Hogan running for Senate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why would anyone in a blue state trust a republican senatorial candidate?

Why trust anyone these days in office.

That said, 3 split ballots and votes for Hogan in our household.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hahahahahahaha not such a Trump hater after all. What a stooge.

I read the article and I don’t think what he said was “touting” Trump’s endorsement in the context of what was being discussed on the call.

Yes, you're right, he wasn't touting Trump's endorsement, he was just repeatedly citing Trump's endorsement as a reason for why Trump supporters would vote for him. After previously having said in public that he would reject Trump's endorsement.

And we're supposed to trust this guy when he says he won't fall in line with the all the other Republicans?

I’m not seeing how discussing the fact that he may have an issue getting support from Trump’s hard core followers and saying well we should point out to them that Trump endorsed me and their other option is a left wing liberal is “touting” or disingenuous in any way. It’s a pragmatic statement.

Correct. It's a pragmatic statement that, despite everything he says, the reality is that he will fall in line with all the other Republicans. Perhaps - like Susan Collins - he might deplore a bit, before he votes with them.

I’m not seeing how that equates to he will fall in line with all the other Republicans, but you see what you want to see 🙄

Hogan in public: I won't accept Trump's endorsement.
Hogan in private to donors: Trump endorsed me!

If you actually read the article detailing the call you would see that he also talked about not wanting Trump’s endorsement. I know you can’t be reasoned with, but at least be knowledgeable about the entirety of what was being discussed on that call instead of taking a snippet and acting like he is actively campaigning using Trumps endorsement. He’s talking about the strategy to use with the hard core Trumpers that may not want to support him. It’s not rocket science or some sort of about-face to tell those people hey, your guy actually did end up endorsing me because your other choice is a far left liberal.

I’m not the poster you are quoting but you don’t seem to be acknowledging their point.

To Dems and Independents Hogan says “I’m not accepting Trump’s endorsement” and to Republicans he says “Trump endorsed me”.

I mean maybe you consider that not rocket science and perfectly pragmatic but a lot of us consider it a bad sign in a politician when they are willing to tell different people different things because he knows that’s what they want to hear.

If he’s going to reject Trump’s endorsement he shouldn’t be suggesting to his donors that they should use it to win support. Otherwise it’s all just a sham isn’t it? Or is your point that we should all expect a sham from him?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hahahahahahaha not such a Trump hater after all. What a stooge.

I read the article and I don’t think what he said was “touting” Trump’s endorsement in the context of what was being discussed on the call.

Yes, you're right, he wasn't touting Trump's endorsement, he was just repeatedly citing Trump's endorsement as a reason for why Trump supporters would vote for him. After previously having said in public that he would reject Trump's endorsement.

And we're supposed to trust this guy when he says he won't fall in line with the all the other Republicans?

I’m not seeing how discussing the fact that he may have an issue getting support from Trump’s hard core followers and saying well we should point out to them that Trump endorsed me and their other option is a left wing liberal is “touting” or disingenuous in any way. It’s a pragmatic statement.

Correct. It's a pragmatic statement that, despite everything he says, the reality is that he will fall in line with all the other Republicans. Perhaps - like Susan Collins - he might deplore a bit, before he votes with them.

I’m not seeing how that equates to he will fall in line with all the other Republicans, but you see what you want to see 🙄

He's said he will caucus with republicans. The most important vote that a senator makes is for majority leader. 90% of the rest is posturing because all that matters is that party that controls the senate controls the agenda.

FFS get yourself off of rote talking points and actually keep up with the thread of conversation if you feel you need to add to it. We were talking specifically about the call to donors reported by CNN.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hahahahahahaha not such a Trump hater after all. What a stooge.

I read the article and I don’t think what he said was “touting” Trump’s endorsement in the context of what was being discussed on the call.

