Herschel is toast.

[trotsky]

The brain trust that is Herschel Walker is totally screwed in his race
against Rev. Warnock now that the Daily Beast has published a story
about his been reputed to have paid for an abortion. He denies it and
swear he's going to sue for defamation in a written statement he clearly
didn't write. Let more stupid shit flying out of his mouth ensue.

[Ubiquitous]

Racism noted.
Shitposting noted.

Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.

--
Let's go Brandon!

[bruce bowser]

There is no more argument to make. Herschel is toast. Didn't you read the byline?

[suzeeq]

The only argument to make is that he has an R after his name and many
people will vote for him because of that. Putting another warm body to
vote with the party in Congress. He's canceled his debate with Warnock,
his people probably think that will hurt him and show his stupid side.

[trotsky]

He was in too much of a rush to shitpost.

[shawn]

Given that the only time I've seen him make a coherent statement
during this campaign was when he was clearly reading from a
teleprompter, I think that was the wisest decision. Sadly it is the
sort of decision that should cause many of his likely voters to
reconsider that vote but, as you say, the R mark by his name is all
that really matters to many voters on election day.

[EGK]

On Tue, 04 Oct 2022 16:42:00 -0400, shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>
wrote:

LOL Do you and Suzeeq even see the irony of you two democrats saying this?
Warnock reportedly asssaulted his wife. So what? People voted for him
because he had a D next to his name, right? What you say? There's no
proof, only allegations by an ex wife? Meet Herschel Walker.

[shawn]

Herschel Walker has admitted to threatening his wife's life and has
used mental illness as his excuse. I don't know about Warnock's issue
because as you say it is reportedly, but not proven, while Walker has
admitted his issue.

That said my issue with him is his inability to come up with any
coherent statement on what he thinks on any of the issues, or what he
would do if he were elected. Every time I listen to him he speaks in a
word salad. At least with Warnock there's a coherent set of ideas
being espoused. They may not be something that you (or sometimes I)
agree with but at least I have some idea of where the man stands and
what he hopes to accomplish.

In any reasonable election Walker would never have been put forward as
a candidate. If they had put forward a candidate who can put forward a
coherent statement they would be leading the polls because this is
still a strong Republican state.

[EGK]

On Tue, 04 Oct 2022 23:10:31 -0400, shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>

And Senile Joe and Word Salad Harris are President and VP of the US. Just
admit your hypocrisy and move on.

[shawn]

Just admit that you hate Democrats and move. You can dislike President
Biden but he's clearly capable of discussing the issues. Same goes for
Harris. No requirement for you to agree with any of their stances on
issue to admit to their ability to coherently discuss the issues,
unlike with Walker.

As a side issue I wonder what has changed over the past decades where
in the past when candidates were revealed to live vastly different
lives from their political stances but now it doesn't matter what
someone does in their private lives.

Even Herschel Walker's son is calling him out over his having four
kids from four different women and not having stuck around to raise
even one of them while claiming himself as a good Christian. Let alone
his claimed lifelong stance against abortion while it seems that proof
has come that he not only got a woman pregnant in the past and
encouraged her to have an abortion, but then paid her for that
abortion. Yet he continues to claim it never happened. I do hope he
goes ahead and sues (Deadline?) so that we all can learn the truth,
but I fear it will be much like with Donald Trump where there's always
talk about suing people but it seldom ever happens.

[anim8rfsk]

“Space is what keeps us together”

Come on it’s amazing she doesn’t drool on herself too much.






--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

[EGK]

On Wed, 05 Oct 2022 00:42:40 -0400, shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>

After the last two years, I hate Democrats more than ever. That wasn't the
point. It was you and Suzeeq acting like it's a one-way street.

IMO, anyone who would vote for a Democrat after the last two years of
runaway inflation, rampant crime, a border that's like a sieve, idiotic woke
ideology and a constant attempt to gaslight the public is only doing it
because they would never vote any other way. Same way you're talking about
those voting for someone with an R next to their name.

I've said for years that politics is nothing more than a spectator sport for
most people. That's BOTH sides.

[EGK]

“It is time for us to do what we have been doing and that time is every day.
Every day it is time for us to agree.”

These others would all be hysterical if they were written by the Babylon
Bee.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/curl-a-brief-history-of-kamala-harris-word-salads

“For Jamaica, one of the issues that has been presented as an issue that is
economic in the way its impact has been the pandemic. … We will assist
Jamaica in COVID recovery by assisting in terms of the recovery efforts in
Jamaica that have been essential,” she told reporters after the meeting.

“We were all doing a tour of the library here and talking about the
significance of the passage of time, right?” Harris said while promoting
internet access in rural areas. “The significance of the passage of time. So
when you think about it, there is great significance to passage of time.
There is such great significance to the passage of time when you think of a
day in the life of our children.”

“We must, together, work together to see where we are, where we are headed,
where we are going and our vision for where we should be, but also see it as
a moment, yes, to, together, address the challenges.”

“As you know, on this issue, for example, we applaud Germany in terms of
what it has done as it relates to Nord Stream 2,” Harris said. “As it
relates to what we need to do domestically as well as what we need to do in
terms of this issue generally, we have, as the president said, to reevaluate
what we’re doing in terms of strategic oil reserves here in the United
States to make sure that it will not have an impact, or we can mitigate the
impact on the American consumer.”

[shawn]

That's a bullshit opinion and I would have expected better from you.
After all I made my point about how horrible Walker is so voting for
Warnock becomes a non-issue. Doesn't matter if I think he's a good
candidate or not. Much like voting for Biden in this past election or
Hillary in the previous one. Neither one would have been my first
choice but given the choice between them and Trump it was an easy
choice. Now if they had put up some of the other Republican candidates
it becomes a much harder choice.

I can't remember for sure which election Huntsman was in but he was
certainly one that I might have voted for but he never made it past
the Republican convention. So your assumption about my vote always
going for the Dem candidate is solely mistaken. I'm looking for
candidates where I have some idea of what they are going to do and who
won't go completely against things that I like or tear down the system
(without any plan for replacing it.) It would be great if there were
always candidates we can truly support but mostly it's a case of which
one do I least dislike/distrust.

