We’re not playing whataboutism right now.
-
-
I personally wouldn’t be caught dead financing either one of them, fwiw. The people I want don’t (and may never) win. However, I’m not going to judge people by how they vote or which political candidates they give money to, because I can’t know all of the reasons.
2 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 3 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @cyantist, @kimmaicutler ja
I do know Reid is historically an honest person and most likely made a mistake here. I doubt he’d ever do this on purpose. I just don’t like the hypocrisy. Had this been Peter, the coverage and hate would have been felt around the world. It’s very politically motivated.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 8 tykkäystä -
Hate? Because he has a multi-year long track record of associating with and/or funding candidates and figures who have directed threats & hateful speech in a way where real violence or harm is possible at individuals or members of specific ethnic or racial groups?
2 vastausta 1 uudelleentwiittaus 5 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @kimmaicutler, @cyantist ja
Anyway, Reid and everyone else in this space, whatever their politics, should just have to openly publish all 501c4, 501c3, PAC and dark money spending, maybe in a yearly statement with some overarching statement about their strategy/intent. Or it should just be very restricted.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 5 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @kimmaicutler, @cyantist ja
Too often these conversations are mired from the outset because distinctions aren't made between tactics & goals. The question isn't who's tribe has the right values — it's always yours, of course — it's whether the home team gets a pass on defecting from the norms of engagement
1 vastaus 1 uudelleentwiittaus 11 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @webdevMason, @kimmaicutler ja
Right, but that's what makes it weird to bring up Thiel in this conversation. Thiel is critiqued for goals, whereas Hoffman is being critiqued on tactics. It isn't a helpful comparison in the context.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 2 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @Sherveen, @kimmaicutler ja
The point, AFAICT, is that we're (increasingly?) unable to have a good faith conversation about norms re: tactics because people actually care more about immediate outcomes than stability/process. "Would you be so forgiving if he wasn't wearing your colors?" is a reasonable Q
2 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 4 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @webdevMason, @Sherveen ja
Maybe it’s hard to talk about norms because someone very overtly wants to erode and destroy democratic norms?
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 3 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @kimmaicutler, @Sherveen ja
Are we talking about the guy who said that female voters lead to liberal outcomes or the guy who funded a false flag operation to manipulate a state election?
3 vastausta 1 uudelleentwiittaus 6 tykkäystä
Vastauksena käyttäjille @webdevMason, @kimmaicutler ja
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
15.12 - 28. jouluk. 2018
0 vastausta
0 uudelleentwiittausta
1 tykkäys
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.