Kenyan or Janeese?

[Anonymous]

McDuffie cares more about his name being plastered all over the city with his signs than answering questions in debates or attending them. He probably won’t have funds to get the signs down right away as it is said his campaign is paying people now to take down the signs of his opponents at night..

[Anonymous]

some of JLG's beliefs really scare me.

However, Kenyan is just too corrupt. I cant do it. There is. 100 percent chance that he will direct city contracts in a way that financially benefits his own family and friends. I just can't handle corruption in office anymore.

[Anonymous]

some of JLG's beliefs really scare me.

However, Kenyan is just too corrupt. I cant do it. There is. 100 percent chance that he will direct city contracts in a way that financially benefits his own family and friends. I just can't handle corruption in office anymore.

And you think JLG wouldn't? The progressives are equally as corrupt. Steering city contracts to family and friends has been going on for the over 30 years I have lived in DC, with the brief exception of Tony Williams' tenure.

[Anonymous]

McDuffie is less likely to clean out all the Bowser rot, so I'm voting for JLG.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:some of JLG's beliefs really scare me.

However, Kenyan is just too corrupt. I cant do it. There is. 100 percent chance that he will direct city contracts in a way that financially benefits his own family and friends. I just can't handle corruption in office anymore.

Honestly, I'd rather the corrupt good ol' boys be in charge than having my stuff stolen and being shot at.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
some of JLG's beliefs really scare me.

However, Kenyan is just too corrupt. I cant do it. There is. 100 percent chance that he will direct city contracts in a way that financially benefits his own family and friends. I just can't handle corruption in office anymore.


Honestly, I'd rather the corrupt good ol' boys be in charge than having my stuff stolen and being shot at.

Yep. Same here. A progressive mayor plus a progressive dominated council and a progressive AG means more violent crime and an endless parade of new taxes. No thank you. If this comes to pass, and I fear it will, then I will be rooting for a control board type takeover of the city by the feds.

[Anonymous]

They are both so bad that no one here can list one good thing either of them has done. They just attack each other and can’t mention one good thing their candidate has done. We’re screwed.

[Anonymous]

The collective obsession with incarcerating children is vile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The collective obsession with incarcerating children is vile.

Are children anyone under the age of 25?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The collective obsession with incarcerating children is vile.

Distorting the very reasonable position of "you shouldn't throw chairs and brawl in public" as an "obsession with incarcerating children" is vile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The collective obsession with incarcerating children is vile.

Distorting the very reasonable position of "you shouldn't throw chairs and brawl in public" as an "obsession with incarcerating children" is vile.

Put down the liquor, grandma.

[Anonymous]

And this is the problem with progressives---any suggestion that violent juveniles need to be removed from the community is instantly attacked as "incarcerating children". No, the real evil is continually giving violent children a free pass back into the communities---which is what is happening now---and then, when they eventually age into being adults, throwing them into adult jail for long sentences for the same violent behaviors they engaged in scot-free. Most of us who think that violent juveniles need to be detained do not think they should be incarcerated with adults but rather the city should have detention facilities that are designed with rehabilitation goals and requirements: i.e., you don't just get released at 21---rather you have to have obtained your GED and a marketable skill, etc. What the progressives are doing now in terms of catch and release is dangerous and counterproductive for the children they allege to care about, not to mention the communities being terrorized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And this is the problem with progressives---any suggestion that violent juveniles need to be removed from the community is instantly attacked as "incarcerating children". No, the real evil is continually giving violent children a free pass back into the communities---which is what is happening now---and then, when they eventually age into being adults, throwing them into adult jail for long sentences for the same violent behaviors they engaged in scot-free. Most of us who think that violent juveniles need to be detained do not think they should be incarcerated with adults but rather the city should have detention facilities that are designed with rehabilitation goals and requirements: i.e., you don't just get released at 21---rather you have to have obtained your GED and a marketable skill, etc. What the progressives are doing now in terms of catch and release is dangerous and counterproductive for the children they allege to care about, not to mention the communities being terrorized.

That is how the system operates currently. There are no children in the DC jail. Kids in DYRS custody live at either New Beginnings or the Youth Services Center, where they are required to attend classes and work towards a GED or high school diploma.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are both so bad that no one here can list one good thing either of them has done. They just attack each other and can’t mention one good thing their candidate has done. We’re screwed.

Truest comment on the thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are both so bad that no one here can list one good thing either of them has done. They just attack each other and can’t mention one good thing their candidate has done. We’re screwed.

They both hate Trump. That's the campaign mantra for the next two years.