,
8 tweets,
4 min read
Read on Twitter
1. Here's a thread on this thread. The @SenFeinstein video needs to be viewed 2 ways, on the optics and the substance. On the optics, there's clearly a gulf between the edited and the full video.
@SenFeinstein 2. All of the conflict occurs after @SenFeinstein agrees she might vote YES on #GND, and spends several minutes engaging substantively on the issue. That's important context that they left out.
@SenFeinstein 3. OTOH, provoked or not, her reaction is open to fair criticism, and they also didn't show the part where she and her staff were like "Nah, you don't need to read this mess out loud, thx." But she then engages them for a very long time more and offers one of them an internship.
@SenFeinstein 4. If optics are your concern, the edited video is terrible, the full video is more of a wash. You can still fairly think she should have been nicer. But substantively, this was a very healthy exchange. The activists made their point, with relative restraint compared to others.
@SenFeinstein 5. And instead of pandering to them and saying "Yes, I might vote for it, thx for coming," which would actually have been condescending, DiFi said she might vote yes, but explained the substance of her critique of #GND.
@SenFeinstein 6. The activists edited their video to make their point, and they posted the full video on their FB page, but they should have linked it in their viral tweets. Those reporting on it should have looked.
@SenFeinstein 7. But substantively, this is a win-win, and on balance, I think DiFi displayed a willingness to engage honestly with a surprise group of activists that I've rarely seen. Imagine how this would've gone at James Inhoffe's office.
@SenFeinstein 8. So I don't think the kids are villains, or DiFi is a villain, but the activists should've posted a link in their viral tweet. DiFi's frustration aside, the 14 minutes of honesty she gave them were the surest sign of respect. This is how a healthy democracy should work.