[anim8rfsk]

I get to watch a political commercial between every round on the game I
play on my iPhone. And they show the same ones over and over and over
again. We have two that were clearly done by the same company using the
same announcer and graphics, one for the Republican and one for the
Democrat.

Both are attack ads, against the other one.

Both use abortion as an issue.

The one claims the guy is too extreme for Arizona because his position on
abortion is anybody should have one, anywhere in the United States, free,
at any point in the pregnancy, right up to the moment of birth.

The other one says the guy is too extreme for Arizona and actually has
footage of the guy saying that nobody should ever have an abortion under
any circumstances because the reason “these people“ get abortions is that
it’s a form of ritual sacrifice. He then goes on to say “I think it’s
demonic“

Which one do I vote for?

[RichA]

Print equals truth. Isn't that a Big Brother edict?

[trotsky]

Egregiously Gay Klansman certainly won't win awards for intelligence.
So what? ONLY ONE MOTHERFUCKING PARTY IS HYPOCRITICALLY KNOWN AS THE
"FAMILY VALUES" PARTY, SO WHEN YOU SAY "SO WHAT?" YOU'RE REALLY SAYING
IS "EVERYTHING THE RIGHT WING SAYS IS HORSESHIT, SO WHAT?" FUCKING MORON.

People voted for him
> because he had a D next to his name, right? What you say? There's no
> proof, only allegations by an ex wife? Meet Herschel Walker.

Fuck off you stupid cunt.

[trotsky]

Oh look, the stupid cunt went straight to the whataboutism. More
shitposting.

[shawn]

On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 23:43:39 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim...@cox.net>
wrote:

The one that you like the most. That's what most people do. Either
they are voting by party line because they like the party or they are
voting for one candidate over the other because he/she is better
looking or they feel like that candidate is the one they would enjoy
spending time with over the other.

Though given your two choices I would say vote for the first. He/She
may be the devil incarnate but they were smart enough not to give the
ad agency any clips proving their evil intent while the second guy
gave the ad agency evidence of his intent to bring you into his cult.
Or you could vote for the second guy with the belief that he will
always screw up and let you know what his next move is, giving you
time to prepare where the first guy won't give a clue until it is a
fate accompli.

[NoBody]

So you believe the Daily Beast when they post an unnamed source weeks
before the election?

[trotsky]

Well shitposted! The only ones who have said anything about 'abortions
up to the moment of birth' are right wing assholes, many of them
homosexual, like yourself. Go ahead, keep making shit up, it's all
you've got.

[trotsky]

No, you sound like a fucking idiot as usual.

What is the truth 1984?
'The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became the
truth. ' And thus, Orwell has shown exactly how history is written and
how reality can be manipulated by those in power.Jan 25, 2017


Let me know what other learnings you need.

[trotsky]

Sorry "shawn" if you treat his shitposts like they're credible you come
of as an asshole too. Sure are a lot of assholes here scared shitless
of the facts.

[trotsky]

That's actually a reasonable question which you probably already know
the answer to. Left wing sources and sites have huge credibility and
right wing ones have almost none.

[Ubiquitous]

In article <thi2s1$frik$1...@solani.org>, su...@imbris.com wrote:

>The only argument to make is that he has an R after his name and many
>people will vote for him because of that. Putting another warm body to
>vote with the party in Congress.

Oh, the irony!

Projection noted.
Selective outrage noted.

Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.

[Ubiquitous]

NoB...@nowhere.com wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 08:18:44 -0500, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:

>>The brain trust that is Herschel Walker is totally screwed in his race
>>against Rev. Warnock now that the Daily Beast has published a story
>>about his been reputed to have paid for an abortion. He denies it and
>>swear he's going to sue for defamation in a written statement he clearly
>>didn't write. Let more stupid shit flying out of his mouth ensue.
>
>So you believe the Daily Beast when they post an unnamed source weeks
>before the election?

"trotsky" believes everything he reads on Angry Left kook web sites.

You know a Democrat candidate is in trouble when anonymous accusations of
rape start coming out of the woodwork...

Herschel Walker, a Republican running for a U.S. Senate seat in Georgia,
slammed a report in the Left-wing Daily Beast that claimed Walker paid for a
woman to have an abortion over a decade ago.

The woman, who remained anonymous, alleged that Walker got her pregnant while
they were dating in 2009 and that he urged her to get an abortion. The woman
said that Walker reimbursed her $700 for the $575 procedure because she said
she had estimated an additional $125 for “travel and recovery costs.”

The woman claims that she came forward because of Walker’s stance against
abortion. The woman provided a purported copy of a check Walker allegedly
wrote to cover the costs as well as a personal note.

“I just can’t with the hypocrisy anymore,” the anonymous woman claimed. “We
all deserve better.”

Robert Ingram, a lawyer representing both the campaign and Walker in his
personal capacity, told the publication that the story was “false” and that
all the publication does “is run with stories to target Black conservatives.”

“This is a flat-out lie — and I deny this in the strongest possible terms,”
Walker said in a statement. “This is another repugnant hatchet job from a
Democrat activist disguised as a reporter who has obsessively attacked my
family and tried to tear me down since this race started. He’s harassed
friends of mine, asking if I fathered their children. He’s called my children
‘secret’ because I didn’t want to use them as campaign props in a political
campaign. Now, they’re using an anonymous source to further slander me. They
will do anything to hold onto power. It’s disgusting, gutter politics. I’m
not taking this anymore. I planning to sue the Daily Beast for this
defamatory lie. It will be filed tomorrow morning.”

In an unexpected turn of events, Walker’s son, Christian Walker, attacked his
father publicly on social media after having repeatedly shown support for his
father and his father’s campaign online.

“Every family member of Herschel Walker asked him not to run for office,
because we all knew (some of) his past,” the conservative social media
influencer claimed. “Every single one. He decided to give us the middle
finger and air out all of his dirty laundry in public, while simultaneously
lying about it.”

Herschel Walker responded after his son’s tweets by writing: “I LOVE my son
no matter what.”

It was a sharp turn for the younger Walker, who previously has supported his
father’s Senate bid.