Yes, you're right, he wasn't touting Trump's endorsement, he was just repeatedly citing Trump's endorsement as a reason for why Trump supporters would vote for him. After previously having said in public that he would reject Trump's endorsement.

And we're supposed to trust this guy when he says he won't fall in line with the all the other Republicans?

I’m not seeing how discussing the fact that he may have an issue getting support from Trump’s hard core followers and saying well we should point out to them that Trump endorsed me and their other option is a left wing liberal is “touting” or disingenuous in any way. It’s a pragmatic statement.

Correct. It's a pragmatic statement that, despite everything he says, the reality is that he will fall in line with all the other Republicans. Perhaps - like Susan Collins - he might deplore a bit, before he votes with them.

I’m not seeing how that equates to he will fall in line with all the other Republicans, but you see what you want to see 🙄

He's said he will caucus with republicans. The most important vote that a senator makes is for majority leader. 90% of the rest is posturing because all that matters is that party that controls the senate controls the agenda.

FFS get yourself off of rote talking points and actually keep up with the thread of conversation if you feel you need to add to it. We were talking specifically about the call to donors reported by CNN.

DP. That's what I'm talking about. The call to donors, reported by CNN, where he cited Trump's endorsement, which he has not rejected, as a reason why Trump supporters will vote for him.

To the non-Trump voters, he's saying: it's ok to vote for me, I will be independent!
To the Trump voters, he's saying: it's ok to vote for me, Trump has endorsed me!

Which should we believe? They can't both be true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hahahahahahaha not such a Trump hater after all. What a stooge.

I read the article and I don’t think what he said was “touting” Trump’s endorsement in the context of what was being discussed on the call.

Yes, you're right, he wasn't touting Trump's endorsement, he was just repeatedly citing Trump's endorsement as a reason for why Trump supporters would vote for him. After previously having said in public that he would reject Trump's endorsement.

And we're supposed to trust this guy when he says he won't fall in line with the all the other Republicans?

I’m not seeing how discussing the fact that he may have an issue getting support from Trump’s hard core followers and saying well we should point out to them that Trump endorsed me and their other option is a left wing liberal is “touting” or disingenuous in any way. It’s a pragmatic statement.

Correct. It's a pragmatic statement that, despite everything he says, the reality is that he will fall in line with all the other Republicans. Perhaps - like Susan Collins - he might deplore a bit, before he votes with them.

I’m not seeing how that equates to he will fall in line with all the other Republicans, but you see what you want to see 🙄

Hogan in public: I won't accept Trump's endorsement.
Hogan in private to donors: Trump endorsed me!

If you actually read the article detailing the call you would see that he also talked about not wanting Trump’s endorsement. I know you can’t be reasoned with, but at least be knowledgeable about the entirety of what was being discussed on that call instead of taking a snippet and acting like he is actively campaigning using Trumps endorsement. He’s talking about the strategy to use with the hard core Trumpers that may not want to support him. It’s not rocket science or some sort of about-face to tell those people hey, your guy actually did end up endorsing me because your other choice is a far left liberal.

Exactly. He says one thing in public, another thing in private. He can't be trusted.

There is nothing, but absolutely nothing, "far left" about Angela Alsobrooks's political positions. That's a racist dog whistle.

During the call he acknowledged that he didn’t want Trump’s endorsement but pointed out the fact that despite him not wanting it or asking for it that Trump did endorse him. There is nothing disingenuous about that, he didn’t pretend that he eagerly sought the endorsement or that he even wanted it. He’s pointing out the fact that the endorsement was made. And please stop with the argument that anything anyone says about Angela Alsobrooks that isn’t supportive is racially driven. It is so effing tiresome that people try to silence any criticism of a candidate by crying racism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hahahahahahaha not such a Trump hater after all. What a stooge.

I read the article and I don’t think what he said was “touting” Trump’s endorsement in the context of what was being discussed on the call.

