The Republican Party of Virginia mails out nude photos of a candidate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Big whoop.

Your kids have all already seen her nude and sex tapes at this point.

Newsflash parents: your kids are looking at porn on their phones by the time they're 10 or 11 years old.

She put her nude stuff out there. Snail mail is a low tech way to send a Google result everyone can already do.

Newsflash. No, most kids are NOT looking at porn on their phones by the time they're 10 or 11 years old.

LMAO.

You are so, soooooooo woefully naive.

I can guarantee your kids are google "boobs". Even with parental locks you can find porn anywhere. Reddit for example. So, soooo many kids are looking at porn.

Do you live under a rock, lady?

[Anonymous]

Lol, the party of legalize marijuana, shrooms, virtually all drugs, sex work, prostitution, and unfettered crime all of the sudden is mad someone mails what everyone can easily Google and find online in about 29 seconds?

Hypocrisy is astounding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Big whoop.

Your kids have all already seen her nude and sex tapes at this point.

Newsflash parents: your kids are looking at porn on their phones by the time they're 10 or 11 years old.

She put her nude stuff out there. Snail mail is a low tech way to send a Google result everyone can already do.

Newsflash. No, most kids are NOT looking at porn on their phones by the time they're 10 or 11 years old.

LMAO.

You are so, soooooooo woefully naive.

I can guarantee your kids are google "boobs". Even with parental locks you can find porn anywhere. Reddit for example. So, soooo many kids are looking at porn.

Do you live under a rock, lady?

Nope. I work in a large, diverse school system.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It was obvious it would be something like this. Thank you for posting. I'm sure everyone will ignore this though. [/quote]

It was pretty clear that something was up when we kept seeing picture of the outside of the envelope, but no one was showing pictures of the actual mailer at all. The only reason why you would show pictures of the envelope and then only give a description about the mailer is because you're trying to lie to people about the contents of the mailer. The original title here - "Glenn Youngkin mails out nude photos of a candidate" was a complete lie. Turns out it's "The Republican party mails out photos of a candidate's face with zero nudity."

8 pages of outrage where everyone trusted a Twitter post and never bothered to check what the actual mailer looked like. This is why misinformation spreads.[/quote]

It was a cropped image of her nude from a live chat.

VA Republicans (led by Youngkin) are sending “explicit 18+” materials (their words) to thousands of homes in VA.

Doesn’t seem like they are sincerely interested in keeping explicit material out of kids hands when they are sending it out themselves.

Republicans are so full of crap. I can’t believe anyone falls for their propaganda.

[/quote]

So... It wasn't a nude photo? Why did you need to put quotes around explicit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was obvious it would be something like this. Thank you for posting. I'm sure everyone will ignore this though.

It was pretty clear that something was up when we kept seeing picture of the outside of the envelope, but no one was showing pictures of the actual mailer at all. The only reason why you would show pictures of the envelope and then only give a description about the mailer is because you're trying to lie to people about the contents of the mailer. The original title here - "Glenn Youngkin mails out nude photos of a candidate" was a complete lie. Turns out it's "The Republican party mails out photos of a candidate's face with zero nudity."

8 pages of outrage where everyone trusted a Twitter post and never bothered to check what the actual mailer looked like. This is why misinformation spreads.

It was a cropped image of her nude from a live chat.

VA Republicans (led by Youngkin) are sending “explicit 18+” materials (their words) to thousands of homes in VA.

Doesn’t seem like they are sincerely interested in keeping explicit material out of kids hands when they are sending it out themselves.

Republicans are so full of crap. I can’t believe anyone falls for their propaganda.

So... It wasn't a nude photo? Why did you need to put quotes around explicit?

Correct. It wasn’t a nude photo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was obvious it would be something like this. Thank you for posting. I'm sure everyone will ignore this though.

It was pretty clear that something was up when we kept seeing picture of the outside of the envelope, but no one was showing pictures of the actual mailer at all. The only reason why you would show pictures of the envelope and then only give a description about the mailer is because you're trying to lie to people about the contents of the mailer. The original title here - "Glenn Youngkin mails out nude photos of a candidate" was a complete lie. Turns out it's "The Republican party mails out photos of a candidate's face with zero nudity."

8 pages of outrage where everyone trusted a Twitter post and never bothered to check what the actual mailer looked like. This is why misinformation spreads.

