[Tweeters] candidates notes/evaluation

Devorah the Ornithologist birdologist at gmail.com
Wed Mar 4 11:26:00 PST 2020

actually, twitter does not have a problem with political views, but it
(supposedly) DOES have a problem with "fake news". that said, my complaints
about the current resident of the white house making false and misleading
statements on twitter have been received by twitter, but are being ignored.
i guess rules are only meant for us little people.

GrrlScientist | @GrrlScientist <https://twitter.com/GrrlScientist>
grrlscientist at gmail.com
Blogs: Forbes <http://www.forbes.com/sites/grrlscientist/>
sunt lacrimae rerum et mentem mortalia tangunt. [Virgil, Aeneid]

On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 7:26 AM littlebirder <littlebirder at comcast.net>

> This is very interesting information in light of what is going on now.


> We all love birds (and other creatures) in this group so I find this as

> useful as where a bird is being seen.




> Sherry


> Sherry Hagen

> Vancouver, WA

> littlebirder at comcast.net

> Verizon, Samsung Galaxy S9+



> -------- Original message --------

> From: Will's Email <yekramw at gmail.com>

> Date: 3/1/20 8:31 PM (GMT-08:00)

> To: Mark Egger <m.egger at comcast.net>

> Cc: tweeters at u.washington.edu

> Subject: Re: [Tweeters] candidates notes/evaluation


> I thought tweeters was supposed to NOT expound political views!


> Why are these people NOT being BANISHED from tweeters???


> Will Markey

> General Adjuster

> Cell - 253-569-8455

> Sent from my IPhone


> > On Mar 1, 2020, at 19:05, Mark Egger <m.egger at comcast.net> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Diann and all,

> >

> > I’m a very long term member of the Center for Biological Diversity, the

> outfit that published this ranking you shared, but I am extremely

> displeased with their analysis and think they are portraying very

> misleading information, clearly favoring Sanders. After I read their

> rating, I went to the League of Conservation Voters site and looked at the

> LIFE-TIME voting records for Sanders, Klobuchar, and Warren. Of these three

> senators, all with extensive voting records, Sanders actually was the

> LOWEST, with 92%, Amy Klobuchar had 94%, and Warren was the best, with 98%!

> So based on actual cast votes, both Klobuchar AND Warren have better

> records on conservation and the environment than Sanders. Yet Sanders gets

> an A, Warren a B, and Klobuchar an F from the CBD??? So how does that work?

> In my view some folks at the CBD have decided to try to help Bernie with

> opinion-based “ratings”, rather than actual facts. That being said, in

> terms of conservation and environmental policies, ANY of those three or any

> other candidate in the race will be an astronomical improvement over the

> current regime…

> >

> > Mark

> > _______________________________________________

> > Tweeters mailing list

> > Tweeters at u.washington.edu

> > http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/pipermail/tweeters/attachments/20200304/67e3a3fa/attachment.html>

More information about the Tweeters mailing list