Yes, you're right, he wasn't touting Trump's endorsement, he was just repeatedly citing Trump's endorsement as a reason for why Trump supporters would vote for him. After previously having said in public that he would reject Trump's endorsement.

And we're supposed to trust this guy when he says he won't fall in line with the all the other Republicans?

I’m not seeing how discussing the fact that he may have an issue getting support from Trump’s hard core followers and saying well we should point out to them that Trump endorsed me and their other option is a left wing liberal is “touting” or disingenuous in any way. It’s a pragmatic statement.

Correct. It's a pragmatic statement that, despite everything he says, the reality is that he will fall in line with all the other Republicans. Perhaps - like Susan Collins - he might deplore a bit, before he votes with them.

I’m not seeing how that equates to he will fall in line with all the other Republicans, but you see what you want to see 🙄

He's said he will caucus with republicans. The most important vote that a senator makes is for majority leader. 90% of the rest is posturing because all that matters is that party that controls the senate controls the agenda.

FFS get yourself off of rote talking points and actually keep up with the thread of conversation if you feel you need to add to it. We were talking specifically about the call to donors reported by CNN.

DP. That's what I'm talking about. The call to donors, reported by CNN, where he cited Trump's endorsement, which he has not rejected, as a reason why Trump supporters will vote for him.

To the non-Trump voters, he's saying: it's ok to vote for me, I will be independent!
To the Trump voters, he's saying: it's ok to vote for me, Trump has endorsed me!

Which should we believe? They can't both be true.

This is where you are lacking critical thinking. Telling Trumps most hard core Maryland supporters (which is a pretty small number) listen, me and your guy don’t like or agree with each other, but he endorsed me because I’m way better than the alternative so perhaps you should consider supporting me, does not equate to telling those voters once I get to the Senate I’m going full MAGA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hahahahahahaha not such a Trump hater after all. What a stooge.

I read the article and I don’t think what he said was “touting” Trump’s endorsement in the context of what was being discussed on the call.

Yes, you're right, he wasn't touting Trump's endorsement, he was just repeatedly citing Trump's endorsement as a reason for why Trump supporters would vote for him. After previously having said in public that he would reject Trump's endorsement.

And we're supposed to trust this guy when he says he won't fall in line with the all the other Republicans?

I’m not seeing how discussing the fact that he may have an issue getting support from Trump’s hard core followers and saying well we should point out to them that Trump endorsed me and their other option is a left wing liberal is “touting” or disingenuous in any way. It’s a pragmatic statement.

Correct. It's a pragmatic statement that, despite everything he says, the reality is that he will fall in line with all the other Republicans. Perhaps - like Susan Collins - he might deplore a bit, before he votes with them.

I’m not seeing how that equates to he will fall in line with all the other Republicans, but you see what you want to see 🙄

Hogan in public: I won't accept Trump's endorsement.
Hogan in private to donors: Trump endorsed me!

If you actually read the article detailing the call you would see that he also talked about not wanting Trump’s endorsement. I know you can’t be reasoned with, but at least be knowledgeable about the entirety of what was being discussed on that call instead of taking a snippet and acting like he is actively campaigning using Trumps endorsement. He’s talking about the strategy to use with the hard core Trumpers that may not want to support him. It’s not rocket science or some sort of about-face to tell those people hey, your guy actually did end up endorsing me because your other choice is a far left liberal.

Exactly. He says one thing in public, another thing in private. He can't be trusted.

There is nothing, but absolutely nothing, "far left" about Angela Alsobrooks's political positions. That's a racist dog whistle.

During the call he acknowledged that he didn’t want Trump’s endorsement but pointed out the fact that despite him not wanting it or asking for it that Trump did endorse him. There is nothing disingenuous about that, he didn’t pretend that he eagerly sought the endorsement or that he even wanted it. He’s pointing out the fact that the endorsement was made. And please stop with the argument that anything anyone says about Angela Alsobrooks that isn’t supportive is racially driven. It is so effing tiresome that people try to silence any criticism of a candidate by crying racism.

