Having read the article again, I'm commenting twice.
What strikes me in the article is the discussion surrounding Fled Cruz running off to Cancun. The Dem strategists say that Cruz was able to repair his image on that by pointing to a lifetime of career public service, so it seems like the Cancun trip is untouchable.
Why not go after Cruz on the fact that he proposed legislation for term limits for senators, and this upcoming term for him would exceed the term limit he proposed? You can't backpedal out of that. Do you or do you not believe in the strength of your own ideas in proposal? If you do, then why are you running again? If you don't, then why should anyone vote for someone governing from insincere positions?
"I still think it would be the right move, but so long as it isn't the rules for the Dems I am not going to hamstring my base by following it" - some version of what he will say to handwave the hypocricy.
Going after conservatives for being hypocrites is not a winning strategy. The movement is about social hierarchies and identity politics. It just doesn't care about hypocrisy in service of the tribe and is totally credulous to any justification, no matter how tenuous.
I anticipate the hand-waving would actually be "term limits are the best option, but with corrupt pedophiles on the democrats' side, I have to stay in the game to save America. To save the children."
Honestly, I don't know if there is any logos or ethos argument that could ever away someone completely ruled by pathos.
Good. I'm not usually one for wanting to see someone lose everything, but if anyone deserves it it's this asshole. Imagine knowingly lying about dead children for a decade.
How the hell do these kinds of people live with themselves?
In this one instance they are actually losing their money, maybe, nearly a decade after the fact.
Up until now he's been living it relatively large.
I'd also put money on him still having a significantly higher amount of money to throw around, even assuming he loses the string of appeals and other legal bullshit he's undoubtedly going to pull for probably the next decade.
By chance are you using adblockers? I noticed it loads scripts from youtube.com, googletagmanager.com, and so on, so I bet there are some hooks in there. What I don’t understand is why a .GOV site includes commercial junk that the citizenry might opt to block.
Direct evidence? They haven’t even shown Direct Evidence’s 4th cousin twice removed. They’ve shown absolutely nothing. It’s just a bunch of old white men grandstanding and whining like petulant toddlers while the clock ticks on real issues like a fucking looming shutdown
You really love to see yet another unsuspecting victim accidentally invoke the wrath of tree law. Really makes that old episode of Aqua Teen Hunger Force (S1E2) hit different. Ain’t no joke!
The point is to rile up their chuds enough to go out and harass citizens who look like they may not be citizens (racial minorities) in order to scare them away from legally voting.
I pointed this out to a conservative coworker years ago . He asked me if illegal immigrants voted since I am an immigrant. I told him “if American’s don’t vote what makes you think immigrants would”, he just replied with “right, that makes sense”.
It’s specifically designed that way so they can use it to shut down the government, there’s also no reason why we need a debt ceiling. We could completely eliminate the concept tomorrow if we wanted to, but that’s one less thing the Republicans can use to hold our country hostage with
Not actually mentioned in the NPR article for some reason but:
Jones ordered Georgia’s Republican majority General Assembly and governor to take action before Dec. 8, saying he would redraw districts if lawmakers did not, and that he would not allow the 2024 elections to be conducted using districts he has found to be “unlawful.”
npr.org
Top