Anonymous wrote:I don't get all the hate on Symone. She didn't assume it was OK. She asked. And was told yes. And proceeded accordingly. You can say she should have pushed back more and assumed she was given bad advice, but that seems a stretch to me. Why all the vindictiveness about this?
Anonymous wrote:I don't get all the hate on Symone. She didn't assume it was OK. She asked. And was told yes. And proceeded accordingly. You can say she should have pushed back more and assumed she was given bad advice, but that seems a stretch to me. Why all the vindictiveness about this?
Anonymous wrote:I don't get all the hate on Symone. She didn't assume it was OK. She asked. And was told yes. And proceeded accordingly. You can say she should have pushed back more and assumed she was given bad advice, but that seems a stretch to me. Why all the vindictiveness about this?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I love that Symone will be attending the debate and live tweeting her responses from the audience. That technique needs to be incorporated into an SNL sketch.
This just might be worth joining Twitter for . . .![]()
I think it would be distracting from hearing the other candidates' responses and/or the question being asked. Can't she just tweet them or post them immediately after the debate - in full answers rather than tweets? This seems like a way to participate without being able to participate....especially if she's going to be in the same room, for cryin' out loud. It also indicates she's not completely listening to everything her opponents are saying. You can't tweet and listen at the same time. It's coming off a bit arrogant or self-centered, the more I think about it.
Arrogant and self- centered, like the person who doesn’t think the Hatch Act applies to her even though every other Fed in the county has followed it?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I love that Symone will be attending the debate and live tweeting her responses from the audience. That technique needs to be incorporated into an SNL sketch.
This just might be worth joining Twitter for . . .![]()
I think it would be distracting from hearing the other candidates' responses and/or the question being asked. Can't she just tweet them or post them immediately after the debate - in full answers rather than tweets? This seems like a way to participate without being able to participate....especially if she's going to be in the same room, for cryin' out loud. It also indicates she's not completely listening to everything her opponents are saying. You can't tweet and listen at the same time. It's coming off a bit arrogant or self-centered, the more I think about it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I love that Symone will be attending the debate and live tweeting her responses from the audience. That technique needs to be incorporated into an SNL sketch.
This just might be worth joining Twitter for . . .![]()
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I love that Symone will be attending the debate and live tweeting her responses from the audience. That technique needs to be incorporated into an SNL sketch.
This just might be worth joining Twitter for . . .![]()
Anonymous wrote:I love that Symone will be attending the debate and live tweeting her responses from the audience. That technique needs to be incorporated into an SNL sketch.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Having been on a committee with both Priddy and Sims, from my experience there is a huge difference between the two in terms of engagement and thoughtful input.
Priddy is well-informed, listens and engages with speakers and gives meaningful feedback. He seems to have really upped his involvement since his last run (when I was not compelled to vote for him.)
I don’t feel the same level of care and engagement from Sims. When I heard he was running, I was shocked because, to me, he seems checked out of the committee. From what I have seen, I do not think he would be an effective SB member.
Yes, it's weird, because he does put in the time with the volunteering with kids and stuff, and he applies for all these committees, but he doesn't engage with whatever the issues are. He doesn't offer any unique perspective or help the group problem solve. How is he going to be on a five-person board? I think he's going to be like James Lander, grandstanding about a narrow range of issues but otherwise not really helping them sort out policy.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Having been on a committee with both Priddy and Sims, from my experience there is a huge difference between the two in terms of engagement and thoughtful input.
Priddy is well-informed, listens and engages with speakers and gives meaningful feedback. He seems to have really upped his involvement since his last run (when I was not compelled to vote for him.)
I don’t feel the same level of care and engagement from Sims. When I heard he was running, I was shocked because, to me, he seems checked out of the committee. From what I have seen, I do not think he would be an effective SB member.
Yes, it's weird, because he does put in the time with the volunteering with kids and stuff, and he applies for all these committees, but he doesn't engage with whatever the issues are. He doesn't offer any unique perspective or help the group problem solve. How is he going to be on a five-person board? I think he's going to be like James Lander, grandstanding about a narrow range of issues but otherwise not really helping them sort out policy.