He literally said to the media about Trump’s endorsement “it’s not something we’re going to be promoting that’s for sure” and here he is promoting it in private to a small group of rwnjs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hahahahahahaha not such a Trump hater after all. What a stooge.

I read the article and I don’t think what he said was “touting” Trump’s endorsement in the context of what was being discussed on the call.

Yes, you're right, he wasn't touting Trump's endorsement, he was just repeatedly citing Trump's endorsement as a reason for why Trump supporters would vote for him. After previously having said in public that he would reject Trump's endorsement.

And we're supposed to trust this guy when he says he won't fall in line with the all the other Republicans?

I’m not seeing how discussing the fact that he may have an issue getting support from Trump’s hard core followers and saying well we should point out to them that Trump endorsed me and their other option is a left wing liberal is “touting” or disingenuous in any way. It’s a pragmatic statement.

Correct. It's a pragmatic statement that, despite everything he says, the reality is that he will fall in line with all the other Republicans. Perhaps - like Susan Collins - he might deplore a bit, before he votes with them.

I’m not seeing how that equates to he will fall in line with all the other Republicans, but you see what you want to see 🙄

He's said he will caucus with republicans. The most important vote that a senator makes is for majority leader. 90% of the rest is posturing because all that matters is that party that controls the senate controls the agenda.

FFS get yourself off of rote talking points and actually keep up with the thread of conversation if you feel you need to add to it. We were talking specifically about the call to donors reported by CNN.

DP. That's what I'm talking about. The call to donors, reported by CNN, where he cited Trump's endorsement, which he has not rejected, as a reason why Trump supporters will vote for him.

To the non-Trump voters, he's saying: it's ok to vote for me, I will be independent!
To the Trump voters, he's saying: it's ok to vote for me, Trump has endorsed me!

Which should we believe? They can't both be true.

This is where you are lacking critical thinking. Telling Trumps most hard core Maryland supporters (which is a pretty small number) listen, me and your guy don’t like or agree with each other, but he endorsed me because I’m way better than the alternative so perhaps you should consider supporting me, does not equate to telling those voters once I get to the Senate I’m going full MAGA.

I did not fall off a turnip truck yesterday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hahahahahahaha not such a Trump hater after all. What a stooge.

I read the article and I don’t think what he said was “touting” Trump’s endorsement in the context of what was being discussed on the call.

Yes, you're right, he wasn't touting Trump's endorsement, he was just repeatedly citing Trump's endorsement as a reason for why Trump supporters would vote for him. After previously having said in public that he would reject Trump's endorsement.

And we're supposed to trust this guy when he says he won't fall in line with the all the other Republicans?

I’m not seeing how discussing the fact that he may have an issue getting support from Trump’s hard core followers and saying well we should point out to them that Trump endorsed me and their other option is a left wing liberal is “touting” or disingenuous in any way. It’s a pragmatic statement.

Correct. It's a pragmatic statement that, despite everything he says, the reality is that he will fall in line with all the other Republicans. Perhaps - like Susan Collins - he might deplore a bit, before he votes with them.

I’m not seeing how that equates to he will fall in line with all the other Republicans, but you see what you want to see 🙄

Hogan in public: I won't accept Trump's endorsement.
Hogan in private to donors: Trump endorsed me!

If you actually read the article detailing the call you would see that he also talked about not wanting Trump’s endorsement. I know you can’t be reasoned with, but at least be knowledgeable about the entirety of what was being discussed on that call instead of taking a snippet and acting like he is actively campaigning using Trumps endorsement. He’s talking about the strategy to use with the hard core Trumpers that may not want to support him. It’s not rocket science or some sort of about-face to tell those people hey, your guy actually did end up endorsing me because your other choice is a far left liberal.

Exactly. He says one thing in public, another thing in private. He can't be trusted.

