What’s the Point of Anything Anymore, in Three Emojis or Less

August political Twitter, as August as you’d think.

Hillary Clinton speaks during a Service Employees International Union event with home care providers at Los Angeles Trade Technical College August 6, 2015, in Los Angeles, California. 
National Journal
Add to Briefcase
Matt Berman
Aug. 12, 2015, 11:39 a.m.

It can be tricky to figure out just what to tweet in mid-August. That’s especially true right now, as the post-debate political world has hushed to a “will Lawrence Lessig really make the plunge?” whimper.

So Hillary Clinton’s campaign, trying to ramp up that #social #engagement early in the nominating contest, can be kind of forgiven for this:

And the responses have even been pretty OK!

From the serious:

To the eggplant:

To the Hey I’m a Reporter Making Pointed Jokes:

But put all that aside. Let’s pretend that we, as a people, can accept that this is the political discourse we’ve built for ourselves. That we’re an electorate that emotes best in emoji. That this is an understandable and sensible way to reach out and win that millennial vote. That politicians’ social-media teams just have a truer sense of what is right than the cynics do.

Still, then, there is this: It’s three emojis or fewer. Fewer. Not less. Fewer. We can settle for an America under our new emoji overlords. But we should never settle for confused grammar.

At least there’s been a semiofficial apology.


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.