Facts not opinion. FYI

[PotimusWillie]

Here are the political issues for review. Your opinion on the issues is yours.

ABORTION ON DEMAND ( From conception)

R. Warnock -Yes
H. Walker - No

RAISE GAS PRICES ON U.S. CITIZENS

R. Warnock-Yes
H. Walker- No

REMOVAL OF FILIBUSTER

R. Warnock - Yes
H. Walker- No

STOP U.S. ENERGY INDEPENDENCE

R. Warnock- Yes
H. Walker- No

ABOLISHMENT OF ELECTION COLLEGE

R. Warnock - Yes
H. Walker - no

HIGHER TAXES ON ALL INDIVIDUAL TAX PAYERS

R. Warnock - Yes
H. Walker - No

HIGHER TAXES ON CORPORATIONS

R. Warnock- Yes
H. Walker - No

ABOLISH VOTER ID LAWS

R. Warnock - YES
H. Walker - No

PROMOTION OF IDENTITY BASED EQUITY LEGISLATION

R. Warnock - Yes
H. Walker - No

ENDORSED BY LBGTQ, BLM, ANTIFA, JANES REVENGE

R. Warnock- Yes
H. Walker - No

Regardless of who the men are, the issues mentioned above affect our lives every single day.

Both men are flawed sinners in the eyes of God and their fellow citizens.

Vote your conscious.

 

[willdup]

Here are the political issues for review. Your opinion on the issues is yours.

ABORTION ON DEMAND ( From conception)

R. Warnock -Yes
H. Walker - No

RAISE GAS PRICES ON U.S. CITIZENS

R. Warnock-Yes
H. Walker- No

REMOVAL OF FILIBUSTER

R. Warnock - Yes
H. Walker- No

STOP U.S. ENERGY INDEPENDENCE

R. Warnock- Yes
H. Walker- No

ABOLISHMENT OF ELECTION COLLEGE

R. Warnock - Yes
H. Walker - no

HIGHER TAXES ON ALL INDIVIDUAL TAX PAYERS

R. Warnock - Yes
H. Walker - No

HIGHER TAXES ON CORPORATIONS

R. Warnock- Yes
H. Walker - No

ABOLISH VOTER ID LAWS

R. Warnock - YES
H. Walker - No

PROMOTION OF IDENTITY BASED EQUITY LEGISLATION

R. Warnock - Yes
H. Walker - No

ENDORSED BY LBGTQ, BLM, ANTIFA, JANES REVENGE

R. Warnock- Yes
H. Walker - No

Regardless of who the men are, the issues mentioned above affect our lives every single day.

Both men are flawed sinners in the eyes of God and their fellow citizens.

Vote your conscious.

I would be very interested in hearing HW himself articulate his positions on these topics. I suspect it would be very telling.



This article is long, but you should read it anyway. A few key passages can be found below.

Does MAGA Care If The Herschel Walker Story Is True?

LOL nothing matters.

boilingfrogs.thedispatch.com

"We might ask, finally, why it matters what Herschel Walker does in his private life so long as he votes the right way on legislation. Neither side disputes that he’ll reliably support his party’s agenda as a senator, which may or may not eventually include a national ban on abortion. If he’s pro-life publicly, should we care that he’s pro-choice privately?

It would make him a hypocrite, sure. But if hypocrites were unfit for office, we wouldn’t be able to staff the government.

The problem with electing Republicans who don’t practice what they preach on abortion is that it undermines the ability of pro-lifers to persuade. I believe strongly that sincere pro-life advocacy is more likely to reduce abortion long-term than insincere pro-life legislation will. My colleague David French has often marveled at the fact that more abortions occurred in the United States before Roe v. Wade, in an era when the practice was illegal, than occurred in recent years before Roe was overturned. It’s not the law, obviously, that drove the number of abortions steadily downward for decades when it was legal and freely available. It’s the combination of cheaper, more effective contraception and the dogged efforts of abortion opponents to convince undecideds that life in the womb is life, not to be dispensed with lightly for matters of convenience.

If the charges against Walker turn out to be true and the Republican Party shrugs them off, how seriously should those undecideds take the right’s arguments going forward that abortion is a grave moral breach?

It might be one thing if Walker copped to it and claimed to have seen the error of his ways. Norma “Jane Roe” McCorvey, the plaintiff in Roe v. Wade, became an outspoken opponent of abortion after that ruling and was celebrated for it by pro-lifers. Converts are powerful witnesses when they’re sincere—which, perhaps, McCorvey wasn’t.