There is nothing, but absolutely nothing, "far left" about Angela Alsobrooks's political positions. That's a racist dog whistle.

During the call he acknowledged that he didn’t want Trump’s endorsement but pointed out the fact that despite him not wanting it or asking for it that Trump did endorse him. There is nothing disingenuous about that, he didn’t pretend that he eagerly sought the endorsement or that he even wanted it. He’s pointing out the fact that the endorsement was made. And please stop with the argument that anything anyone says about Angela Alsobrooks that isn’t supportive is racially driven. It is so effing tiresome that people try to silence any criticism of a candidate by crying racism.

Is all criticism of Angela Alsobrooks a racist dog whistle? Of course not. There are plenty of things I disagree with her about, and I voted for her twice.

Is "Angela Alsobrooks is a far left liberal" a racist dog whistle? You betcha.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hahahahahahaha not such a Trump hater after all. What a stooge.

I read the article and I don’t think what he said was “touting” Trump’s endorsement in the context of what was being discussed on the call.

Yes, you're right, he wasn't touting Trump's endorsement, he was just repeatedly citing Trump's endorsement as a reason for why Trump supporters would vote for him. After previously having said in public that he would reject Trump's endorsement.

And we're supposed to trust this guy when he says he won't fall in line with the all the other Republicans?

I’m not seeing how discussing the fact that he may have an issue getting support from Trump’s hard core followers and saying well we should point out to them that Trump endorsed me and their other option is a left wing liberal is “touting” or disingenuous in any way. It’s a pragmatic statement.

Correct. It's a pragmatic statement that, despite everything he says, the reality is that he will fall in line with all the other Republicans. Perhaps - like Susan Collins - he might deplore a bit, before he votes with them.

I’m not seeing how that equates to he will fall in line with all the other Republicans, but you see what you want to see 🙄

Hogan in public: I won't accept Trump's endorsement.
Hogan in private to donors: Trump endorsed me!

If you actually read the article detailing the call you would see that he also talked about not wanting Trump’s endorsement. I know you can’t be reasoned with, but at least be knowledgeable about the entirety of what was being discussed on that call instead of taking a snippet and acting like he is actively campaigning using Trumps endorsement. He’s talking about the strategy to use with the hard core Trumpers that may not want to support him. It’s not rocket science or some sort of about-face to tell those people hey, your guy actually did end up endorsing me because your other choice is a far left liberal.

Exactly. He says one thing in public, another thing in private. He can't be trusted.

There is nothing, but absolutely nothing, "far left" about Angela Alsobrooks's political positions. That's a racist dog whistle.

During the call he acknowledged that he didn’t want Trump’s endorsement but pointed out the fact that despite him not wanting it or asking for it that Trump did endorse him. There is nothing disingenuous about that, he didn’t pretend that he eagerly sought the endorsement or that he even wanted it. He’s pointing out the fact that the endorsement was made. And please stop with the argument that anything anyone says about Angela Alsobrooks that isn’t supportive is racially driven. It is so effing tiresome that people try to silence any criticism of a candidate by crying racism.

Is all criticism of Angela Alsobrooks a racist dog whistle? Of course not. There are plenty of things I disagree with her about, and I voted for her twice.

Is "Angela Alsobrooks is a far left liberal" a racist dog whistle? You betcha.

No, it’s a statement you disagree with, which doesn’t make it a “racist dog whistle”, but carry on.

[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:Hahahahahahaha not such a Trump hater after all. What a stooge.

I read the article and I don’t think what he said was “touting” Trump’s endorsement in the context of what was being discussed on the call.

Yes, you're right, he wasn't touting Trump's endorsement, he was just repeatedly citing Trump's endorsement as a reason for why Trump supporters would vote for him. After previously having said in public that he would reject Trump's endorsement.

And we're supposed to trust this guy when he says he won't fall in line with the all the other Republicans?

