When you refer to certain people as moral exemplars, that necessitates the assignment of credence to them.
-
-
Replying to @mtracey
Their audience is moderate Republicans who already, theoretically, feel that way.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @KPhed
So the big strategy is to point to certain discredited Bush-era hawks as exemplars of moral courage.
3 replies 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @mtracey
You can do that and not endorse a single policy position these people hold. And then go back to war after November.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @KPhed
You can justify anything that way. The lasting damage will have already been done. HRC is rehabilitating neocons' images.
4 replies 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @mtracey
How has she embraced a single neocon or endorsed them in any way? That's ludicrous.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @KPhed
Are you kidding? Robert Kagan has held fundraisers for her campaign. They touted the endorsement of Richard Armitage.
3 replies 1 retweet 7 likes -
Replying to @mtracey
I commend them for not supporting Trump, and will admonish them for nearly everything else they stand for. Not mutually exclusive.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @KPhed
So you are commending Robert Kagan, one of the architects of the worst foreign policy disaster in generations. Noted for the record.
2 replies 0 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @mtracey
No indication that policy influence is part of the deal here. And if some arises, then I'd be extremely fucking pissed about it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
-
-
Replying to @mtracey
We'll see. I'm not worried about atm. Clinton acting here from strength, GOPers out of desperation. No pressure.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
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.