This is what you call two AMERICANS who love our FREEDOM, COUNTRY,
and PRESIDENT @realDonaldTrump

Thanks for having us on! @MariaBartiromo
pic.twitter.com/4bzDKxJq9b

— Christian Walker (@ChristianWalk1r) December 18, 2020

[bruce bowser]

On Wednesday, October 5, 2022 at 7:51:20 AM UTC-4, Ubiquitous wrote:
> NoB...@nowhere.com wrote:
> > On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 08:18:44 -0500, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>
> >>The brain trust that is Herschel Walker is totally screwed in his race
> >>against Rev. Warnock now that the Daily Beast has published a story
> >>about his been reputed to have paid for an abortion. He denies it and
> >>swear he's going to sue for defamation in a written statement he clearly
> >>didn't write. Let more stupid shit flying out of his mouth ensue.
> >
> >So you believe the Daily Beast when they post an unnamed source weeks
> >before the election?
>
> "trotsky" believes everything he reads on Angry Left kook web sites.

Ubiquitous believes everything he reads on Angry Rightist kook web sites.

[Adam H. Kerman]

EGK <memy...@null.net> wrote:

>>. . .

>After the last two years, I hate Democrats more than ever. That wasn't the
>point. It was you and Suzeeq acting like it's a one-way street.

>IMO, anyone who would vote for a Democrat after the last two years of
>runaway inflation, rampant crime, a border that's like a sieve, idiotic woke
>ideology and a constant attempt to gaslight the public is only doing it
>because they would never vote any other way.

Last I looked, Trump was president during 2020's Summer of Love, which
was sparked in part due to the economic shutdown recommended to the
nation's governors by the federal government which Trump was, again, in
charge of.

As far as immigration, federal courts kept shutting Trump down for
refusing to follow the Adminuistrative Procedures Act. Yeah, yeah, I
know: DACA wasn't in accord with the APA either. But in truth, DACA
recipients weren't illegal aliens committing violent felonies and I'd
still rather prioritize deporting criminals versus those brought to the
United States as children who never committed crimes.

It's not like Trump proposed legislation that could have gotten through
Congress, so the authorizing act we use is still the same act as amended
when Reagan was president.

Illegal aliens may be unfair to those waiting decades for immigration
visas, but there presence in the United States didn't break the economy.

That stupid "completely shut down the economy to prevent COVID from
becoming epidemic" is what broke the economy to begin with. This advice
came from the Trump administration.

>Same way you're talking about those voting for someone with an R next
>to their name.

I'm not unwilling to vote for a Republican. I'm not willing to vote for
Darren Bailey, and it truly doesn't matter if I vote for Pritzker or
not. I can't stand Pritzker.

>I've said for years that politics is nothing more than a spectator sport for
>most people. That's BOTH sides.

I worked on plenty of political campaigns as a yout'. You can blame me.

[Adam H. Kerman]

shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:

>>. . .

>That's a bullshit opinion and I would have expected better from you.
>After all I made my point about how horrible Walker is so voting for
>Warnock becomes a non-issue. Doesn't matter if I think he's a good
>candidate or not. Much like voting for Biden in this past election or
>Hillary in the previous one. Neither one would have been my first
>choice but given the choice between them and Trump it was an easy
>choice. Now if they had put up some of the other Republican candidates
>it becomes a much harder choice.

Uh, shawn; Thanks to winner-by-plurality-takes-all-electors, the only people
who get to vote for president are those who live in swing states. I
didn't get a vote. Hillary was going to win my state by a large margin,
which made my vote irrelevant. I voted a protest vote for the
Libertarian I really didn't care for either but I wasn't voting for
Hillary.

The only way to have made my vote count would have been to move to
Wisconsin. Then I would have had an ethical dilemna and probably would
have been forced to vote for her.

You know better than to make that excuse. You could have done the same.
If you despise the nominees of both major parties, then vote third party
or vote for the independent candidate. You decide. You make the choice
to show that you support someone else.

fwiw, I read the wife's accusation versus Warnock with respect to him
running over her foot with the automobile when he was trying to get away
from her during an argument about whether she should bring their
children to her grandfather's funeral in West Africa.

From what I've read, foreign travel by minor children requires
permission of both parents.

Police investigated her claim. Her foot was examined. There was no
evidence of injury.

She lacks credibility.

https://nypost.com/2020/12/23/raphael-warnocks-ex-claims-he-ran-over-her-foot-during-a-dispute/

I didn't bother to look for a news report in the Atlanta paper. Do I
have to? Is there some news report that makes her statements credible in
any way? She sounds like someone anim would have dated.

>I can't remember for sure which election Huntsman was in but he was
>certainly one that I might have voted for but he never made it past
>the Republican convention.

Ok.

I remember Huntsman, who ran in 2012. He put all his eggs in New
Hampshire; didn't campaign in Iowa. His New Hampshire organizers screwed
up and he never found a way to differentiate himself from Mitt Romney.
Despite endorsements, Romney was way ahead and Huntsman came in third.

He dropped out. He got newspaper endorsements for both the New Hampshire
and South Carolina primaries and was on the ballot in nearly all states,
but he never got his campaign properly organized. I really never thought
he had the will to win, quite frankly.

His fundraising was mostly his own father's money and some of his own
money. At no point did he have any grass-roots support. He's the kind of
guy who might have won convention delegate support when political
conventions used to mean something but he sucked at retail politics,
which is necessary in New Hampshire.

>. . .

[Adam H. Kerman]

anim8rfsk <anim...@cox.net> wrote:

>. . .

>The one claims the guy is too extreme for Arizona because his position on
>abortion is anybody should have one, anywhere in the United States, free,
>at any point in the pregnancy, right up to the moment of birth.

I oppose men having abortions.

>. . .