I’m not seeing how discussing the fact that he may have an issue getting support from Trump’s hard core followers and saying well we should point out to them that Trump endorsed me and their other option is a left wing liberal is “touting” or disingenuous in any way. It’s a pragmatic statement.

Correct. It's a pragmatic statement that, despite everything he says, the reality is that he will fall in line with all the other Republicans. Perhaps - like Susan Collins - he might deplore a bit, before he votes with them.

I’m not seeing how that equates to he will fall in line with all the other Republicans, but you see what you want to see 🙄

Hogan in public: I won't accept Trump's endorsement.
Hogan in private to donors: Trump endorsed me!

If you actually read the article detailing the call you would see that he also talked about not wanting Trump’s endorsement. I know you can’t be reasoned with, but at least be knowledgeable about the entirety of what was being discussed on that call instead of taking a snippet and acting like he is actively campaigning using Trumps endorsement. He’s talking about the strategy to use with the hard core Trumpers that may not want to support him. It’s not rocket science or some sort of about-face to tell those people hey, your guy actually did end up endorsing me because your other choice is a far left liberal.

Exactly. He says one thing in public, another thing in private. He can't be trusted.

There is nothing, but absolutely nothing, "far left" about Angela Alsobrooks's political positions. That's a racist dog whistle.

During the call he acknowledged that he didn’t want Trump’s endorsement but pointed out the fact that despite him not wanting it or asking for it that Trump did endorse him. There is nothing disingenuous about that, he didn’t pretend that he eagerly sought the endorsement or that he even wanted it. He’s pointing out the fact that the endorsement was made. And please stop with the argument that anything anyone says about Angela Alsobrooks that isn’t supportive is racially driven. It is so effing tiresome that people try to silence any criticism of a candidate by crying racism.

Is all criticism of Angela Alsobrooks a racist dog whistle? Of course not. There are plenty of things I disagree with her about, and I voted for her twice.

Is "Angela Alsobrooks is a far left liberal" a racist dog whistle? You betcha.

No, it’s a statement you disagree with, which doesn’t make it a “racist dog whistle”, but carry on.

It's a statement I disagree with AND a racist dog whistle.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Hahahahahahaha not such a Trump hater after all. What a stooge.

I read the article and I don’t think what he said was “touting” Trump’s endorsement in the context of what was being discussed on the call.

Yes, you're right, he wasn't touting Trump's endorsement, he was just repeatedly citing Trump's endorsement as a reason for why Trump supporters would vote for him. After previously having said in public that he would reject Trump's endorsement.

And we're supposed to trust this guy when he says he won't fall in line with the all the other Republicans?

I’m not seeing how discussing the fact that he may have an issue getting support from Trump’s hard core followers and saying well we should point out to them that Trump endorsed me and their other option is a left wing liberal is “touting” or disingenuous in any way. It’s a pragmatic statement.

Correct. It's a pragmatic statement that, despite everything he says, the reality is that he will fall in line with all the other Republicans. Perhaps - like Susan Collins - he might deplore a bit, before he votes with them.

I’m not seeing how that equates to he will fall in line with all the other Republicans, but you see what you want to see 🙄

Hogan in public: I won't accept Trump's endorsement.
Hogan in private to donors: Trump endorsed me!

If you actually read the article detailing the call you would see that he also talked about not wanting Trump’s endorsement. I know you can’t be reasoned with, but at least be knowledgeable about the entirety of what was being discussed on that call instead of taking a snippet and acting like he is actively campaigning using Trumps endorsement. He’s talking about the strategy to use with the hard core Trumpers that may not want to support him. It’s not rocket science or some sort of about-face to tell those people hey, your guy actually did end up endorsing me because your other choice is a far left liberal.

Exactly. He says one thing in public, another thing in private. He can't be trusted.

There is nothing, but absolutely nothing, "far left" about Angela Alsobrooks's political positions. That's a racist dog whistle.

