Reply to Georgia Senate Runoff

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Georgia Senate Runoff - official"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]They have not been convicted.  The evidence that there was wrongdoing is strong.  The timing of Purdue’s prolific trades of companies his committees had oversight of is appalling.  I am a federal employee and would lose my job if I did a single trade of an entity that my agency has oversight of.  Yes, his actions are shady and morally repugnant.[/quote]

Strong evidence isn't the same as a conviction. Not at all.[/quote]

OMG. The bar to get someone’s vote shouldn’t be that “they weren’t convicted.”  It’s clear that even if they weren’t convicted, it’s clear that they personally benefitted from the knowledge they received before the general public. That tells me that their moral compass is set to care more about themselves and their financial benefit and *not* the good of the general American public. To me, that is disqualifying for my vote. [/quote]

PP here. I wasn't saying how a person should vote. I was responding to this comment: "They have committed the crimes of insider trader."[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics