EPTOn July 21 2016 09:18 Sent. wrote:
Why does Clinton end some of her tweets with "-H"?
Why does Clinton end some of her tweets with "-H"?
cause she writes those
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4365
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
CorsairHero
Canada9491 Posts
cause she writes those | ||
|
oBlade
United States6677 Posts
On July 21 2016 09:14 Plansix wrote: Who did they advocate to be executed for treason? Bush? Didn't you just post that the Trump campaign disavowed what that one guy personally said? On July 21 2016 09:16 FiWiFaKi wrote: Say what you will, Trump has been doing reasonably in the polls compared to both the 2008 and 2012 nominees. People don't really have perspective. The last time the Republican Party won the popular vote for the Presidency without holding the White House was 1980. It's been downhill, and this is the party realigning. | ||
Nakajin
Canada8991 Posts
Edit: ok so introducing the next speaker, that was still weird, isn't space exploration suppose to be a global effort. I tough everyone had agree that space race was kind of pointless, didn't mean we collectively should not reinvest in space of course. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 21 2016 09:35 oBlade wrote: Didn't you just post that the Trump campaign disavowed what that one guy personally said? People don't really have perspective. The last time the Republican Party won the popular vote for the Presidency without holding the White House was 1980. It's been downhill, and this is the party realigning. Call me when the guy is fired for it. Until then they are just buying time hoping no one brings it up again. | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
Not saying they're not issues, but really, to me, you've got to go further than to say were going to make everyone equal and take Trump quotes out of context and continuously attack them. Anyway, I think it's extremely easy to support someone like Hillary, but takes a bit more to appreciate the republican view... There's always that split perspective, that it's old fashioned people set in their ways, or people who have experienced the world fully and have wisdom. I used to think it was the former, but I think it's far more in between than people like to give it credit for... People like Bernie had major support from people who have not experienced the real world yet, and it'd be neat to have some study to find a breakdown of those reasons. Anyway, I don't know, I was just under the impression that the Democrats were still focusing on a bit more substantive campaign, but there's literally nothing in that twitter anyway. | ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
On July 21 2016 09:43 FiWiFaKi wrote: 50% of Hillary's twitter is complaining about Trump, 20% is motivation quotes, 20% is on LGBT, 5% is saying you deserve equal rights (minorities and women), 5% about gun rights. Not saying they're not issues, but really, to me, you've got to go further than to say were going to make everyone equal and take Trump quotes out of context and continuously attack them. I don't know, I was just under the impression that the Democrats were still focusing on a bit more substantive campaign, but there's literally nothing in that twitter anyway. It's twitter. Serious, substantive discussions about politics are hard with just 140 characters available. If you want that you probably have to look elsewhere no matter of party you're looking at | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On July 21 2016 09:43 FiWiFaKi wrote: 50% of Hillary's twitter is complaining about Trump, 20% is motivation quotes, 20% is on LGBT, 5% is saying you deserve equal rights (minorities and women), 5% about gun rights. Not saying they're not issues, but really, to me, you've got to go further than to say were going to make everyone equal and take Trump quotes out of context and continuously attack them. Anyway, I think it's extremely easy to support someone like Hillary, but takes a bit more to appreciate the republican view... There's always that split perspective, that it's old fashioned people set in their ways, or people who have experienced the world fully and have wisdom. I used to think it was the former, but I think it's far more in between than people like to give it credit for... People like Bernie had major support from people who have not experienced the real world yet, and it'd be neat to have some study to find a breakdown of those reasons. Anyway, I don't know, I was just under the impression that the Democrats were still focusing on a bit more substantive campaign, but there's literally nothing in that twitter anyway. It's Twitter. By definition, it's impossible to have anything substantive there. | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On July 21 2016 09:47 Toadesstern wrote: It's twitter. Serious, substantive discussions about politics are hard with just 140 characters available. If you want that you probably have to look elsewhere no matter of party you're looking at I would just think that there would be link to studies and articles, you know. I know it's tough to do with so little space, but both parties are running populist politics to the extreme. To me it's just kind of the camp you're in... If you stick to the democrats, it's easy to self-rationalize it, but I think it's also the same when you're getting fed republican media. Kind of reminds me of the argument of a kid being raised religious debating religion with a kid raised otherwise. Ugh, I've been trying to convey the Republican message recently, because I think it's very legitimate, just a shitty few give it a bad name (and some aspects of it aren't good, true)... And I was doing it because I felt like they lacked a voice of reason (even though their arguments are often valid) but seriously, in a way where I can try to be as unbiased as I can - Democrats are no better. I guess they really switched tone to play Trumps game instead of trying to play it like Rubio, as they saw rationalizing and actually arguing things made it worse. But wow, it's just constant attacks from Hillary, and saying the standard feel good stuff like everyone is equal, parents shouldn't have to pay x for childcare, etc. It's much like Trump saying we need to secure our borders, win again, etc. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 21 2016 09:50 FiWiFaKi wrote: I would just think that there would be link to studies and articles, you know. I know it's tough to do with so little space, but both parties are running populist politics to the extreme. To me it's just kind of the camp you're in... If you stick to the democrats, it's easy to self-rationalize it, but I think it's also the same when you're getting fed republican media. Like...that isn't how Twitter works or the audience. That's like going to snap chat for high quality photos with good shot composition. | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On July 21 2016 09:55 Plansix wrote: Like...that isn't how Twitter works or the audience. That's like going to snap chat for high quality photos with good shot composition. Alright, I don't use twitter much, so I don't know. But generally, to keep up to news with Trump, all you need to do is visit his twitter lmao, so maybe I had a different perspective of how different candidates use it. | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
GGTeMpLaR
United States7226 Posts
He brought the fire | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On July 21 2016 10:03 GGTeMpLaR wrote: Pastor just dropped the MLK on the RNC to standing ovations Loving this speech and the energy. | ||
|
Nakajin
Canada8991 Posts
| ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
| ||
|
Introvert
United States5082 Posts
| ||
Falling
Canada11607 Posts
Would need some international options as well- I swing right of centre, but on the Canadian spectrum. | ||
|
Introvert
United States5082 Posts
| ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On July 21 2016 10:14 Falling wrote: Would need some international options as well- I swing right of centre, but on the Canadian spectrum. Everyone's standing should be expressed in coordinates on the political compass: https://www.politicalcompass.org/ Do take the test if you haven't already. | ||
| ||