It was a cropped image of her nude from a live chat.

VA Republicans (led by Youngkin) are sending “explicit 18+” materials (their words) to thousands of homes in VA.

Doesn’t seem like they are sincerely interested in keeping explicit material out of kids hands when they are sending it out themselves.

Republicans are so full of crap. I can’t believe anyone falls for their propaganda.

So... It wasn't a nude photo? Why did you need to put quotes around explicit?

I put quotes around explicit because that is a direct quote from the Republicans who sent out the "explicit" mailings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Big whoop.

Your kids have all already seen her nude and sex tapes at this point.

Newsflash parents: your kids are looking at porn on their phones by the time they're 10 or 11 years old.

She put her nude stuff out there. Snail mail is a low tech way to send a Google result everyone can already do.

Newsflash. No, most kids are NOT looking at porn on their phones by the time they're 10 or 11 years old.

LMAO.

You are so, soooooooo woefully naive.

I can guarantee your kids are google "boobs". Even with parental locks you can find porn anywhere. Reddit for example. So, soooo many kids are looking at porn.

Do you live under a rock, lady?

Nope. I work in a large, diverse school system.

which one? FCPS?

In my experience, it's only some 10/11 year olds, but by 12/13 most kids have at some point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lol, the party of legalize marijuana, shrooms, virtually all drugs, sex work, prostitution, and unfettered crime all of the sudden is mad someone mails what everyone can easily Google and find online in about 29 seconds?

Hypocrisy is astounding.

You are OK with Republicans mailing EXPLICIT materials to thousands of people, many with young kids, straight to their home?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s more disgusting that a major political party would do this than whatever it is she did.

Like, it’s completely disqualifying. All Republicans should lose their elections since they are guilty by association, IMO.

There’s also a direct line between circulating and slut shaming and their anti-woman, anti-abortion agenda.

Shame on Republicans. Shame! SHAME!!!

Imagine if you will, that this porn-producing woman was a Republican candidate. You and all of the hyper-hypocritical LWNJs would be shaming her to your dying day. Look at the things you said about a fully clothed Lauren Boebert. You people are so far gone, it's unreal.

It’s about consent, not that you’d understand anything about that.

Boebert fondled genitalia in front of kids and people who didn’t consent.

Up until this GOP mailing, everyone who watched Gibson sought it out; they consented.

Republicans like to force themselves on everyone else.

Why do you want a porn producing woman as your candidate?

Because:
1) I DGAF what consenting adults do in the bedroom
2) I would prefer a candidate with better judgment but ultimately it was legal and the deadline passed to replace her
3) she will defend women in VA (!)

I am as single-issue voter pro-abortion voter out there but c'mon she needs to go. She is not the boy with his finger in the dyke, she is not the sole deciding vote, she is not that important. Not worth this. She needs to go.

Not with the numbers so close in the General Assembly.

Was it great judgement? No. Was it illegal? Also no.

So...vote blue, no matter who. (just politics as usual )

Republicans are posed to ban abortion.

I can certainly support someone who has shown poor judgment BUT hasn’t broken any laws. She’s miles ahead of criminal politicians in office/on the bench and/or actively campaigning for bigger offices.

PP here. I get it. Both Democrats and Republicans hold their noses all the time and vote down the party line. Not a surprise.

Women's rights go far beyond "party line".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s more disgusting that a major political party would do this than whatever it is she did.

Like, it’s completely disqualifying. All Republicans should lose their elections since they are guilty by association, IMO.

There’s also a direct line between circulating and slut shaming and their anti-woman, anti-abortion agenda.

Shame on Republicans. Shame! SHAME!!!

Imagine if you will, that this porn-producing woman was a Republican candidate. You and all of the hyper-hypocritical LWNJs would be shaming her to your dying day. Look at the things you said about a fully clothed Lauren Boebert. You people are so far gone, it's unreal.

It’s about consent, not that you’d understand anything about that.

Boebert fondled genitalia in front of kids and people who didn’t consent.

Up until this GOP mailing, everyone who watched Gibson sought it out; they consented.

Republicans like to force themselves on everyone else.

Why do you want a porn producing woman as your candidate?

Because:
1) I DGAF what consenting adults do in the bedroom
2) I would prefer a candidate with better judgment but ultimately it was legal and the deadline passed to replace her
3) she will defend women in VA (!)

