The New York Times gives up their legitimacy to attack Trump. It must be embarrassing to work there today. https://twitter.com/codyave/status/732194238742462464 …
-
-
you said it correctly Trump could be bad, maybe even very bad HC will be very bad, maybe even devastated
-
that does not change the fact that liyng won't make things better.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I've already read your opinion about candidates, but your actions talk in a different way. And this post is an example.
-
I focus on persuasion. Only one candidate is good at it. I can't change that.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
also, if we can NEVER know which one is worst... Why don't we choose our politians randomly? Or let a machine do that job.
-
Perhaps we should have a random sampling of citizens making decisions like year (or many) year jury duty?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This I agree with.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Epistemologically, we don't know with absolute certainty who will win, Hillary or Trump.
-
that's right, but we can try to know wich choise would be the best. That's democracy. Even if the choise is a third party.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Scott says that, but isn't predicting a landslide a prediction?
-
As in, seeing the future
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.