Or the guns rights activists barely flinching at "Take the guns first, go through due process second". Just trying to imagine their reaction if the previous officeholder had said that.

The anger at the kneeling protestors is especially revealing considering the debate centered around whether the private NFL could interfere with the expression of the players.

public expression, on the NFL's property, under the NFL's name... Nobody believes Kapernick should be denied the right to say and do what he wants to say and do, but if I take actions contrary to my employer's best interests, on company time and property, my company can't restrict my right to speak, but they can sure tell me I can't do it on their property anymore, and they can terminate my employment as well.

As for the gun issue, nobody in the gun crowd liked that comment from him. Some have even argued they're not going to vote for him going forward as a result. But when the alternative is people who literally believe that the second amendment doesn't exist, doesn't say what it says, and don't believe that the SCOTUS rulings that have come down on it have any effect, what choice do they have?

It’s surprising only if you take them at face value. I don’t and I’m never surprised, it’s all quite predictable actually.

His speech is still there it just has a commentary beside it. Nothing in 230 requires a company to be either neutral or hands off with user content to get protection from civil liabilities for moderation.

You were saying...

I don’t believe that at all. Thiel just wants whatever makes the most money for him. He isn’t looking out for the rest of the country.