[shawn]

On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 13:10:20 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<a...@chinet.com> wrote:

>shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>
>>>. . .
>
>>That's a bullshit opinion and I would have expected better from you.
>>After all I made my point about how horrible Walker is so voting for
>>Warnock becomes a non-issue. Doesn't matter if I think he's a good
>>candidate or not. Much like voting for Biden in this past election or
>>Hillary in the previous one. Neither one would have been my first
>>choice but given the choice between them and Trump it was an easy
>>choice. Now if they had put up some of the other Republican candidates
>>it becomes a much harder choice.
>
>Uh, shawn; Thanks to winner-by-plurality-takes-all-electors, the only people
>who get to vote for president are those who live in swing states. I
>didn't get a vote. Hillary was going to win my state by a large margin,
>which made my vote irrelevant. I voted a protest vote for the
>Libertarian I really didn't care for either but I wasn't voting for
>Hillary.
>

Hey, I live in a swing state. With the Trump-Hillary election we went
for Trump, but the vote was close. With the Trump-Biden election we
went for Biden and hence got caught up in Trump's looking for 11,700
votes phone call.

>The only way to have made my vote count would have been to move to
>Wisconsin. Then I would have had an ethical dilemna and probably would
>have been forced to vote for her.
>
>You know better than to make that excuse. You could have done the same.
>If you despise the nominees of both major parties, then vote third party
>or vote for the independent candidate. You decide. You make the choice
>to show that you support someone else.

That's an option but given that I live in a state where the votes do
matter for now, I'm stuck choosing between the D and R candidates.
Voting for anyone else is a wasted vote.

I would dare say it's a wasted vote in any case, even for you, unless
you can get enough other people to do the same that it catches the
attention of the major parties. Say 5-10% of the voters vote for
someone other than the major parties candidates. That should get their
attention as that is more than enough votes to swing the final vote
tally in most elections from one candidate to the other.

Though I would argue your vote does matter in the primaries. Whether
it be to choose a candidate you really like, or as we have seen in
this election to try to get a candidate chosen that you think can't
get elected.

Getting that organization together is key. Of course it also helped
that Romney was the money man. Even if he didn't touch a dime of his
own money in his campaign he was already plugged in with other wealthy
people that could easily help get his campaign going.

[shawn]

Well, we know that Walker has 4 kids by 4 different women and he
didn't stick around to raise any of those kids. So the idea that there
was a 5th child that he encouraged the mother to abort isn't out of
this world.

[EGK]

On Wed, 05 Oct 2022 01:44:51 -0400, shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>

And I think yours is a bullshit opinion. How's that? You totally missed
the point yet again as the irony continues to allude you. It wasn't about
Walker and Warnock. It was you and Suzeeq's allusion to people voting for
someone just because the R is next to their name. My point is that goes
both ways. You seem to think you're above that kind of behavior. Do you
think only those dastardly Republicans vote that way?.

[suzeeq]

Actualy I wasn't. I could care less if Walker had several affairs and
fathered several children or paid for an abortion for one (that we know
of) for one of the woman. But he does claim to have been anti-abortion
for years and espuses 'family values' despite not sticking around to
even be IN his children's lives, let alone help raise them. I've heard
nothing about Warnock assault his wife. But he's not saying he never
did. It's the hypocrisy of the R party, not what they do.

[Adam H. Kerman]

shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>Wed, 5 Oct 2022 13:10:20 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:

>>>>. . .

>>>That's a bullshit opinion and I would have expected better from you.
>>>After all I made my point about how horrible Walker is so voting for
>>>Warnock becomes a non-issue. Doesn't matter if I think he's a good
>>>candidate or not. Much like voting for Biden in this past election or
>>>Hillary in the previous one. Neither one would have been my first
>>>choice but given the choice between them and Trump it was an easy
>>>choice. Now if they had put up some of the other Republican candidates
>>>it becomes a much harder choice.

>>Uh, shawn; Thanks to winner-by-plurality-takes-all-electors, the only people
>>who get to vote for president are those who live in swing states. I
>>didn't get a vote. Hillary was going to win my state by a large margin,
>>which made my vote irrelevant. I voted a protest vote for the
>>Libertarian I really didn't care for either but I wasn't voting for
>>Hillary.

>Hey, I live in a swing state. With the Trump-Hillary election we went
>for Trump, but the vote was close. With the Trump-Biden election we
>went for Biden and hence got caught up in Trump's looking for 11,700
>votes phone call.

Great. I get to blame the voters of your state for the quality of our
recent presidents. I wish our presidential elections in some way
resembled democracy.

>>The only way to have made my vote count would have been to move to
>>Wisconsin. Then I would have had an ethical dilemna and probably would
>>have been forced to vote for her.

>>You know better than to make that excuse. You could have done the same.
>>If you despise the nominees of both major parties, then vote third party
>>or vote for the independent candidate. You decide. You make the choice
>>to show that you support someone else.

>That's an option but given that I live in a state where the votes do
>matter for now, I'm stuck choosing between the D and R candidates.
>Voting for anyone else is a wasted vote.

It's never a wasted vote. If a third-party or independent candidate has
won your vote, then give him your vote. Otherwise you won't ever get
candidates running on issues you care about.

>I would dare say it's a wasted vote in any case, even for you, unless
>you can get enough other people to do the same that it catches the
>attention of the major parties. Say 5-10% of the voters vote for
>someone other than the major parties candidates. That should get their
>attention as that is more than enough votes to swing the final vote
>tally in most elections from one candidate to the other.

I have little ability to influence the behavior of others. I'm just
pointing out that one's vote isn't wasted unless one chooses to waste
the vote. Even though I'm a Democrat, I feel no obligation to vote to
allow Democrats to retain a legislative house at the state or federal
level, and I refuse to take the position that third-party candidates are
ever spoilers.

I want to be represented, and that's all that matters when I make a
selection.

Having said that, I'm still trying to picture myself actually voting for
Hillary if I lived in a swing state. Yeah, I know I aaid "ethical
dilemna" and all that earlier, but I still don't see it. It matter not.
The choice was taken away from me.

>Though I would argue your vote does matter in the primaries. Whether
>it be to choose a candidate you really like, or as we have seen in
>this election to try to get a candidate chosen that you think can't
>get elected.

I can't agree. If one wants to be represented, then one has to vote that
way and not worry about the possibility of electibility in November.
Neither party nominates moderates any longer. It's not helpful to vote
against one's interests.

