Great, so there’s no need to make up garbage takes on Thiel, since there’s plenty of legitimate, evidence-supported takes on him they could have gone with.

Any article which makes stuff up to support the cause is bad for the cause.

See, that’s a much more interesting take, with actual evidence. The article should have been about that. As is, the article is purely baseless fearmongering, and we don’t need that. If you’re going to write about how Trump is a threat to women, use the waterfall of evidence available for that.

I have no particular reason to believe he is being sincere. But, “Right-Wing Plot to Prevent Women From Voting Advances”? Hmm??

Haha, fair enough. I just think it’s bad journalism to play so loose.

Indeed, I have no love for Thiel. I just object to mischaracterization of my enemies; it makes it easier to criticize us.

I have read and reread those quotes three times. Where is he questioning the notion of women’s suffrage?

I am disappointed this article resorts to paraphrasing a paraphrase of Thiel’s essay rather than the original essay directly. Journalism! The paraphrase makes him sound like he’s intentionally being overtly misognyistic. In the original essay, he provocatively blames women’s suffrage for making it hard to get libertarian policies passed, and and afterward clarifies he obviously doesn’t mean women’s suffrage should be revoked.

Yeah, I too think that women’s suffrage resulted in different policies being voted in than would have otherwise. Similarly, if white men couldn’t vote, we’d see a lot of advances I’d like – but I don’t want anyone disenfranchised.

This article just says: “In 2009, Thiel said libertarianism would have more sway if only men voted. Also, Trump is requiring extra documentation in order to vote, disenfranchising many voters.” It does not explain what the plot in the headline is, or how Trump’s XO impacts women in particular.

Thiel may or may not be a misogynist (I have no idea), but can we at least keep our criticisms grounded in reality please?

I think CA probably wouldn’t vote to join Canada. But Washington state might.

If Trump wants us to have a referendum on joining the U.S. as the 51st state, we should ask him in return for a binding referendum in any one state of our choice on joining Canada. Which state should we choose?

is this a reference to something

and women