As far as Tiffany goes, yes he has reached out to his constituents which is ANYONE who chooses to receive his newsletter. Democrats and liberals can do this. Since the Twitter file drops, we now know there is a governmental/media-orchestrated and pervasive suppression and silencing of conservative voices. That is not conspiracy; that is now proven beyond a doubt. If you don't hear about these various topics, blame the liberal media and anyone who shuts down/out conservative voices. They are there; you have to be willing to read and listen to that voice. It is not their fault they are not being heard. And why would they reach out to media outlets that deliberately mock and misrepresent them?
I have followed the Twitter files with great interest, as journalists Matt Taibbi and Bari Weiss are two of my favorite journalists because they tend to go where the truth takes them outside of partisan ideology (they are two of several who worked on the Twitter files). What they found I thought was deeply disturbing and far from a nothingburger. That said, yes, anyone CAN choose to follow his newsletter but assuredly the vast majority would be his supporters and knowing that, as he surely does, he would be getting a skewed data sample. I held off on a story because if he presents it as a sample of his supporters, that's fine; if he presents it as the opinion of CD7, that wouldn't be accurate or honest. That's regardless of the issue itself, which I make no point about other than to say it's complicated.
I don't know if he is on any social media. That might be a platform he could get feedback from someone other than his followers/constituents? He does do a lot of townhall type meetings so that would be another opportunity to offer varying opinions on a wide range of issues.
He has Facebook and Twitter. I checked. A Town Hall would be a good option as well. A specific one on the wolf issue would be a good opportunity to hear from a variety of voices on the issue.
As far as Tiffany goes, yes he has reached out to his constituents which is ANYONE who chooses to receive his newsletter. Democrats and liberals can do this. Since the Twitter file drops, we now know there is a governmental/media-orchestrated and pervasive suppression and silencing of conservative voices. That is not conspiracy; that is now proven beyond a doubt. If you don't hear about these various topics, blame the liberal media and anyone who shuts down/out conservative voices. They are there; you have to be willing to read and listen to that voice. It is not their fault they are not being heard. And why would they reach out to media outlets that deliberately mock and misrepresent them?
I have followed the Twitter files with great interest, as journalists Matt Taibbi and Bari Weiss are two of my favorite journalists because they tend to go where the truth takes them outside of partisan ideology (they are two of several who worked on the Twitter files). What they found I thought was deeply disturbing and far from a nothingburger. That said, yes, anyone CAN choose to follow his newsletter but assuredly the vast majority would be his supporters and knowing that, as he surely does, he would be getting a skewed data sample. I held off on a story because if he presents it as a sample of his supporters, that's fine; if he presents it as the opinion of CD7, that wouldn't be accurate or honest. That's regardless of the issue itself, which I make no point about other than to say it's complicated.
I don't know if he is on any social media. That might be a platform he could get feedback from someone other than his followers/constituents? He does do a lot of townhall type meetings so that would be another opportunity to offer varying opinions on a wide range of issues.
He has Facebook and Twitter. I checked. A Town Hall would be a good option as well. A specific one on the wolf issue would be a good opportunity to hear from a variety of voices on the issue.