Frankly, I wouldn't mind if we saw an end to Trump's tweets. Not because of their content, but because of their impulsiveness, which is a behavior that Twitter's design encourages. Which is cool when it comes to celebrities and such in which it's fun to see what they think about sans filter.

But the president of the United States speaks with the executive authority for an entire nation. It's questionable enough when a company's stock falls because Trump lashes out at them, and means it [0]. But what about the times he makes a typo, or just doesn't have all the info he needs at that moment when his emotions arise? Even asking that he types something to be sent through a Wordpress-powered system would give him the same megaphone, but adding a little more friction so that things that deserved to be trashed/called-out in his voice actually deserve so.

For those who say this amounts to making Trump less "real" of a man...sure. But he's no longer just a man, he's the chief executive of the world's greatest power. He gave up the privilege of "just sayin what I think" for the privilege of being able to unilaterally launch a nuclear war. Keep in mind that there are no checks and balances against this power -- it is utterly unilateral: http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2016/11/18/the-president-and-...

Giving up frictionless communication in 140-character-sized comments seems like a reasonable thing to pass on, given the many extra responsibilities he has, and the extra weight each of his words have.

[0] http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/trump-threaten...

There's no rational reason why a PotUS should be tweeting random impulsive thoughts to the world at large. Very few potential positives, a lot of potential negatives. It's pretty obvious that Trump should not be doing this, but alas, rationality went out of the window when he was voted into office.

> But the president of the United States speaks with the executive authority for an entire nation. It's questionable enough when a company's stock falls because Trump lashes out at them, and means it [0].

The share prices of the companies Trump has bashed have rebounded within the same day, so this is incredibly misleading to say.

Not that I disagree with the core point of your post.

But that is what people want! They want a president with human impulses (Or at least one who pretends to have them -you can never be too sure with Trump.). People want someone who says whatever he wants to say whenever he wants to say it. No holding back for anyone. They don't want dignity and restraint. That's why he won and it's still something a lot of people just don't understand.

You do realize he's not the one posting there? Neither was Obama. These accounts are ran by teams...

That would go against most public accounts of how Trump has been using his phone for tweeting.

For one thing, Obama's personal account (i.e. not @POTUS, but @BarackObama) explicitly says in its profile: "This account is run by Organizing for Action staff. Tweets from the President are signed -bo. [0]

No such disclaimer has been made about Trump's account, which tweets with the same characteristics and tone as it did well before his current presidential campaign [1]. You're right, though, that Trump's team does tweet for him on occasion. Either that, or Trump, who is famously not a computer user, has mastered the art of using two different mobile operating systems [2]

[0] http://imgur.com/a/ZGyzo

[1] https://github.com/sashaperigo/Trump-Tweets

[2] http://varianceexplained.org/r/trump-tweets/

Trump uses Twitter but he didn't invite them to the tech summit reportedly for not creating a special trending tag for him.

Trump enjoys being treated like royalty. I doubt he has loyalty to Twitter and would jump ship to another company that puts him on a pedestal. He would enjoy seeing the millions of customers who follow him.

> Trump uses Twitter but he didn't invite them to the tech summit reportedly for not creating a special trending tag for him.

The word reportedly is really interesting. Was this reported by the same media that was wrong about just about everything this election cycle? Could they somehow be wrong about this too?

PS: Twitter is smaller than the other companies and is perceived as a failing (or at best stagnant) company. While Twitter is an important company online, if you were inviting the biggest companies in tech, there's some logic to not inviting them to that conference.

Yeah that's a fishy reportedly. Better to look at the transcript. Trump: "I won’t tell you the hundreds of calls we’ve had asking to come to this meeting, and I will say, and I will say Peter was sort of saying, ’No, that company’s too small.’ And these are monster companies."

My guess is Peter vetoed Twitter, for sensible reasons.

Thiel has long been contemptuous of Twitter's management:

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/twitter-executives-smoke-t...

> he didn't invite them to the tech summit reportedly for not creating a special trending tag for him. Trump enjoys being treated like royalty.

That's unfair to say. Trump's own Director of Digital Advertising explained[0] how Trump's campaign signed deals with Twitter, which Twitter didn't honor, without offering a refund.

Sources connected to Trump[1] say he's considering an anti-trust investigation on them because of their role in this election, which includes censoring pro-Sanders and pro-Trump hashtags, and biased censorship of people like Milo.

[0]: https://medium.com/@garycoby/twitter-restricts-trump-eb7e48c... [1]: https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/798765870172368896

> another company

What other company offers a similar broadcast style approach for text content and doesn't require real name registration?

r/The_Donald or /pol?

Really though, Trump would fit right in on 4chan.

Nah, 4chan is the opposite of the kind of forum he craves. Everyone is a nameless faceless anon, so unless Trump starts leaking things about himself, he's just another boring racist troll in a crowd of boring racist trolls (just maybe 5x the average age).

He could use a tripcode. /pol/ would literally explode.

Why is not requiring "real name registration" a prerequisite?

Regardless, the company doesn't have to exist today. Someone could be working on creating the new company, as we type.

whitehouse.gov?

twitter was too small to be there, he wanted companies with money?

Friday, January 20, 2017 WASHINGTON, D.C. -- President Donald Trump, as his first act in office, announces plans to nationalize ailing tech giant Twitter so that it may forever remain the communication channel that "helps keep America great."