>Elizabeth Warren gets more twitter favorites talking about Trump than Trump does talking about Elizabeth
Should we be scared?
>>73845027
she deserves it.
she spends more time tweeting about trump than anything else.
>>73845027
How many of those followers can/will vote?
Now think, what kind of people use twitter.
>>73845027
>>73845027
>Trump's tweet about Taco Bowls gets more twitter likes than Elizabeth Warren's tweet calling him a racist
Stay scared
>>73845138
>1/32
Wonder what a dna test would say.
is this bitch autistic or something? a week long twitter attack is a bit much
>>73845027
Status signaling. Those who click favorite do it as an alternative to taking action in real life, so there is nothing to fear.
Who fucking cares about this idiot?
How is this any different than anything anyone else on the left is saying?
People who take her position are the biggest cowards alive. They take ZERO risk saying the things they say, the way they say them.
>Grrrr Trump, such and such platitude to women and mintorities. I'm such a good person.
Fucking SHUT THE FUCK UP.
>>73845027
>i i im not alone
>>73845257
There was some article about her having autism I read
apparently she had no friends at whatever Ivy league university she went to.
It was lost
>>73845096
Seriously, this.
Warren voted on eight fucking things this year so far. EIGHT FUCKING VOTES! When people get frustrated that Congress doesn't do anything... this is what America is talking about!
https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/141272/elizabeth-warren
>>73845257
she thinks shes getting good press
>>73845027
>twitter favorites are now representative of the voting habits of the population
Twitter doesn't mean jack shit. The favorites could be coming from bot accounts for all you know. However, given the kind of person that uses twitter I'm not surprised anyway.
>implying likes of hired indian shillary matter
>>73845027
UHHH
EXCUSE ME, BUT YOU DON'T DARE TALK SHIT ABOUT A NATIVE AMERICAN PRINCESS THAT WAY.
>>73845027
What, in total? Because she made like 30 more tweets than he did.
>>73845027
>Starting a sentence with 'And'
Isn't she supposed to be intelligent?
>>73845526
I'm kind of relieved that Congress is inept. Think of all the awful shit they'd pass if they could figure out how.
>>73845027
No worry. Most of the favorites are from dumb degenerated woman (average Twitter's users)
>>73845027
That libshits tend use social media platforms like Twitter
What I love about this election is that everyone is learning that these politicians are really incompetent.
>>73845982
For many of us, our English lessons at school were marked by the stern admonition: ‘Never begin a sentence with a conjunction!’. I was taught this ‘rule’ as a grammatical diktat back in the 1970s, and a quick trawl of the Net shows that the same advice is still being handed down to English students on many websites.
And yet perfectly respectable writers employ this disputed usage, and have done since Anglo-Saxon times. Many grammar and usage experts have also tried to squash this myth, but it seems to be set in stone. Here’s my own attempt to chip away at the foundations of this grammatical ‘superstition’
http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/01/can-i-start-a-sentence-with-a-conjunction/
