Catching up on how this became a thing while I was gone.
Biggest critique is it should‘ve been labeled “private,” even though we’d said prior it was closed to press.
Genuine Q?: how should we label a free campaign event, open to all, that’s a sanctuary space? Still private? twitter.com/mattyglesias/s
Conversation
Replying to
Not trying to make a mountain out of a molehill, but we are genuinely trying to create environments of where our constituents feel comfortable expressing honestly & engaging in discourse.
Usually people pay $5k/plate for that, but we were trying to make that enviro for all.
172
494
4,343
To be honest, the event was very successful.
People were much more comfortable sharing their personal issues with healthcare, housing, and immigration. It was a safe + powerful environment for change.
My apologies if the situation upset or alarmed journalists or constituents.
357
365
4,022
Replying to
If you would like ideas, something along the lines of "A private event reserved for members of the community"
1
13
Replying to
If you close it, bad optics. I would say compromise with one pool reporter from the local area you are in. Would that work?
1
1
4
Replying to
Genuine answer: You should allow reporters in. Democracy doesn't have secrets. If you normalise that, you're no better than Trump.
45
10
73
Show replies
Replying to
You did nothing wrong. Press and democrats making a big deal out of this are making fools of themselves.
Trying to connect it with Trumps attacks on press is absurd. You are trying to protect the identity of marginalized constituents from being targeted by Trump admin cruelty.
3
2
43
Replying to
Nope. Have private meetings with your marginalized supporters. An open and free event should be open to the press. #thefourthestate was designed to put a check on politics. Obey the #Constitution if you going for public office.
4
2
17
Show replies