I've long concluded that nomination by party primary is a failured system
due to lack of participation and should be dispensed with. A number of
states have done so: various southern states and California.

How was Huntsman not a money man?

Huntsman didn't reach a potential constituency and it wasn't because the
campaign was underfunded. It failed to make due with the resources it
had. That's a bad sign.

[EGK]

Irony really isnt your strong suit either is it? "It's the hypocrisy of
the R party, not what they do". As if Democrats don't routinely prove
themselves to be hypocrites may times over.

Just two examples of Warnock's hypocrisy since getting elected:
Warnock has complained about large companies buying up swathes of homes in
his state. Then he turns around and takes huge campaign donations from
Wall street execs engaged in that very practice.

Warnock is a big gun control advocate while paying insane amounts of money
for armed, private security. He's not opposed to guns, he's opposed to
average people owning guns.

He's routinely been called out by fellow, black ministers in Georgia for his
abortion stance while being a pastor. It's no worse than Biden and Pelosi
claiming to be devout Catholics while supporting it, I guess.

[suzeeq]

I vote for Rs, many of them are sane and moderate people. But many
people don't think about the quality of the person, but what letter is
after their name.

[moviePig]

I'd bet more people vote for/against the R than vote for/against the D.

[suzeeq]

You're trying to be cute again, but there's a lot of women voters who
will be voting against Rs this election.

[shawn]

On Wed, 05 Oct 2022 10:49:06 -0400, EGK <memy...@null.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 05 Oct 2022 01:44:51 -0400, shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>
>wrote:
>

>>That's a bullshit opinion and I would have expected better from you.
>>After all I made my point about how horrible Walker is so voting for
>>Warnock becomes a non-issue. Doesn't matter if I think he's a good
>>candidate or not.
>
>And I think yours is a bullshit opinion. How's that? You totally missed
>the point yet again as the irony continues to allude you. It wasn't about
>Walker and Warnock. It was you and Suzeeq's allusion to people voting for
>someone just because the R is next to their name. My point is that goes
>both ways. You seem to think you're above that kind of behavior. Do you
>think only those dastardly Republicans vote that way?.

That's fine but yours is more BS because you ignored my point is that
I'm comparing the two current candidates and Warnock comes up as the
better candidate. I've voted for Republicans in the past but there was
no way in hell I was going to vote for Trump. As I said in another
post I was ready to vote for Huntsman and liked McCain but thought his
choice of a running mate was horrible. It's just that the current
crop of Republicans that can make it through the primaries all seem to
be election deniers which I'm not going to vote for, but you do you.

[EGK]

On Wed, 05 Oct 2022 12:47:12 -0400, shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>

Ex-Democratic congressman sentenced to prison in yearslong Pennsylvania
election fraud scheme

https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/27/politics/michael-ozzie-myers-election-fraud-prison-sentenced/index.html

I bet you think he's the only one.

[Adam H. Kerman]

suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:

>>. . .

>I vote for Rs, many of them are sane and moderate people. But many
>people don't think about the quality of the person, but what letter is
>after their name.

You found moderates to vote for? Unpossible. Moderates are dead.

[Adam H. Kerman]

EGK <memy...@null.net> wrote:

>. . .

[Warnock]

>He's routinely been called out by fellow, black ministers in Georgia for his
>abortion stance while being a pastor. It's no worse than Biden and Pelosi
>claiming to be devout Catholics while supporting it, I guess.

What the hell does being a minister or pastor have to do with an opinion
on abortion? There's no episcopacy. He can hold whatever damn opinion he
wants to hold without violating religious tenets.

[EGK]

On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 17:44:41 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com>
wrote:

I have no idea but a lot of people, including those fellow black pastors,
seem to think it smacks of hypocrisy to preach morality while killing
babies.
I personally think it's as stupid as people who make abortion their main
issue for voting but that's just me.
My personal view of abortion is it's a woman's body so she can do what she
wants and there are definite reasons why it should be legal. I also think
crusading about abortion rights is often just another cover for lack of
personal responsibility.

[suzeeq]

There's only a few. I'm talking in state and local races.

[Adam H. Kerman]

EGK <memy...@null.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 17:44:41 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com>:

>>EGK <memy...@null.net> wrote:

>>>. . .

>>[Warnock]

>>>He's routinely been called out by fellow, black ministers in Georgia for his
>>>abortion stance while being a pastor. It's no worse than Biden and Pelosi
>>>claiming to be devout Catholics while supporting it, I guess.

>>What the hell does being a minister or pastor have to do with an opinion
>>on abortion? There's no episcopacy. He can hold whatever damn opinion he
>>wants to hold without violating religious tenets.

>I have no idea but a lot of people, including those fellow black pastors,
>seem to think it smacks of hypocrisy to preach morality while killing
>babies.

That's the true nature of Christianity. One isn't a true believer unless
one demands that other people share the same beliefs.

> I personally think it's as stupid as people who make abortion their main
>issue for voting but that's just me.

It wouldn't have been an issue if not for the antics of the Supreme
Court's opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. That
stirred people up who for decades had been ignoring their own state
legislatures busily passing anti-abortion legislation waiting for the
Supreme Court to allow states to do so.

>My personal view of abortion is it's a woman's body so she can do what she
>wants and there are definite reasons why it should be legal. I also think
>crusading about abortion rights is often just another cover for lack of
>personal responsibility.

It's impossible to force someone else to take personal responsibility.

[Adam H. Kerman]

If any moderates are getting elected, then somebody is failing to use
the best possible techniques to draw districts.

[EGK]

On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 18:58:20 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com>
wrote:

>It's impossible to force someone else to take personal responsibility.

Of course you can't force people to take personal responsiblity. A lot of
people still look for government to give them excuses for lacking any.

[moviePig]

"Cute"? What you're saying supports what I'm saying, i.e., that, one
way or another, people react more strongly to an 'R' than to a 'D
..just like how the 2020 election was more about Trump than Biden.

[suzeeq]

In a 70R/30D state there's not question who's drawing the districts. I
did say there's only been a few. In the whole state.

[trotsky]

Pubie believes everything his sockpuppet Nobody tells him.