But Walker hasn’t copped to it, despite the fact that the evidence assembled by the Daily Beast seems compelling and that Walker’s own son appears to find it credible. If Republicans in Georgia hand-wave that away and send him to the Senate anyway, the message will be received that pro-lifers don’t take their own message on abortion seriously, that they quietly agree with pro-choicers that sometimes matters of expedience, electoral or otherwise, should trump the moral interest in not treating life in the womb cheaply. That, to borrow a joke circulating on Twitter this week, they believe there should be an exception to abortion bans for the political life of the father.

Walker could rescue them from that dilemma by admitting to the charges if they’re true and seeking forgiveness, giving them an opportunity to place him in the “convert” category. But I suspect he won’t, fearing that one more confirmed scandal might be the final straw for swing voters or fearing that an expression of remorse, even if insincere, will be viewed by some MAGA populists as a “weak” capitulation to the media. If I had to bet, I’d bet that Walker continues to deny and leaves his party stuck, forced to figure out whether they’re supposed to pretend to care about their candidates paying for abortions or not.

They should care. If they don’t, the window for behavior that the right is expected to excuse as a matter of partisan duty will open wider. And it’s already plenty wide."

 

[RoyDawgMercer]

Here are the political issues for review. Your opinion on the issues is yours.

ABORTION ON DEMAND ( From conception)

R. Warnock -Yes
H. Walker - No

RAISE GAS PRICES ON U.S. CITIZENS

R. Warnock-Yes
H. Walker- No

REMOVAL OF FILIBUSTER

R. Warnock - Yes
H. Walker- No

STOP U.S. ENERGY INDEPENDENCE

R. Warnock- Yes
H. Walker- No

ABOLISHMENT OF ELECTION COLLEGE

R. Warnock - Yes
H. Walker - no

HIGHER TAXES ON ALL INDIVIDUAL TAX PAYERS

R. Warnock - Yes
H. Walker - No

HIGHER TAXES ON CORPORATIONS

R. Warnock- Yes
H. Walker - No

ABOLISH VOTER ID LAWS

R. Warnock - YES
H. Walker - No

PROMOTION OF IDENTITY BASED EQUITY LEGISLATION

R. Warnock - Yes
H. Walker - No

ENDORSED BY LBGTQ, BLM, ANTIFA, JANES REVENGE

R. Warnock- Yes
H. Walker - No

Regardless of who the men are, the issues mentioned above affect our lives every single day.

Both men are flawed sinners in the eyes of God and their fellow citizens.

Vote your conscious.

A LIAR, MENTALLY UNSTABLE, ASSAULTED EX-SPOUSE WITH WEAPONS, PAID FOR ABORTION, UNFIT FOR OFFICE.

R. WARNOCK - NO
H. WALKER - YES

Thanks for sharing more BS...

 

[PotimusWillie]

A LIAR, MENTALLY UNSTABLE, ASSAULTED EX-SPOUSE WITH WEAPONS, PAID FOR ABORTION, UNFIT FOR OFFICE.

R. WARNOCK - NO
H. WALKER - YES

Thanks for sharing more BS...

Everything I posted was an issue with the candidates position. My, you become quite emotional when non biased facts are laid out.

I posted facts. If you aligned with either candidate, vote for him.

I will ask you this. What does Walker or Warnock’s personal life have to do with the issues I posted? It is the issues I am voting for.

The value in my congressman is to drive the issues that affect my family and country. If that congressman sticks cigars in women’s vagina’s, but supports issues that help the economy, protect the life of the unborn, be man enough to admit men are men and women are women and not cave for the vote….. am I suppose to vote for the other guy whom I believe is willing to concede anything to get elected, including totally bankrupting our country?

So you are saying HW is bad, so I should vote for the communist?

You are so drunk on agenda, you might not even know what sex you are to today RDM. And yes, you are quite emotional. I figured a couple of ya’ll couldn’t just be honest with your view, you have to attack the other guy to somehow justify your agenda.

I will vote for HW because he does not propose and support killing the unborn for convenience and will not concede it just for the vote. I will vote for HW because what he proposes is not based on identity politics. I will vote for HW because he isn’t a communist. I will vote for HW, because as flawed as he is, his vote will mirror my beliefs.

