Anonymous wrote:Heinz 57, this guy is. George Vandalay
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Seriously, how did this guy fly under the radar for so long claiming all this nonsense?
He really didn't. Too many voters in this district just don't give a crap for some reason.
I find it interesting that no Dem could beat Santos regardless.
I find it interesting that every lie he told was something the Republicans in that district would find commendable. Something they and their kids could identify with and aspire to.
I don't know. One of the lies was that he's gay-- he was married to a woman until recently. It's possible he is gay. Also possible that he was just going for an intersectional identity to seem more sympathetic. In any case, it is likely most GOP voters do not aspire to be a gay Brazilian.
Gay jew was the lie.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Seriously, how did this guy fly under the radar for so long claiming all this nonsense?
He really didn't. Too many voters in this district just don't give a crap for some reason.
I find it interesting that no Dem could beat Santos regardless.
I find it interesting that every lie he told was something the Republicans in that district would find commendable. Something they and their kids could identify with and aspire to.
I don't know. One of the lies was that he's gay-- he was married to a woman until recently. It's possible he is gay. Also possible that he was just going for an intersectional identity to seem more sympathetic. In any case, it is likely most GOP voters do not aspire to be a gay Brazilian.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Seriously, how did this guy fly under the radar for so long claiming all this nonsense?
He really didn't. Too many voters in this district just don't give a crap for some reason.
I find it interesting that no Dem could beat Santos regardless.
I find it interesting that every lie he told was something the Republicans in that district would find commendable. Something they and their kids could identify with and aspire to.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Seriously, how did this guy fly under the radar for so long claiming all this nonsense?
He really didn't. Too many voters in this district just don't give a crap for some reason.
I find it interesting that no Dem could beat Santos regardless.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Seriously, how did this guy fly under the radar for so long claiming all this nonsense?
He really didn't. Too many voters in this district just don't give a crap for some reason.
I find it interesting that no Dem could beat Santos regardless.
Maybe because Dems didn't have the backing and influence machine of Russian oligarchs?
Again, we need to end dark money in politics.