Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Say what Nancy Pelosi? [View all]BainsBane
(53,031 posts)137. That tweet contains a link to an article
That article is the context.
Those who took on the arduous task of reading even the first 200 of those 500 words immediately saw the title was misleading. It's unfortunate Tribe did not.
For some reason the OP has refused to acknowledge the error, and for some reason you demonstrate no concern with the subject matter.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
221 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW. What she said isn't "TERRIBLE", nor did she misspeak -
George II
Jul 2017
#19
This is a good illustration of the mistaken power of the Tweet. Tribe should be embarrassed.
Eyeball_Kid
Jul 2017
#205
she meant it isn't important that we estimate chances of winning and that she is speaker
wasupaloopa
Jul 2017
#25
Oh my, that is simply SCANDALOUS! BRING OUT THE HAIR SHIRT! No, wait - that's too good.
beam me up scottie
Jul 2017
#163
Actually, we can't be too careful when it comes to people who violate the spirit
Ninsianna
Jul 2017
#168
We don't know what Tribe did if he realized his error. The error here can easily be fixed, but....
George II
Jul 2017
#206
Yeah, well I read and watched the video and only those looking to criticize will find that she said
Demsrule86
Jul 2017
#191
No she didn't...she was talking about being speaker...some are so transparent.
Demsrule86
Jul 2017
#190
The Hill distorted that intentionally. She was saying that ESTIMATING the chances of a Democratic
still_one
Jul 2017
#8
You have to wonder if some hate winning...she is doing a great job and the attacks ramp up...do
Demsrule86
Jul 2017
#192
It appears to me that she was responding instead to whether she would run for Speaker again.
spooky3
Jul 2017
#4
She was asked was to estimate the chances that Democrats win back the House"? She
still_one
Jul 2017
#5
exactly. She wasn't going to play the "estimating game", but focus on winning on the issues. This
still_one
Jul 2017
#9
Sadly I'm not surprised when what a strong woman says is distorted any more...
WePurrsevere
Jul 2017
#21
I think the problem is The Hill, which has been known to exploit misleading headlines
still_one
Jul 2017
#27
Yes it's all very concerning. I'm concerned that more people aren't properly concerned.
beam me up scottie
Jul 2017
#145
A highly deceptive tweet. To the point of dishonest. No effort in correction. Transparent. nt.
Weekend Warrior
Jul 2017
#203
"Go away now"? Sure, you posted a tweet, with a very subjective subject line....
George II
Jul 2017
#100
Perhaps a more appropriate "question" might have been "What does Pelosi mean?"
George II
Jul 2017
#112
Why did you leave out part of the definition - the very first part?
beam me up scottie
Jul 2017
#116
I suggested maybe he didn't want to be bullied, that's not speaking for someone, she.
beam me up scottie
Jul 2017
#117
Looks like I was right, he didn't want to be bullied. So now who's spinning?
beam me up scottie
Jul 2017
#133
You haven't tried to engage anyone who has posted or talked about the context.
muriel_volestrangler
Jul 2017
#180
Once again, you are refusing to address any of the well-justified criticisms of your thread
muriel_volestrangler
Jul 2017
#212
The Hill's headline was DISHONEST and you chose to highlight it for some reason.
pnwmom
Jul 2017
#118
I saw a tweet by Lawrence Tribe, found it interesting and posted it here.
Kingofalldems
Jul 2017
#121
You saw a tweet attacking a Democratic leader which if you had watched the video, you would
Demsrule86
Jul 2017
#197
What are your "honest" concerns with respect to what was posted in the op? nt.
Weekend Warrior
Jul 2017
#201
A messenger who editorialized an already slanted headline to deliberately mislead. nt
procon
Jul 2017
#209
"et tu brute". No. Not happy that The Hill distorted what was actually said in the interview,
still_one
Jul 2017
#36
I am guilty of my own share of assumptions. One thing I know is that everyone here realizes how
still_one
Jul 2017
#41
When the source is The Hill it's best to delve a bit deeper than their off the cuff reporting.
herding cats
Jul 2017
#32
But you still haven't edited your OP to point out that what Tribe thinks is incorrect.
George II
Jul 2017
#49
Yes, he was wrong. That should have been pointed out in the OP, but I won't tell you what to post.
George II
Jul 2017
#58
Yes, the discussion has shown Laurence was wrong.. what more discussion can we have...
JHan
Jul 2017
#155
Saying "but you still haven't..." is not telling you what to post. "Do not tell me what to post" is.
muriel_volestrangler
Jul 2017
#181
The word "unimportant" was appropriate since she was referring to being Speaker
George II
Jul 2017
#88
The Hill deliberately misrepresented her answer. She didn't say that winning the House
pnwmom
Jul 2017
#141
It's weird that some people here seem to be enjoying the deliberate distortion,
Ninsianna
Jul 2017
#173
Really? Awfully active so late at night, but I guess it's a workday somewhere on the globe.
Ninsianna
Jul 2017
#176
Did you read the article? She is talking about whether she is speaker or not...Gosh some never
Demsrule86
Jul 2017
#189
There is nothing to clarify. What she was referring to what was unimportant was whether she
still_one
Jul 2017
#215