And lastly, I will vote for HW because he has not told GOD that he was going to promote sin in spite of God. It is one thing to sin and repent, it’s another thing to flip God off as a proclaimed Christian preacher, because that makes you a narcissistic liar.

What Warnock did or didn’t do to his wife cannot be taken into account. Number one, because he is hiding it sealed. Number two, it’s his vote that continue to kill our country.

Be honest RDM or hide behind your skirt. Put your pantries on and discuss it.

Glad I got to you. I enjoyed it.

 

[PotimusWillie]

I would be very interested in hearing HW himself articulate his positions on these topics. I suspect it would be very telling.

View embedded media

This article is long, but you should read it anyway. A few key passages can be found below.

Does MAGA Care If The Herschel Walker Story Is True?

LOL nothing matters.

boilingfrogs.thedispatch.com

"We might ask, finally, why it matters what Herschel Walker does in his private life so long as he votes the right way on legislation. Neither side disputes that he’ll reliably support his party’s agenda as a senator, which may or may not eventually include a national ban on abortion. If he’s pro-life publicly, should we care that he’s pro-choice privately?

It would make him a hypocrite, sure. But if hypocrites were unfit for office, we wouldn’t be able to staff the government.

The problem with electing Republicans who don’t practice what they preach on abortion is that it undermines the ability of pro-lifers to persuade. I believe strongly that sincere pro-life advocacy is more likely to reduce abortion long-term than insincere pro-life legislation will. My colleague David French has often marveled at the fact that more abortions occurred in the United States before Roe v. Wade, in an era when the practice was illegal, than occurred in recent years before Roe was overturned. It’s not the law, obviously, that drove the number of abortions steadily downward for decades when it was legal and freely available. It’s the combination of cheaper, more effective contraception and the dogged efforts of abortion opponents to convince undecideds that life in the womb is life, not to be dispensed with lightly for matters of convenience.

If the charges against Walker turn out to be true and the Republican Party shrugs them off, how seriously should those undecideds take the right’s arguments going forward that abortion is a grave moral breach?

It might be one thing if Walker copped to it and claimed to have seen the error of his ways. Norma “Jane Roe” McCorvey, the plaintiff in Roe v. Wade, became an outspoken opponent of abortion after that ruling and was celebrated for it by pro-lifers. Converts are powerful witnesses when they’re sincere—which, perhaps, McCorvey wasn’t.

But Walker hasn’t copped to it, despite the fact that the evidence assembled by the Daily Beast seems compelling and that Walker’s own son appears to find it credible. If Republicans in Georgia hand-wave that away and send him to the Senate anyway, the message will be received that pro-lifers don’t take their own message on abortion seriously, that they quietly agree with pro-choicers that sometimes matters of expedience, electoral or otherwise, should trump the moral interest in not treating life in the womb cheaply. That, to borrow a joke circulating on Twitter this week, they believe there should be an exception to abortion bans for the political life of the father.

Walker could rescue them from that dilemma by admitting to the charges if they’re true and seeking forgiveness, giving them an opportunity to place him in the “convert” category. But I suspect he won’t, fearing that one more confirmed scandal might be the final straw for swing voters or fearing that an expression of remorse, even if insincere, will be viewed by some MAGA populists as a “weak” capitulation to the media. If I had to bet, I’d bet that Walker continues to deny and leaves his party stuck, forced to figure out whether they’re supposed to pretend to care about their candidates paying for abortions or not.

They should care. If they don’t, the window for behavior that the right is expected to excuse as a matter of partisan duty will open wider. And it’s already plenty wide."

OK will, I’ll vote for the communist.

The standard your propose……..you ever looked around and seen the groups that support Dem candidates?

As a democratic, will they deny that vote? Nah

 

[willdup]

Everything I posted was an issue with the candidates position. My, you become quite emotional when non biased facts are laid out.

I posted facts. If you aligned with either candidate, vote for him.

I will ask you this. What does Walker or Warnock’s personal life have to do with the issues I posted? It is the issues I am voting for.

The value in my congressman is to drive the issues that affect my family and country. If that congressman sticks cigars in women’s vagina’s, but supports issues that help the economy, protect the life of the unborn, be man enough to admit men are men and women are women and not cave for the vote….. am I suppose to vote for the other guy whom I believe is willing to concede anything to get elected, including totally bankrupting our country?

So you are saying HW is bad, so I should vote for the communist?