During the call he acknowledged that he didn’t want Trump’s endorsement but pointed out the fact that despite him not wanting it or asking for it that Trump did endorse him. There is nothing disingenuous about that, he didn’t pretend that he eagerly sought the endorsement or that he even wanted it. He’s pointing out the fact that the endorsement was made. And please stop with the argument that anything anyone says about Angela Alsobrooks that isn’t supportive is racially driven. It is so effing tiresome that people try to silence any criticism of a candidate by crying racism.

Is all criticism of Angela Alsobrooks a racist dog whistle? Of course not. There are plenty of things I disagree with her about, and I voted for her twice.

Is "Angela Alsobrooks is a far left liberal" a racist dog whistle? You betcha.

No, it’s a statement you disagree with, which doesn’t make it a “racist dog whistle”, but carry on.

It's a statement I disagree with AND a racist dog whistle.

Your opinion is noted 🙄

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hahahahahahaha not such a Trump hater after all. What a stooge.

I read the article and I don’t think what he said was “touting” Trump’s endorsement in the context of what was being discussed on the call.

Yes, you're right, he wasn't touting Trump's endorsement, he was just repeatedly citing Trump's endorsement as a reason for why Trump supporters would vote for him. After previously having said in public that he would reject Trump's endorsement.

And we're supposed to trust this guy when he says he won't fall in line with the all the other Republicans?

I’m not seeing how discussing the fact that he may have an issue getting support from Trump’s hard core followers and saying well we should point out to them that Trump endorsed me and their other option is a left wing liberal is “touting” or disingenuous in any way. It’s a pragmatic statement.

Correct. It's a pragmatic statement that, despite everything he says, the reality is that he will fall in line with all the other Republicans. Perhaps - like Susan Collins - he might deplore a bit, before he votes with them.

I’m not seeing how that equates to he will fall in line with all the other Republicans, but you see what you want to see 🙄

He's said he will caucus with republicans. The most important vote that a senator makes is for majority leader. 90% of the rest is posturing because all that matters is that party that controls the senate controls the agenda.

FFS get yourself off of rote talking points and actually keep up with the thread of conversation if you feel you need to add to it. We were talking specifically about the call to donors reported by CNN.

DP. That's what I'm talking about. The call to donors, reported by CNN, where he cited Trump's endorsement, which he has not rejected, as a reason why Trump supporters will vote for him.

To the non-Trump voters, he's saying: it's ok to vote for me, I will be independent!
To the Trump voters, he's saying: it's ok to vote for me, Trump has endorsed me!

Which should we believe? They can't both be true.

This is where you are lacking critical thinking. Telling Trumps most hard core Maryland supporters (which is a pretty small number) listen, me and your guy don’t like or agree with each other, but he endorsed me because I’m way better than the alternative so perhaps you should consider supporting me, does not equate to telling those voters once I get to the Senate I’m going full MAGA.

If Hogan thinks he's ever going to be free to deviate from MAGA if he's in the Senate, he has not been paying attention for the past 8 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hahahahahahaha not such a Trump hater after all. What a stooge.

I read the article and I don’t think what he said was “touting” Trump’s endorsement in the context of what was being discussed on the call.

Yes, you're right, he wasn't touting Trump's endorsement, he was just repeatedly citing Trump's endorsement as a reason for why Trump supporters would vote for him. After previously having said in public that he would reject Trump's endorsement.

And we're supposed to trust this guy when he says he won't fall in line with the all the other Republicans?

I’m not seeing how discussing the fact that he may have an issue getting support from Trump’s hard core followers and saying well we should point out to them that Trump endorsed me and their other option is a left wing liberal is “touting” or disingenuous in any way. It’s a pragmatic statement.

Correct. It's a pragmatic statement that, despite everything he says, the reality is that he will fall in line with all the other Republicans. Perhaps - like Susan Collins - he might deplore a bit, before he votes with them.

