Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It must be difficult for conservatives who want to implement small government, tax cuts, and avoid talk of LGBTQ and abortion, yet hate this Republican election lie and don't want to support liars and Trump hangers-on.

I am sure a lot of them will hold their nose and vote Republican, because like Democrats, they are prepared to vote for long-term policies rather than focus on the ills of their candidates.

If I were in their place, I just would not vote. And I know some people plan to do that as well.

I'm just thinking of this, because I'm sure we on the left will eventually be faced with a nonsense candidate at some point.

There are plenty of nutty candidates on the left.

Take Mandela Barnes, for one.... abolish ICE, defund police....
There are others like him.

Did Mandela Barnes spend July 4th in Moscow?
Did Mandela Barnes feed information to the Vice President in hopes of overtuning an election?
Did Mandela Barnes pass legislation that benefited him and his family to the tune of 8 figures?

Johnson is a self-serving traitor. Sure go vote for him. Our republic dies.

It's not really news that Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, vying to be the state's first Black U.S. senator, has on occasion strongly criticized American police.

He's made his thoughts known in a number of forums.

But it is news when it turns out that Barnes offered his harsh words about American law enforcement to a Russian-funded media outlet. Barnes, a Democrat, is taking on Republican U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson next month.

Records show that Barnes did six interviews with RT, formerly Russia Today, in 2015 and 2016, during his second term as a state lawmaker. RT is a Russian state-controlled international news television network funded by the Kremlin.

In May 2015, for instance, Barnes told RT that police brutality is a “total epidemic” in the United States. A month earlier, he posted a screenshot of his interview with RT on the Baltimore protests, commenting, "People are tired of being targets."

In July 2016, after five police officers were shot dead in Dallas in retaliation against alleged racial discrimination by police, Barnes told RT that “police officers across the country haven’t reformed their patterns and practices” and that “police officers are over-exercising their badges.”

Barnes then thanked RT on Twitter for interviewing him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the Walker-Warnock debate is....something else.

I wasn’t able to watch it live but reading the news reviews it looks like the format chosen by the moderators kept Walker from further imploding.

I wasn't able to watch it live, but have seen several clips of the debate. Walker did very well.

More importantly, the fact that people here on DCUM are not critiquing the debate tells me that Walker did very well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Pretty much. In case any Republicans don’t know this, the above account is parody but it’s spot on. The media will do anything to get the fascists in power so they can feel important again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the Walker-Warnock debate is....something else.

I wasn’t able to watch it live but reading the news reviews it looks like the format chosen by the moderators kept Walker from further imploding.

I wasn't able to watch it live, but have seen several clips of the debate. Walker did very well.

More importantly, the fact that people here on DCUM are not critiquing the debate tells me that Walker did very well.

Since you frame everything through a partisan lens of course you’ll think Walker did well. Reality suggests otherwise.

LOL. You claim "reality" with a tweet from a B-list comedian.

When the AJC says Walker did well, he probably did. This publication has not been kind to Walker in the past

Anonymous wrote:Walker did surprisingly well but I still think he’s a complete doofus.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the Walker-Warnock debate is....something else.

I wasn’t able to watch it live but reading the news reviews it looks like the format chosen by the moderators kept Walker from further imploding.

I wasn't able to watch it live, but have seen several clips of the debate. Walker did very well.

More importantly, the fact that people here on DCUM are not critiquing the debate tells me that Walker did very well.

Since you frame everything through a partisan lens of course you’ll think Walker did well. Reality suggests otherwise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the Walker-Warnock debate is....something else.

I wasn’t able to watch it live but reading the news reviews it looks like the format chosen by the moderators kept Walker from further imploding.

I wasn't able to watch it live, but have seen several clips of the debate. Walker did very well.

More importantly, the fact that people here on DCUM are not critiquing the debate tells me that Walker did very well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the Walker-Warnock debate is....something else.

I wasn’t able to watch it live but reading the news reviews it looks like the format chosen by the moderators kept Walker from further imploding.

I wasn't able to watch it live, but have seen several clips of the debate. Walker did very well.

More importantly, the fact that people here on DCUM are not critiquing the debate tells me that Walker did very well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the Walker-Warnock debate is....something else.

I wasn’t able to watch it live but reading the news reviews it looks like the format chosen by the moderators kept Walker from further imploding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn’t matter. Walker and Vance will most likely get elected. The Democrats could run a combination of Mother Teresa and the Pope against them and still get beat.

Hello. Georgia. Look at who they elect to the Senate. You are not paying attention.

In what normal universe would Warnock and Walker even be close in the polls?