You are so drunk on agenda, you might not even know what sex you are to today RDM. And yes, you are quite emotional. I figured a couple of ya’ll couldn’t just be honest with your view, you have to attack the other guy to somehow justify your agenda.

I will vote for HW because he does not propose and support killing the unborn for convenience and will not concede it just for the vote. I will vote for HW because what he proposes is not based on identity politics. I will vote for HW because he isn’t a communist. I will vote for HW, because as flawed as he is, his vote will mirror my beliefs.

And lastly, I will vote for HW because he has not told GOD that he was going to promote sin in spite of God. It is one thing to sin and repent, it’s another thing to flip God off as a proclaimed Christian preacher, because that makes you a narcissistic liar.

What Warnock did or didn’t do to his wife cannot be taken into account. Number one, because he is hiding it sealed. Number two, it’s his vote that continue to kill our country.

Be honest RDM or hide behind your skirt. Put your pantries on and discuss it.

Glad I got to you. I enjoyed it

Based on your earlier posts, you believe abortion is the murder of an innocent and yet have no problem supporting a candidate who (apparently) directly funded such a murder as a matter of convenience. It would seem you have either mischaracterized your feelings about abortion or that those feelings become secondary when considering practical issues that affect your life.

Almost like many of the women who decide to have an abortion after considering the impact a pregnancy and child would have on practical aspects of their lives.

Of course, as males, you, me and HW don't have to worry about the impact of carrying an unplanned pregnancy and if you are HW, it can be taken care of with a check and a card anyway.

If you keep invoking God's will and choosing people like DJT and HW to represent you, don't be surprised when people stop believing that God is anywhere in the equation.

 

[Eastmandawg]

Here are the political issues for review. Your opinion on the issues is yours.

ABORTION ON DEMAND ( From conception)

R. Warnock -Yes
H. Walker - No

RAISE GAS PRICES ON U.S. CITIZENS

R. Warnock-Yes
H. Walker- No

REMOVAL OF FILIBUSTER

R. Warnock - Yes
H. Walker- No

STOP U.S. ENERGY INDEPENDENCE

R. Warnock- Yes
H. Walker- No

ABOLISHMENT OF ELECTION COLLEGE

R. Warnock - Yes
H. Walker - no

HIGHER TAXES ON ALL INDIVIDUAL TAX PAYERS

R. Warnock - Yes
H. Walker - No

HIGHER TAXES ON CORPORATIONS

R. Warnock- Yes
H. Walker - No

ABOLISH VOTER ID LAWS

R. Warnock - YES
H. Walker - No

PROMOTION OF IDENTITY BASED EQUITY LEGISLATION

R. Warnock - Yes
H. Walker - No

ENDORSED BY LBGTQ, BLM, ANTIFA, JANES REVENGE

R. Warnock- Yes
H. Walker - No

Regardless of who the men are, the issues mentioned above affect our lives every single day.

Both men are flawed sinners in the eyes of God and their fellow citizens.

Vote your conscious.

If all true, would be much more afraid of Warnock’s future in politics than Herschel’s past….

 

[Dawg 'n IT]

I would be very interested in hearing HW himself articulate his positions on these topics. I suspect it would be very telling.

View embedded media

This article is long, but you should read it anyway. A few key passages can be found below.

Does MAGA Care If The Herschel Walker Story Is True?

LOL nothing matters.

boilingfrogs.thedispatch.com

"We might ask, finally, why it matters what Herschel Walker does in his private life so long as he votes the right way on legislation. Neither side disputes that he’ll reliably support his party’s agenda as a senator, which may or may not eventually include a national ban on abortion. If he’s pro-life publicly, should we care that he’s pro-choice privately?

It would make him a hypocrite, sure. But if hypocrites were unfit for office, we wouldn’t be able to staff the government.

The problem with electing Republicans who don’t practice what they preach on abortion is that it undermines the ability of pro-lifers to persuade. I believe strongly that sincere pro-life advocacy is more likely to reduce abortion long-term than insincere pro-life legislation will. My colleague David French has often marveled at the fact that more abortions occurred in the United States before Roe v. Wade, in an era when the practice was illegal, than occurred in recent years before Roe was overturned. It’s not the law, obviously, that drove the number of abortions steadily downward for decades when it was legal and freely available. It’s the combination of cheaper, more effective contraception and the dogged efforts of abortion opponents to convince undecideds that life in the womb is life, not to be dispensed with lightly for matters of convenience.

