Curiously enough, a different viral moment from the same LGBTIQCAP event is getting a lot of traction in my very heavily normalcy-friendly social media sphere.
A black man(?) compares mispronouncing his name to violence
You can’t make this shit up, folks.
What?
What do you consider normal?
Is your community unfriendly to anyone that doesn’t fit that description?
Sounds like another name for bigotry-friendly to me.
Well, you know… Normal.
It’s where normal people talk about normal things, not some made-up idiocy…
For example, in this normal community of ours, we have a guy named ‘Conner’.
And a lot of times (more often than not, in fact), people call him ‘Connor’.
I don’t how he survives this daily onslaught of violence, but somehow he does.
But putting that aside, what do you guys think about Pocahontas being caught lying again about her past?
You think this new story will get more traction, then her previous attempts at cultural appropriation?
You are not worth one more second of my time.
My apologies, if you have been triggered.
I just know a waste of time when I see it.
Please don’t waste one more second of your time, as you previously indicated.
First you intentionally misgender a person.
Next, race based derogatory remarks.
And finally, just trolling.
This is a warning for trolling. 2 warnings now in 9 days does not bode well for your continued posting privileges. I recommend you evaluate the rhetoric and manner in which you engage in debate because the current course will not be allowed to continue.
[/moderating]
In the future, please report rather than respond.
[/moderating]
It’s not just Obama’s strength but Warren’s weakness. Less than a year ago, 538 found she ranked dead last among all incumbents in the House and Senate for her electoral weakness compared to the expectation for a generic candidate of the same party in the state or district. Second-worst was an indicted Republican congressman who successfully fought off the GOP’s attempt to take him off the ballot.
She’s underrated on camera, IMO. She’s very, very sharp. Great comedic timing, too, for a politician.
Her natural inclination is to have a “resting face” that is not smiling or friendly. You can see in clips like that how she has had media training where they are really trying to beat it into her to smile, but it looks so forced and strained. It’s not naturally twinkling in her eyes, like Obama, Biden, or Harris. She is a policy wonk who is doing her damnedest to approximate being a politician, but it’s not all that great an approximation—and I really think the people who love her just love that she’s a progressive policy wonk. That’s the type of person they think really ought to be president, and maybe in some abstract sense that’s true but this is politics.
I used to think she was just a wonk, but she’s very sharp on camera, IMO.
Sharp in a high school or college forensics way. Not in a sunny, charismatic politician way. Contrast her with Booker for instance.
Booker?!? The wild-eyed demagogue?
Warren’s “joke” is not really very funny. And why would she not just assume, but make a point of stating her assumption, that homophobic religious dogma is more likely to be espoused by a man?
It’s been my experience that the religious right and their bigotry is propped up by women adherents just as much as men.
That’s a pretty minor nitpick though. In the grand scheme of things my overall expectation of her (if nominated) remains the same: she will be severely thrown off her game in the debates when Trump assails her whole “very serious woman talking about very serious issues” posture with his relentlessly dirty, insulting debate style; audiences will howl with laughter and the resulting publicity generated by the various soundbites from the debates will not only energize the Republican electorate but potentially expand it.
Yes, it is a scientific fact that religiosity is more prevalent in women than men. I feel very lucky to have found a wife who is as much as an atheist as I am (which I discovered even my non-religious mother is not, as she told me she thought there must be “something” after you die). I don’t know if the gender tendencies go the same way when talking about very conservative religiosity (since there are plenty of women who just believe in New Agey woo or some kind of vague spiritualism, while asserting that all religions are equally valid even though that doesn’t make a lick of sense), but it would not surprise me.
That’s…not how I would describe him. :eek:
Now Warren is getting undeserved praise in my opinion for using a Facebook ad to attack Mark Zuckerberg. Yes, there’s a subsection of Democratic voters who spend their time bashing Facebook, Apple, Amazon, and Starbucks, but I think she’s got those locked up except the ones that are hopelessly Bernie. Bit, the ad, along with the marriage one liner seems to be to be too clever by half. Or perhaps it’s just my Twitter bubble and the Warren stans are starting to strut a bit more as she gains momentum.
…it was freaking hilarious. The crowd erupted with laughter. Professional comedians have been lauding her comedic timing. The first line was funny enough: but the pause, then the even funnier tag, then the straight face was pure comedy gold. You might not have personally found it funny, and comedy is subjective, but the joke definitely resonated with its target audience.
The Trump regime are spending over a million dollars a week with Facebook telling liesand spreading propaganda directly to the eyeballs of those who are most susceptible to those lies.
“Facebook’s head of global elections policy, Katie Harbath, said that “if a claim is made directly by a politician on their Page, in an ad or on their website, it is considered direct speech and ineligible for our third-party fact checking program.””
Do you know who Katie Harbath is? She was former Chief Digital Strategist for the National Republican Senatorial Committee and former Deputy eCampaign Director for Rudy Giuliani Presidential Committee. The person in charge of Facebook’s global elections policy had been working in some capacity with Republican organizations since 2003.
Facebook played a huge role in the election of Donald Trump in 2016. This is not “undeserved praise.” Every single candidate should be calling this out.
This isn’t “bashing Facebook.” This isn’t “woke politics.” This is calling out a company that has opened up its platform to the President of the United States to use it for unfiltered distribution of propaganda and lies.
Facebook is not only welcoming lies in political ads and content, it’s also lying about that policy:
Warren’s highlighting of this Facebook malfeasance is appropriate and useful for everyone —everyone except Donald Trump, of course.