I am as single-issue voter pro-abortion voter out there but c'mon she needs to go. She is not the boy with his finger in the dyke, she is not the sole deciding vote, she is not that important. Not worth this. She needs to go.

Not with the numbers so close in the General Assembly.

Was it great judgement? No. Was it illegal? Also no.

So...vote blue, no matter who. (just politics as usual )

Republicans are posed to ban abortion.

I can certainly support someone who has shown poor judgment BUT hasn’t broken any laws. She’s miles ahead of criminal politicians in office/on the bench and/or actively campaigning for bigger offices.

PP here. I get it. Both Democrats and Republicans hold their noses all the time and vote down the party line. Not a surprise.

Women's rights go far beyond "party line".

You sound like a single issue voter. Democrats tell me that is wrong think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol, the party of legalize marijuana, shrooms, virtually all drugs, sex work, prostitution, and unfettered crime all of the sudden is mad someone mails what everyone can easily Google and find online in about 29 seconds?

Hypocrisy is astounding.

You are OK with Republicans mailing EXPLICIT materials to thousands of people, many with young kids, straight to their home?

What was explicit about the mailing?

[Anonymous]

I have mixed feelings about whether being a porn actress should preclude her from office. I think the answer is probably no, but also that she should have disclosed it early in the process. I'm not sure.

What I am sure about this is no one is being honest and fair who thinks she should be disqualified for doing porn could turn around and still support the VA GOP for doing this mailing. The mailing is unequivocally indefensible. It's bad. It's bad! There's no good reason for doing it.

I'm a moderate but Glen Younkin ducking this really removes any respect for him I had left. The teacher tip line, and this, I'm not open to him any more. Sorry. You can't play reasonable on TV and then whiff on something this easy.

[Anonymous]

Fake news. The screenshots are not explicit per Axiom

https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2023/10/24/virginia-republicans-send-mail-ad-susanna-gibson-explicit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s more disgusting that a major political party would do this than whatever it is she did.

Like, it’s completely disqualifying. All Republicans should lose their elections since they are guilty by association, IMO.

There’s also a direct line between circulating and slut shaming and their anti-woman, anti-abortion agenda.

Shame on Republicans. Shame! SHAME!!!

Imagine if you will, that this porn-producing woman was a Republican candidate. You and all of the hyper-hypocritical LWNJs would be shaming her to your dying day. Look at the things you said about a fully clothed Lauren Boebert. You people are so far gone, it's unreal.

It’s about consent, not that you’d understand anything about that.

Boebert fondled genitalia in front of kids and people who didn’t consent.

Up until this GOP mailing, everyone who watched Gibson sought it out; they consented.

Republicans like to force themselves on everyone else.

Why do you want a porn producing woman as your candidate?

Because:
1) I DGAF what consenting adults do in the bedroom
2) I would prefer a candidate with better judgment but ultimately it was legal and the deadline passed to replace her
3) she will defend women in VA (!)

I am as single-issue voter pro-abortion voter out there but c'mon she needs to go. She is not the boy with his finger in the dyke, she is not the sole deciding vote, she is not that important. Not worth this. She needs to go.

Not with the numbers so close in the General Assembly.

Was it great judgement? No. Was it illegal? Also no.

So...vote blue, no matter who. (just politics as usual )

Republicans are posed to ban abortion.

I can certainly support someone who has shown poor judgment BUT hasn’t broken any laws. She’s miles ahead of criminal politicians in office/on the bench and/or actively campaigning for bigger offices.

PP here. I get it. Both Democrats and Republicans hold their noses all the time and vote down the party line. Not a surprise.

Women's rights go far beyond "party line".

You sound like a single issue voter. Democrats tell me that is wrong think.

I am after the Republicans overturned RvW.

Who knew women would have to fight for basic human rights in 2023?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol, the party of legalize marijuana, shrooms, virtually all drugs, sex work, prostitution, and unfettered crime all of the sudden is mad someone mails what everyone can easily Google and find online in about 29 seconds?

Hypocrisy is astounding.

You are OK with Republicans mailing EXPLICIT materials to thousands of people, many with young kids, straight to their home?

What was explicit about the mailing?

Republicans called it explicit and said it was 18+. They took images and words from a private adult chat room with nudity and sex.

And then sent to thousands of families in VA, many with young children.