So Charlie, on several occasion you’ve stipulated that Twitter isn’t real life but then you proceed to dedicate a lot of your newsletter’s real estate to highlight and comment on what’s being posted on said Twitter. Have you and the rest of the media ever considered that the fact that you all keep talking and writing about what’s happeni…
So Charlie, on several occasion you’ve stipulated that Twitter isn’t real life but then you proceed to dedicate a lot of your newsletter’s real estate to highlight and comment on what’s being posted on said Twitter. Have you and the rest of the media ever considered that the fact that you all keep talking and writing about what’s happening on Twitter is what’s giving the people you disagree with all their power? And, as you can see, commenting on your favourite progressive whipping horses (such as Elias, Winslow, the Quad, any crazy liberal with an internet connection) isn’t changing their Twitter habits so, what’s the point? Why not try something new for awhile, like ignoring them?
And, isn’t de-escalation a two way street? I believe Liz Cheney said she welcome the overturn of Roe - why isn’t it also incumbent upon her to say, you know what, while I help fight to save democracy, let me refrain from commenting on my policy preferences so that I don’t aggravate my temporary allies? Why is it that only the liberals should refrain from commenting on their policy preferences until after the democracy is saved? To date, you’ve done quite a few newsletters where you chastise the Democrats for pointing out the policy differences that they have with Liz Cheney and Adam K. so one might say that your points on that front have been fully made. So, now it would be nice for you to change things up a bit and write a newsletter (or two) where you advise Cheney and Adam K. to keep quiet for a while about their policy preferences so that they don’t irritate the Dems until after the democracy is saved.
So Charlie, on several occasion you’ve stipulated that Twitter isn’t real life but then you proceed to dedicate a lot of your newsletter’s real estate to highlight and comment on what’s being posted on said Twitter. Have you and the rest of the media ever considered that the fact that you all keep talking and writing about what’s happening on Twitter is what’s giving the people you disagree with all their power? And, as you can see, commenting on your favourite progressive whipping horses (such as Elias, Winslow, the Quad, any crazy liberal with an internet connection) isn’t changing their Twitter habits so, what’s the point? Why not try something new for awhile, like ignoring them?
And, isn’t de-escalation a two way street? I believe Liz Cheney said she welcome the overturn of Roe - why isn’t it also incumbent upon her to say, you know what, while I help fight to save democracy, let me refrain from commenting on my policy preferences so that I don’t aggravate my temporary allies? Why is it that only the liberals should refrain from commenting on their policy preferences until after the democracy is saved? To date, you’ve done quite a few newsletters where you chastise the Democrats for pointing out the policy differences that they have with Liz Cheney and Adam K. so one might say that your points on that front have been fully made. So, now it would be nice for you to change things up a bit and write a newsletter (or two) where you advise Cheney and Adam K. to keep quiet for a while about their policy preferences so that they don’t irritate the Dems until after the democracy is saved.