You're right, all of those things could be true. 98.47% of Twitter contributions to Dems, nothing to see here, move along.
https://mobile.twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/159882999626439065...
https://mobile.twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/159882999626439065...
It does not say "98.47% of Twitter donated to Dems".
Rather it says: "Of the $968,749 contributions made by employees of Twitter, 98.47% of those contributions went to Dems."
It says nothing about the number of people making those donations and thus nothing about the percent of the employees that made those contributions.
(edit)
It is also fun to extend that table to 2016 and before:
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/twitter/totals?id=D00006711...
Contributions by Party of Recipient
Cycle Total Democrats % to Dems Republicans % to Repubs
2022 $185,267 $165,969 99.73% $451 0.27%
2020 $968,749 $909,431 98.47% $14,137 1.53%
2018 $309,394 $295,722 96.38% $11,100 3.62%
2016 $858,596 $589,301 69.07% $263,945 30.93%
2014 $41,300 $23,300 88.59% $3,000 11.41%
2012 $35,529 $34,279 99.28% $250 0.72%
2008 $3,000 $3,000 100.00% $0 0.00%If not, would you please restate "98.47% of Twitter contributions to Dems" to be more representative of what the numbers say.
Your argument is totally dishonest. It's infuriating. What are you saying? That because it's possible 14,137 Twitter employees donated $1 each to the republicans and 1 person donated the other 900K, we can ignore this 98.47% figure entirely?
Second of all, the dollar measurement is not a useless one. It is a measure of wealth, influence, and conviction in the cause. Those Republicans donating $1 probably aren't in charge of censorship. The guy who donated $900K though...
Third, this is Twitter we're talking about. They are headquartered in San Francisco, a very blue city in a very blue state. Their employees are young educated techies. I have friends who work there and have visited their office several times.
Point is, you're not fooling anybody but yourself. Enjoy your motivated reasoning.