I’m not seeing how that equates to he will fall in line with all the other Republicans, but you see what you want to see 🙄

He's said he will caucus with republicans. The most important vote that a senator makes is for majority leader. 90% of the rest is posturing because all that matters is that party that controls the senate controls the agenda.

FFS get yourself off of rote talking points and actually keep up with the thread of conversation if you feel you need to add to it. We were talking specifically about the call to donors reported by CNN.

DP. That's what I'm talking about. The call to donors, reported by CNN, where he cited Trump's endorsement, which he has not rejected, as a reason why Trump supporters will vote for him.

To the non-Trump voters, he's saying: it's ok to vote for me, I will be independent!
To the Trump voters, he's saying: it's ok to vote for me, Trump has endorsed me!

Which should we believe? They can't both be true.

This is where you are lacking critical thinking. Telling Trumps most hard core Maryland supporters (which is a pretty small number) listen, me and your guy don’t like or agree with each other, but he endorsed me because I’m way better than the alternative so perhaps you should consider supporting me, does not equate to telling those voters once I get to the Senate I’m going full MAGA.

If Hogan thinks he's ever going to be free to deviate from MAGA if he's in the Senate, he has not been paying attention for the past 8 years.

And if he wants to be more than a 1 term senator for Maryland he cannot fall in line with the MAGAs. I’m pretty sure after governing this blue state for 8 years he is aware of what he can and can’t do if he wants to serve more than 1 term.

[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:Hahahahahahaha not such a Trump hater after all. What a stooge.

I read the article and I don’t think what he said was “touting” Trump’s endorsement in the context of what was being discussed on the call.

Yes, you're right, he wasn't touting Trump's endorsement, he was just repeatedly citing Trump's endorsement as a reason for why Trump supporters would vote for him. After previously having said in public that he would reject Trump's endorsement.

And we're supposed to trust this guy when he says he won't fall in line with the all the other Republicans?

I’m not seeing how discussing the fact that he may have an issue getting support from Trump’s hard core followers and saying well we should point out to them that Trump endorsed me and their other option is a left wing liberal is “touting” or disingenuous in any way. It’s a pragmatic statement.

Correct. It's a pragmatic statement that, despite everything he says, the reality is that he will fall in line with all the other Republicans. Perhaps - like Susan Collins - he might deplore a bit, before he votes with them.

I’m not seeing how that equates to he will fall in line with all the other Republicans, but you see what you want to see 🙄

He's said he will caucus with republicans. The most important vote that a senator makes is for majority leader. 90% of the rest is posturing because all that matters is that party that controls the senate controls the agenda.

FFS get yourself off of rote talking points and actually keep up with the thread of conversation if you feel you need to add to it. We were talking specifically about the call to donors reported by CNN.

DP. That's what I'm talking about. The call to donors, reported by CNN, where he cited Trump's endorsement, which he has not rejected, as a reason why Trump supporters will vote for him.

To the non-Trump voters, he's saying: it's ok to vote for me, I will be independent!
To the Trump voters, he's saying: it's ok to vote for me, Trump has endorsed me!

Which should we believe? They can't both be true.

This is where you are lacking critical thinking. Telling Trumps most hard core Maryland supporters (which is a pretty small number) listen, me and your guy don’t like or agree with each other, but he endorsed me because I’m way better than the alternative so perhaps you should consider supporting me, does not equate to telling those voters once I get to the Senate I’m going full MAGA.

If Hogan thinks he's ever going to be free to deviate from MAGA if he's in the Senate, he has not been paying attention for the past 8 years.

And if he wants to be more than a 1 term senator for Maryland he cannot fall in line with the MAGAs. I’m pretty sure after governing this blue state for 8 years he is aware of what he can and can’t do if he wants to serve more than 1 term.

What made him aware of that was the Democratic supermajority in the Maryland General Assembly, which overruled his vetoes.