i read the quotation marks as highlighting the absurdity of using that term, as opposed to accurately calling them white supremacists
-
-
Well most of them follow you so why don’t you ask them
-
Just a pathetically bad faith attack that doesn't even warrant a response. I've always engaged you respectfully but apparently that's become impossible on Twitter
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
The president of the United States is giving them 'exactly what they wanted'... a voice in a seat of power. Or did i miss your reflection on how their ideals have wound up in our immigration policy and on the fact that Stephen Miller and Steve King still have jobs.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
what is "ideologically sense" about neo-nazi? it's a perfectly straightforward label that accurately describes the people in question.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Because ignoring them and underestimating them has worked so well in the past.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Dude, they have the White House; they are not insignificant in power, even if they are insignificant in number.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
You are going to go wild when you find out how the president of the United Stares has been behaving.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Think real problem is use of "hate groups". Explicit white supremacists should be called "Explicit white supremacists". They should not be called "hate groups" because virtually the entire US political apparatus runs on hate. That's largely what maintains the duopoly.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Michael I’m sorry I also did this but i hope you understand it’s close to home. Violent, organized white supremacists—with clear ties to mainstream Right, & sympathizers in the White House what they want is not being labeled as such, like “trolls” or “activists,” glossy profiles
-
adam johnson blocked me on a dime after what? 1 interaction, because I asked why he’s going after human rights groups doing their jobs, as fostering conflict. i.e. he called them “human rights scolds” re: North Korea.
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.