If the charges against Walker turn out to be true and the Republican Party shrugs them off, how seriously should those undecideds take the right’s arguments going forward that abortion is a grave moral breach?

It might be one thing if Walker copped to it and claimed to have seen the error of his ways. Norma “Jane Roe” McCorvey, the plaintiff in Roe v. Wade, became an outspoken opponent of abortion after that ruling and was celebrated for it by pro-lifers. Converts are powerful witnesses when they’re sincere—which, perhaps, McCorvey wasn’t.

But Walker hasn’t copped to it, despite the fact that the evidence assembled by the Daily Beast seems compelling and that Walker’s own son appears to find it credible. If Republicans in Georgia hand-wave that away and send him to the Senate anyway, the message will be received that pro-lifers don’t take their own message on abortion seriously, that they quietly agree with pro-choicers that sometimes matters of expedience, electoral or otherwise, should trump the moral interest in not treating life in the womb cheaply. That, to borrow a joke circulating on Twitter this week, they believe there should be an exception to abortion bans for the political life of the father.

Walker could rescue them from that dilemma by admitting to the charges if they’re true and seeking forgiveness, giving them an opportunity to place him in the “convert” category. But I suspect he won’t, fearing that one more confirmed scandal might be the final straw for swing voters or fearing that an expression of remorse, even if insincere, will be viewed by some MAGA populists as a “weak” capitulation to the media. If I had to bet, I’d bet that Walker continues to deny and leaves his party stuck, forced to figure out whether they’re supposed to pretend to care about their candidates paying for abortions or not.

They should care. If they don’t, the window for behavior that the right is expected to excuse as a matter of partisan duty will open wider. And it’s already plenty wide."

Plenty of valid points here, but as I said yesterday, we're at political war and all that matters right now are political wins.

Aside from that, why is it our government's duty to convince people about moral issues? People break laws all the time because people ultimately do what they want to do whether legal or not, big issue or small. That's another topic, but it's our reality.

Abortion is taking a life no matter how anyone tries to spin the issue. The decision to take a life shouldn't be a matter of convenience and the legality of it certainly isn't about controlling women. It's ironic that many women lacking self-control from abstinence to all the highly effective and affordable pregnancy prevention measures available want to talk about being controlled.

That leaves the relatively small number of cases where a woman didn't act in a manner to become pregnant (rape) and when a pregnancy isn't medically viable for the mother and/or the child. The sensible way to handle abortion is obvious, but here we are arguing over BS like controlling women and absolute bans.

If people don't see how it's a major piece in a political psyop to divide us, I can't help you. Why are Democrats and Republicans diametrically opposed on every issue to the point where they avoid common sense solutions? Because political division games are afoot to keep us fighting while they keep screwing us.

 

[PotimusWillie]

Based on your earlier posts, you believe abortion is the murder of an innocent and yet have no problem supporting a candidate who (apparently) directly funded such a murder as a matter of convenience. It would seem you have either mischaracterized your feelings about abortion or that those feelings become secondary when considering practical issues that affect your life.

Almost like many of the women who decide to have an abortion after considering the impact a pregnancy and child would have on practical aspects of their lives.

Of course, as males, you, me and HW don't have to worry about the impact of carrying an unplanned pregnancy and if you are HW, it can be taken care of with a check and a card anyway.

If you keep invoking God's will and choosing people like DJT and HW to represent you, don't be surprised when people stop believing that God is anywhere in the equation.

will, I have tried to stay out of the sin of man reasons for voting for a man.

I will say this as plainly as I can.

In a debate of opposing opinions, the point is the end result the opinion is based on.

To base an opinion political preference on the fall of man is folly. There is not a single man, other than Christ, that can hold a moral and ethical standard worthy of support that determines the very livelihood of our lives.

In a society that denies truth as common standard that can be demanded of all, placing the contempt of a man’s actions in his life seems rather hypocritical.

A mans integrity can only be measured by how he responds to his shortcomings and demands repentance in his decisions moving forward. A Christian principle and the single defining difference in salvation in Christ versus any other religion in the world is Grace. Nothing we do can earn us Heaven, but it can deny us Heaven. We are forgiven and saved through the Grace of Christ taking our place and taking our sins away from us.