[trotsky]

On 10/5/2022 1:03 PM, EGK wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 17:44:41 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com>
> wrote:
>
>> EGK <memy...@null.net> wrote:
>>
>>> . . .
>>
>> [Warnock]
>>
>>> He's routinely been called out by fellow, black ministers in Georgia for his
>>> abortion stance while being a pastor. It's no worse than Biden and Pelosi
>>> claiming to be devout Catholics while supporting it, I guess.
>>
>> What the hell does being a minister or pastor have to do with an opinion
>> on abortion? There's no episcopacy. He can hold whatever damn opinion he
>> wants to hold without violating religious tenets.
>
> I have no idea but a lot of people,

I can't believe how many people don't realize saying "a lot people..."
is the equivalent of saying "warning, impending bullshit..."

[anim8rfsk]

Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:

That’s a fair point. The ad doesn’t address gender rights.



>
>> . . .
>



--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

[Ubiquitous]

Someone pretending to be bruce2...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 5, 2022 at 7:51:20 AM UTC-4, Ubiquitous wrote:
>> NoB...@nowhere.com wrote:
>> > On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 08:18:44 -0500, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:

>> >>The brain trust that is Herschel Walker is totally screwed in his race
>> >>against Rev. Warnock now that the Daily Beast has published a story
>> >>about his been reputed to have paid for an abortion. He denies it and
>> >>swear he's going to sue for defamation in a written statement he clearly
>> >>didn't write. Let more stupid shit flying out of his mouth ensue.
>> >
>> >So you believe the Daily Beast when they post an unnamed source weeks
>> >before the election?
>>
>> "trotsky" believes everything he reads on Angry Left kook web sites.
>
> Ubiquitous believes everything he reads on Angry Rightist kook web sites.

One can only assume from your nonresponse and failure to include my article
that you were unable to make a counter-argument so you used this sockpuppet
for a lame rejoinder.

--
Let's go Brandon!

[Ubiquitous]

In article <thl2gk$3o4$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, gms...@email.com wrote:

> Someone pretending to be bruce bowser wrote:
>> On Wednesday, October 5, 2022 at 7:51:20 AM UTC-4, Ubiquitous wrote:
>>> NoB...@nowhere.com wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 08:18:44 -0500, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:

>>>>> The brain trust that is Herschel Walker is totally screwed in his race
>>>>> against Rev. Warnock now that the Daily Beast has published a story
>>>>> about his been reputed to have paid for an abortion. He denies it and
>>>>> swear he's going to sue for defamation in a written statement he
>>>>> clearly didn't write. Let more stupid shit flying out of his mouth
>>>>> ensue.
>>>>
>>>> So you believe the Daily Beast when they post an unnamed source weeks
>>>> before the election?
>>>
>>>"trotsky" believes everything he reads on Angry Left kook web sites.
>>>

>>>You know a Democrat candidate is in trouble when anonymous accusations of
>>>rape start coming out of the woodwork...
>>>
>>>Herschel Walker, a Republican running for a U.S. Senate seat in Georgia,
>>>slammed a report in the Left-wing Daily Beast that claimed Walker paid for
>>>a woman to have an abortion over a decade ago.
>>>
>>>The woman, who remained anonymous, alleged that Walker got her pregnant while
>>>they were dating in 2009 and that he urged her to get an abortion. The woman
>>>said that Walker reimbursed her $700 for the $575 procedure because she said
>>>she had estimated an additional $125 for “travel and recovery costs.”
>>>
>>>The woman claims that she came forward because of Walker’s stance against
>>>abortion. The woman provided a purported copy of a check Walker allegedly
>>>wrote to cover the costs as well as a personal note.
>>>
>>>“I just can’t with the hypocrisy anymore,” the anonymous woman claimed. “We
>>>all deserve better.”
>>>
>>>Robert Ingram, a lawyer representing both the campaign and Walker in his
>>>personal capacity, told the publication that the story was “false” and that
>>>all the publication does “is run with stories to target Black conservatives.”
>>>
>>>“This is a flat-out lie — and I deny this in the strongest possible terms,”
>>>Walker said in a statement. “This is another repugnant hatchet job from a
>>>Democrat activist disguised as a reporter who has obsessively attacked my
>>>family and tried to tear me down since this race started. He’s harassed
>>>friends of mine, asking if I fathered their children. He’s called my
>>>children ‘secret’ because I didn’t want to use them as campaign props in a
>>>political campaign. Now, they’re using an anonymous source to further
>>>slander me. They will do anything to hold onto power. It’s disgusting,
>>>gutter politics. I’m not taking this anymore. I planning to sue the Daily
>>>Beast for this defamatory lie. It will be filed tomorrow morning.”
>>>
>>>In an unexpected turn of events, Walker’s son, Christian Walker, attacked his
>>>father publicly on social media after having repeatedly shown support for his
>>>father and his father’s campaign online.
>>>
>>>“Every family member of Herschel Walker asked him not to run for office,
>>>because we all knew (some of) his past,” the conservative social media
>>>influencer claimed. “Every single one. He decided to give us the middle
>>>finger and air out all of his dirty laundry in public, while simultaneously
>>>lying about it.”
>>>
>>>Herschel Walker responded after his son’s tweets by writing: “I LOVE my son
>>>no matter what.”
>>>
>>>It was a sharp turn for the younger Walker, who previously has supported his
>>>father’s Senate bid.
>>>
>>> This is what you call two AMERICANS who love our FREEDOM, COUNTRY,
>>> and PRESIDENT @realDonaldTrump
>>>
>>> Thanks for having us on! @MariaBartiromo
>>> pic.twitter.com/4bzDKxJq9b
>>>
>>> — Christian Walker (@ChristianWalk1r) December 18, 2020

>>
>> Ubiquitous believes everything he reads on Angry Rightist kook web sites.
>
>Pubie believes everything his sockpuppet Nobody tells him.

Irony noted.
Projection noted.
Ad hominem noted.
Nonresponse noted.

Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.

[David Johnston]

On 2022-10-05 7:11 a.m., Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> anim8rfsk <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> . . .
>
>> The one claims the guy is too extreme for Arizona because his position on
>> abortion is anybody should have one, anywhere in the United States, free,
>> at any point in the pregnancy, right up to the moment of birth.
>
> I oppose men having abortions.
>

>> . . .

I think pregnant men should definitely be free to abort. I still
remember that time that Trip Tucker got pregnant and they did their best
to pretend that was funny rather than terrifying.

[David Johnston]

Well yeah but "family values" means "burn gay people at the stake"
metaphorically usually, literally sometimes. It doesn't have anything
to do with actually raising children or not cheating on your wife.
That's like thinking that "pro-life" means their protesting at
slaughterhouses. As for Walker's anti-abortion stance that's about
voting for laws criminalizing them. But those laws just mean you should
pay for a plane ticket while paying for your girlfriend's abortion.
It's the only decent thing to do.

[David Johnston]

On 2022-10-05 12:03 p.m., EGK wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 17:44:41 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com>
> wrote:
>
>> EGK <memy...@null.net> wrote:
>>
>>> . . .
>>
>> [Warnock]
>>
>>> He's routinely been called out by fellow, black ministers in Georgia for his
>>> abortion stance while being a pastor. It's no worse than Biden and Pelosi
>>> claiming to be devout Catholics while supporting it, I guess.
>>
>> What the hell does being a minister or pastor have to do with an opinion
>> on abortion? There's no episcopacy. He can hold whatever damn opinion he
>> wants to hold without violating religious tenets.
>
> I have no idea but a lot of people, including those fellow black pastors,
> seem to think it smacks of hypocrisy to preach morality while killing
> babies.

What does killing babies have to do with it?

[David Johnston]

On 2022-10-05 2:30 a.m., Ubiquitous wrote:

> In article <thi2s1$frik$1...@solani.org>, su...@imbris.com wrote:
>
>> The only argument to make is that he has an R after his name and many
>> people will vote for him because of that. Putting another warm body to
>> vote with the party in Congress.
>

> Oh, the irony!
>
> Projection noted.

There isn't a single Democratic federal candidate who manifests
Herschels degree of obvious brain impairment.

[NoBody]

I think that pregnant women who got preganant without the use of sperm

[trotsky]

Did you just call Herschel Walker an asshole?

[NoBody]

No I didn't. Your intellect does seem to be rather limited.

[Ubiquitous]

In article <thsrr3$o8o$3...@gioia.aioe.org>, gms...@email.com wrote:
> On 10/8/2022 8:58 AM, NoBody wrote:
>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On 2022-10-05 7:11 a.m., Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>> anim8rfsk <anim...@cox.net> wrote:

>>>>> The one claims the guy is too extreme for Arizona because his position on
>>>>> abortion is anybody should have one, anywhere in the United States, free,
>>>>> at any point in the pregnancy, right up to the moment of birth.
>>>>
>>>> I oppose men having abortions.
>>>

>>> I think pregnant men should definitely be free to abort. I still
>>> remember that time that Trip Tucker got pregnant and they did their best
>>> to pretend that was funny rather than terrifying.
>>
>> I think that pregnant women who got preganant without the use of sperm
>> should definitely be free to abort.
>
> Did you just call Herschel Walker an asshole?

Nonsequitur noted. get back to us when you have a real argument to make.

[Ubiquitous]

NoB...@nowhere.com wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Oct 2022 16:59:00 -0500, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>> On 10/8/2022 8:58 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2022-10-05 7:11 a.m., Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>> anim8rfsk <anim...@cox.net> wrote:

>>>>>> The one claims the guy is too extreme for Arizona because his position
>>>>>> on abortion is anybody should have one, anywhere in the United States,
>>>>>> free, at any point in the pregnancy, right up to the moment of birth.
>>>>>
>>>>> I oppose men having abortions.
>>>>

>>>> I think pregnant men should definitely be free to abort. I still
>>>> remember that time that Trip Tucker got pregnant and they did their best
>>>> to pretend that was funny rather than terrifying.
>>>
>>> I think that pregnant women who got preganant without the use of sperm
>>> should definitely be free to abort.
>>
>> Did you just call Herschel Walker an asshole?
>
> No I didn't. Your intellect does seem to be rather limited.

That's just "trotsky"'s way of telling you he has lost the debate.

[Micky DuPree]

That's the Republican litmus test today, far more than the R next to the
name. The center-right Republican candidates usually get primaried by
extremists, or simply retire before they can be primaried. I've voted
for Republican candidates before, but it looks like those days are gone.
The ones who make it to the general election are openly reality deniers
in red areas, and are stealth reality deniers when they're campaigning
in purple or blue areas, like Youngkin in Virginia, who feels
comfortable backing election deniers now that he's in office.

Herschel Walker is just a train wreck. He makes Trump actually look
like a stable genius by comparison. It would be sad if his broad
acceptance by Republican voters (probably the same people who claimed to
be "values voters" in the past) weren't so alarming. The party
seriously has no better candidates to put forward?

-Micky

[Adam H. Kerman]

Micky DuPree <MDu...@theworld.com.snip.to.reply> wrote:
>shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> writes:
>>On Wed, 05 Oct 2022 10:49:06 -0400, EGK <memy...@null.net> wrote:

>>>Wed, 05 Oct 2022 01:44:51 -0400, shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>:

>>>>That's a bullshit opinion and I would have expected better from you.
>>>>After all I made my point about how horrible Walker is so voting for
>>>>Warnock becomes a non-issue. Doesn't matter if I think he's a good
>>>>candidate or not.

>>>And I think yours is a bullshit opinion. How's that? You totally
>>>missed the point yet again as the irony continues to allude you. It
>>>wasn't about Walker and Warnock. It was you and Suzeeq's allusion to
>>>people voting for someone just because the R is next to their name.
>>>My point is that goes both ways. You seem to think you're above that
>>>kind of behavior. Do you think only those dastardly Republicans vote
>>>that way?.

>>That's fine but yours is more BS because you ignored my point is that
>>I'm comparing the two current candidates and Warnock comes up as the
>>better candidate. I've voted for Republicans in the past but there was
>>no way in hell I was going to vote for Trump. As I said in another
>>post I was ready to vote for Huntsman and liked McCain but thought his
>>choice of a running mate was horrible. It's just that the current
>>crop of Republicans that can make it through the primaries all seem to
>>be election deniers which I'm not going to vote for, but you do you.

