Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I like what NVD says. It matters to me that people are kind.
Steven seems like he's pretty arrogant. He certainly was in that FB mess he got himself into.
I already like David, but maybe I'll rethink Cristina as my #2 instead of Sandy, though i still wish she hadn't oversold herself initially.
LOL, "kind" and "NVD" do not belong in the same arena.
Then you don't know her. She comes across very aggressively, yes, and that can be off-putting. But she really, really cares about kids and has a big heart.
The first sentence here doesn't support your statement that she's "kind." The second statement may be true; but doesn't mean she's "kind." NVD is "kind" to you as long as you are in agreement with her.
LOL -- reading comp please. Where is my "statement that she's kind"???
Anonymous wrote:Just ignore the silly AEM stuff. There is still useful stuff that appears there. It's like any other forum, this one included.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Just ignore the silly AEM stuff. There is still useful stuff that appears there. It's like any other forum, this one included.
Agreed. It's unfortunate people feel it is necessary to be so negative, but it's the internet.
Anonymous wrote:Just ignore the silly AEM stuff. There is still useful stuff that appears there. It's like any other forum, this one included.
Agreed. It's unfortunate people feel it is necessary to be so negative, but it's the internet.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
LOL, "kind" and "NVD" do not belong in the same arena.
Then you don't know her. She comes across very aggressively, yes, and that can be off-putting. But she really, really cares about kids and has a big heart.
The first sentence here doesn't support your statement that she's "kind." The second statement may be true; but doesn't mean she's "kind." NVD is "kind" to you as long as you are in agreement with her.
LOL -- reading comp please. Where is my "statement that she's kind"???
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I like what NVD says. It matters to me that people are kind.
Steven seems like he's pretty arrogant. He certainly was in that FB mess he got himself into.
I already like David, but maybe I'll rethink Cristina as my #2 instead of Sandy, though i still wish she hadn't oversold herself initially.
LOL, "kind" and "NVD" do not belong in the same arena.
Then you don't know her. She comes across very aggressively, yes, and that can be off-putting. But she really, really cares about kids and has a big heart.
The first sentence here doesn't support your statement that she's "kind." The second statement may be true; but doesn't mean she's "kind." NVD is "kind" to you as long as you are in agreement with her.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I like what NVD says. It matters to me that people are kind.
Steven seems like he's pretty arrogant. He certainly was in that FB mess he got himself into.
I already like David, but maybe I'll rethink Cristina as my #2 instead of Sandy, though i still wish she hadn't oversold herself initially.
LOL, "kind" and "NVD" do not belong in the same arena.
Then you don't know her. She comes across very aggressively, yes, and that can be off-putting. But she really, really cares about kids and has a big heart.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I like what NVD says. It matters to me that people are kind.
Steven seems like he's pretty arrogant. He certainly was in that FB mess he got himself into.
I already like David, but maybe I'll rethink Cristina as my #2 instead of Sandy, though i still wish she hadn't oversold herself initially.
LOL, "kind" and "NVD" do not belong in the same arena.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Oh wow! Someone on AEM just threw it down on the whole "poor Symone" narrative. It's kind of classic, actually. It really takes down the whole argument, quoting an Office of Special Counsel opinion from 2009 pretty much describing this situation and how it's not permissible. How can Symone's campaign really claim that this is a newfound and more conservative interpretation of the Hatch Act? As if THIS administration takes a more conservative view of any ethics law!
I really appreciated this too. I like Symone- and may be happy to vote for her as an independent- but her seeking the democratic endorsement was plainly illegal.
The blame lies at the foot of the ACDC- for insisting on controlling what should be a non-partisan election, not on Terron or anyone who wants laws to be followed.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Oh wow! Someone on AEM just threw it down on the whole "poor Symone" narrative. It's kind of classic, actually. It really takes down the whole argument, quoting an Office of Special Counsel opinion from 2009 pretty much describing this situation and how it's not permissible. How can Symone's campaign really claim that this is a newfound and more conservative interpretation of the Hatch Act? As if THIS administration takes a more conservative view of any ethics law!
I really appreciated this too. I like Symone- and may be happy to vote for her as an independent- but her seeking the democratic endorsement was plainly illegal.
The blame lies at the foot of the ACDC- for insisting on controlling what should be a non-partisan election, not on Terron or anyone who wants laws to be followed.
AMEN. ACDC had a perfect opportunity this year to just do away with the caucus. None of these candidates really had a fair shot at campaigning once quarantine hit. ACDC should have just let them all ride it out to the November election so they had the summer to meet with voters. Instead we're picking based on who has the best website and who is the best public speaker in a debate format. ACDC needs to get rid of this stupid caucus once and for all.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Oh wow! Someone on AEM just threw it down on the whole "poor Symone" narrative. It's kind of classic, actually. It really takes down the whole argument, quoting an Office of Special Counsel opinion from 2009 pretty much describing this situation and how it's not permissible. How can Symone's campaign really claim that this is a newfound and more conservative interpretation of the Hatch Act? As if THIS administration takes a more conservative view of any ethics law!
I really appreciated this too. I like Symone- and may be happy to vote for her as an independent- but her seeking the democratic endorsement was plainly illegal.
The blame lies at the foot of the ACDC- for insisting on controlling what should be a non-partisan election, not on Terron or anyone who wants laws to be followed.