Sin, shortcomings, mean spirited acts, murder, including murder of the unborn,assault, cussing, lust, and on and on and on, are all taken from us from the act of Christ’s crucifixion. All that is asked of us is belief in Christ, following His Word AND REPENTENCE.

Sin done and promoted, advertised and supported, is mocking GOD and shows a contempt for not only what and Who He is, but in what we are. We are His creation and we’re created to worship Him, period.

Man falls from that standard, but to finally answer your question regarding hypocrisy, I end with this.

To vote for a sinful man who acknowledges his sin, repents, and promotes healthy values be protected cannot be condemned on his past. HW has worked hard to move from where he was and mental illness drove much of his behavior.

I support him because of where he is now and is promoting a conservative standard I agree with.

I do not support R. Warnock because for the sake of appeasing his voting base, he has mocked GOD supporting abortion. He has made statements from the pulpit that only serve to promote him politically. No repentance heart. He has told GOD what He meant by murder.

So the standards of two men. A sinner who is promoting Christ like values to get elected versus a preacher mocking God to get elected.

When you had all the other issues I mentioned, the point isn’t the man, but in what the man does once in power.

Hope that helps to better define my point will. What HW did is no different than what you, me, or R Warnock did in his life. What separates HW from R Warnock is repentance and honor to GOD. I am not invoking the will or guard card and I don’t bow at the alter of political maneuverings.

But I will vote for the sinner that will play a part in what I see as important in the realm of earthly protection of what God wants.

 

[deadduckdawg]

I would be very interested in hearing HW himself articulate his positions on these topics. I suspect it would be very telling.

View embedded media

This article is long, but you should read it anyway. A few key passages can be found below.

Does MAGA Care If The Herschel Walker Story Is True?

LOL nothing matters.

boilingfrogs.thedispatch.com

"We might ask, finally, why it matters what Herschel Walker does in his private life so long as he votes the right way on legislation. Neither side disputes that he’ll reliably support his party’s agenda as a senator, which may or may not eventually include a national ban on abortion. If he’s pro-life publicly, should we care that he’s pro-choice privately?

It would make him a hypocrite, sure. But if hypocrites were unfit for office, we wouldn’t be able to staff the government.

The problem with electing Republicans who don’t practice what they preach on abortion is that it undermines the ability of pro-lifers to persuade. I believe strongly that sincere pro-life advocacy is more likely to reduce abortion long-term than insincere pro-life legislation will. My colleague David French has often marveled at the fact that more abortions occurred in the United States before Roe v. Wade, in an era when the practice was illegal, than occurred in recent years before Roe was overturned. It’s not the law, obviously, that drove the number of abortions steadily downward for decades when it was legal and freely available. It’s the combination of cheaper, more effective contraception and the dogged efforts of abortion opponents to convince undecideds that life in the womb is life, not to be dispensed with lightly for matters of convenience.

If the charges against Walker turn out to be true and the Republican Party shrugs them off, how seriously should those undecideds take the right’s arguments going forward that abortion is a grave moral breach?

It might be one thing if Walker copped to it and claimed to have seen the error of his ways. Norma “Jane Roe” McCorvey, the plaintiff in Roe v. Wade, became an outspoken opponent of abortion after that ruling and was celebrated for it by pro-lifers. Converts are powerful witnesses when they’re sincere—which, perhaps, McCorvey wasn’t.

But Walker hasn’t copped to it, despite the fact that the evidence assembled by the Daily Beast seems compelling and that Walker’s own son appears to find it credible. If Republicans in Georgia hand-wave that away and send him to the Senate anyway, the message will be received that pro-lifers don’t take their own message on abortion seriously, that they quietly agree with pro-choicers that sometimes matters of expedience, electoral or otherwise, should trump the moral interest in not treating life in the womb cheaply. That, to borrow a joke circulating on Twitter this week, they believe there should be an exception to abortion bans for the political life of the father.

Walker could rescue them from that dilemma by admitting to the charges if they’re true and seeking forgiveness, giving them an opportunity to place him in the “convert” category. But I suspect he won’t, fearing that one more confirmed scandal might be the final straw for swing voters or fearing that an expression of remorse, even if insincere, will be viewed by some MAGA populists as a “weak” capitulation to the media. If I had to bet, I’d bet that Walker continues to deny and leaves his party stuck, forced to figure out whether they’re supposed to pretend to care about their candidates paying for abortions or not.