>That's the Republican litmus test today, far more than the R next to the
>name. The center-right Republican candidates usually get primaried by
>extremists, or simply retire before they can be primaried.

First of all, stop saying "primaried" as you are literally decimating
the language.

You've got this incumbent entitlement thing going here, and that
attitude stinks. This is America. We are supposed to have competitive
elections. We've had primaries since the late 19th century.

Incumbent politicians hate running for re-election. They think once they
hold office, they are entitled to retain it for as long as they wish.
Well, it doesn't work like that. If one is a partisan, then one must
turn out one's supporters in the primary. An incumbent who doesn't work
to get out the vote will find himself vulnerable in a primary challenge.

Thanks to extreme gerrymandering, especially in the election following
the decenial census, the action has shifted from the general election to
the primary. I heard a statistic the other day that gerrymandering was
done so well this time that we have the FEWEST competitive races for US
House of Representatives than ever before, that around 30 Democratic
majority districts in which Biden won bhy less than 10 points and fewer
than 30 Republican majority districts in which Trump won by less than 10
points.

This is hardly secret information. Everybody knows this. Yet, voters
will not participate in primary elections at the same rate as they do in
general elections.

Funny, though, when voters are highly motivated to vote at a primary,
they can actually make their wishes known. Perhaps you heard about the
failure of the Kansas constitutional amendment, the referendum for which
was deliberately held at the primary election instead of the general
because a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats vote in
primaries and independents cannot vote at all. Nevertheless,
independents turned out in record numbers at the primary to vote "no",
even though it was the only issue they could vote upon.

If you think this doesn't happen in Democratic primaries, then think
again. Ever hear of Dan Lipinski? He was a very powerful member of
Congress, son of the long-time incumbent who essentially inherited his
father's committee assignments and was quite good at bringing back the
pork in transportation infrastructure to the entire state.

Well, the Democratic Party used to be filled with Church-going Catholic
voters who opposed abortion due to religious doctrine. In the last two
decades, there has been a major effort among Democratic politicians and
primary voters to punish incumbent Democrats who oppose abortion rights.

Lipinski was a known votegetter among conservative Republicans in the
district and Reagan won a similar district in 1980.

In 2018, he won re-election with close to 3 out of 4 votes. In the 2020
primary, Marie Newman was nominated thanks to "win by plurality". In the
general election, she did win a majority of the votes by 56% but if the
Republicans had nominated a much stronger candidate it's possible they
could have come closer or possibly won.

The state lost seats in apportiomment and she ran in a primary against
another incumbent and lost. She didn't run in the Hispanic-majority
district she got drawn into.

There is no constitutional requirement for a member of Congress to live
in the district he runs in, just the state.

Chicago mayor Lori Lightfoot and other prominent Democrats in Illinois
actively campaigned against Lipinski in the primary.

Another long-time Democratic member of Congress on the northwest side of
Chicago has faced a Bernie-ite candidate in many primaries. As he's a
decent politician who doesn't operate on a sense of entitlement, he
works in each primary to turn out his own supporters to vote for his
nomination. He's won the nomination with decent enough margins that the
Bernie-ites no longer think he's vulnerable.

>I've voted for Republican candidates before, but it looks like those
>days are gone.

Uh huh. Did it ever occur to you to vote in the Republican primary to
support candidates who would have represented you? If no one
participates in primary elections except single-issue voters and Trump
supporters, duh gee Tennesse, then they'll have an outsized influence on
who gets nominated.

Primary elections are quite vulnerable to shitty attitudes among voters
who just can't bring themselves to participate even though they know
that this will lead to a bad nominees that they won't support in the
general election.

How soon we forget: As recently as 2015, Mitch McConnell's Republican
Party was seen as a dying institution incapable of generating any
enthusiasm among very young voters and Democrats were patting themselves
on the back as the party ever expanding into the future. Well, Donald
Trump came along, saw that the Republican Primary was quite vulnerable
to a populist, and he was nominated thanks to bring into the Republican
Party people who didn't vote regularly or had somehow reached middle age
never before having voted.

Mitch McConnell's Republican Party is long dead and since they were no
longer the party of Lincoln and not even recognizeable as the party
of Ronald Reagan and had largely abandoned the politics of classical
liberalism, good riddance. Yeah, they remain in power in large parts of
the country in which they aren't routinely challenged.

But Trump proved that the post-Reagan Republican Party is vulnerable due
to its lack of depth and bredth of support and inability to work up any
enthusiasm.

Someone else will come along again and change the Republican Party once
more.

>The ones who make it to the general election are openly reality deniers
>in red areas, and are stealth reality deniers when they're campaigning
>in purple or blue areas, like Youngkin in Virginia, who feels
>comfortable backing election deniers now that he's in office.

You seem to ignore that they are trying to appeal to voters who
participate in the Republican Primary and that they aren't trying to win
your vote as you don't participate. If you want to be represented, then
you have to vote in the primary. It's really that simple.

>Herschel Walker is just a train wreck. He makes Trump actually look
>like a stable genius by comparison. It would be sad if his broad
>acceptance by Republican voters (probably the same people who claimed to
>be "values voters" in the past) weren't so alarming. The party
>seriously has no better candidates to put forward?

Walker was nominated because he was a well-liked football player. Maybe
people who don't think football players should be in the Senate should
have participated in that primary.

That's the way it works. Politicians say crazy things and vote on crazy
issues (that sometimes make it into law) because they are trying to
please a constituency that they know ACTUALLY VOTES as opposed to all
that shithead Americans who refuse to vote but sit on their hands and
bitch about lousy representation.

[trotsky]

First of all, stop plagiarizing because it makes you look even more like
an asshole than usual.

[Ubiquitous]

In article <tisjgs$8jr$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, gms...@email.com wrote:
> On 10/20/2022 9:27 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

>> Micky DuPree <MDu...@theworld.com> wrote:
>>> shawn <nanof...@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> writes:

Shitposting noted. Get back to us when you have a real argument to make.