigger events that result in the speaker being silenced. For example, a heckler can disrupt a speech to the point that the speech is canceled.
How is Vance - despite his being a well educated idiot - not describing a heckler's veto?
I've never heard this term before, but I think the key phrase is "party who disagrees with a speaker's message." Presumably, the people calling in bomb threats are on the same page as Vance, so they're not hecklers, and any pressure on Vance to stop is an unintended side effect. If people were calling in bomb threats to Vance's rallies, that'd be a heckler's veto.
Ultimately, though, who the fuck cares. Jesus Christ, libs are insufferable.
Oh, okay, I wasn't following the fact that the bomb threats were also coming from his camp.
Oh, I thought people were calling bomb threats to Vance so it was a heckler's veto.
I was so confused reading this.
It's hard not to when your platform is for nothing to fundamentally change
fixating on anything meaningful might threaten their position
that's a part of why everything has to be means-tested to shit
Bluesky sucks so much ass. It's just the tut tutting scolds from Twitter without weird twitter or any fascists to yell at.
iirc you can't even dunk on people because once they block you their followers can't see your replies
Libs created a back to brunch site where republicans and leftists are quickly booted out.