They should care. If they don’t, the window for behavior that the right is expected to excuse as a matter of partisan duty will open wider. And it’s already plenty wide."

Do you ever get embarrassed from getting liked by the Nutdawg Trio?

 

[zingerdawg]

Warnock voted with Biden and the progressive left. Walker doesn’t. This isn’t rocket science. Everything Biden touches turns to shit. So doing the opposite is the easiest and correct plan. In this case the issues don’t really matter. One side is one bad decision after another. Even you smart lefties should be able to figure that one out. It is truly that simple. Haha. If my dog was the other candidate, and he didn’t vote along the lines of Biden, he should be the choice.

 

[willdup]

Do you ever get embarrassed from getting liked by the Nutdawg Trio?

I’ve embarrassed myself on here more than once but it never had anything to do with getting a few likes from my fellow vent commies. We are outnumbered so it helps to maintain solidarity amongst the proletariat.

 

[RoyDawgMercer]

Everything I posted was an issue with the candidates position. My, you become quite emotional when non biased facts are laid out.

I posted facts. If you aligned with either candidate, vote for him.

I will ask you this. What does Walker or Warnock’s personal life have to do with the issues I posted? It is the issues I am voting for.

The value in my congressman is to drive the issues that affect my family and country. If that congressman sticks cigars in women’s vagina’s, but supports issues that help the economy, protect the life of the unborn, be man enough to admit men are men and women are women and not cave for the vote….. am I suppose to vote for the other guy whom I believe is willing to concede anything to get elected, including totally bankrupting our country?

So you are saying HW is bad, so I should vote for the communist?

You are so drunk on agenda, you might not even know what sex you are to today RDM. And yes, you are quite emotional. I figured a couple of ya’ll couldn’t just be honest with your view, you have to attack the other guy to somehow justify your agenda.

I will vote for HW because he does not propose and support killing the unborn for convenience and will not concede it just for the vote. I will vote for HW because what he proposes is not based on identity politics. I will vote for HW because he isn’t a communist. I will vote for HW, because as flawed as he is, his vote will mirror my beliefs.

And lastly, I will vote for HW because he has not told GOD that he was going to promote sin in spite of God. It is one thing to sin and repent, it’s another thing to flip God off as a proclaimed Christian preacher, because that makes you a narcissistic liar.

What Warnock did or didn’t do to his wife cannot be taken into account. Number one, because he is hiding it sealed. Number two, it’s his vote that continue to kill our country.

Be honest RDM or hide behind your skirt. Put your pantries on and discuss it.

Glad I got to you. I enjoyed it.

More bullshit. You didn't "get" to me; people as you make me pity you because you are so weak. The truth is you'll vote for HW because you've no courage and somehow selfishly rationalize that helping destroy our democracy and other's rights is worth this vote. You have no trust in your fellow citizens nor do you respect their vote or equal freedoms. Like a spoiled brat it's all about you and what you DEMAND based upon your corrupted and narrow views. That the consequences of your actions are somehow minor because you ignore the long term consequences of your actions. You grossly fail to remotely grasp the concept of a representative republic and conveniently ignore the Founders were not "religious." Anything but, in fact. The USA is NOT a theocracy... and IN FACT the Founders went to great lengths to ensure it wasn't because they had been eyewitnesses to the terror and abuse that a religious government had wreaked and vowed not follow that model. People as you are lost souls who wallow in selfish ignorance. Enjoy it.

 

[PotimusWillie]

More bullshit. You didn't "get" to me; people as you make me pity you because you are so weak. The truth is you'll vote for HW because you've no courage and somehow selfishly rationalize that helping destroy our democracy and other's rights is worth this vote. You have no trust in your fellow citizens nor do you respect their vote or equal freedoms. Like a spoiled brat it's all about you and what you DEMAND based upon your corrupted and narrow views. That the consequences of your actions are somehow minor because you ignore the long term consequences of your actions. You grossly fail to remotely grasp the concept of a representative republic and conveniently ignore the Founders were not "religious." Anything but, in fact. The USA is NOT a theocracy... and IN FACT the Founders went to great lengths to ensure it wasn't because they had been eyewitnesses to the terror and abuse that a religious government had wreaked and vowed not follow that model. People as you are lost souls who wallow in selfish ignorance. Enjoy it.

Points of conversation allude you. It’s all agenda.

You seem to be worried about religion.

I only restated the founding fathers own words. No more, no less.

Enjoy your night.