The 1st test - April 18th - Georgia

GRR Spartan wrote:In '02 Max Cleland, a Viet Nam vet who earned a Silver Star and Bronze star and Purple Heart while in combat was defeated by GOP nominee Saxby Chambliss who had student deferrments and the a medical deferrment for a football injury.  

The GOP/Chambliss campaign labeled Cleland as not protecting the Constitution running an ad featuring bin Laden and Saddam Hussein that was pulled after US Senator McCain joined protesting it.

The irony is the Koch Brothers and other outside groups spending millions to complain about outsiders helping the Democrat.  Given 21st century history this is minor league compared to the shot the GOP leveled with Cleland.

That was back when McCain was the media's favorite maverick - when he was attacking Rs. Then he got nominated and turned crazy man ready to blow the world up. Once he lost and now that he regularly attacks Rs again he's back to being the media's favorite maverick.

LooseGoose wrote:

GRR Spartan wrote:In '02 Max Cleland, a Viet Nam vet who earned a Silver Star and Bronze star and Purple Heart while in combat was defeated by GOP nominee Saxby Chambliss who had student deferrments and the a medical deferrment for a football injury.  

The GOP/Chambliss campaign labeled Cleland as not protecting the Constitution running an ad featuring bin Laden and Saddam Hussein that was pulled after US Senator McCain joined protesting it.

The irony is the Koch Brothers and other outside groups spending millions to complain about outsiders helping the Democrat.  Given 21st century history this is minor league compared to the shot the GOP leveled with Cleland.

That was back when McCain was the media's favorite maverick - when he was attacking Rs. Then he got nominated and turned crazy man ready to blow the world up. Once he lost and now that he regularly attacks Rs again he's back to being the media's favorite maverick.

Stay on topic please.

NigelUno wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

That was back when McCain was the media's favorite maverick - when he was attacking Rs. Then he got nominated and turned crazy man ready to blow the world up. Once he lost and now that he regularly attacks Rs again he's back to being the media's favorite maverick.

Stay on topic please.

Stuff it up your ass you numbnut Rethuglican.

I'm outraged by Trump and his cronies and will say what I want you fascist.

LooseGoose wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

Stay on topic please.

Stuff it up your ass you numbnut Rethuglican.

I'm outraged by Trump and his cronies and will say what I want you fascist.

Stay on topic please.

a "stay on topic" bump..

today is the day that Georgia might send shockwaves across America and vote for a Republican....

Robert J Sakimano wrote:a "stay on topic" bump..

today is the day that Georgia might send shockwaves across America and vote for a Republican.....

A "Stay on Topic" bump from Bob....

Robert J Sakimano wrote:a "stay on topic" bump..

today is the day that Georgia might send shockwaves across America and vote for a Republican.....

I might go vote at lunchtime. I'll let you know how many illegal voters I see.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

InTenSity wrote:
I think you missed their point.

shocking turn of events, right.

Bob said republicans don't like veterans. Which is odd because most are republican and vote republican.

CheesySpartan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:shocking turn of events, right.

Bob said republicans don't like veterans. Which is odd because most are republican and vote republican.

they're welcome to vote for America-hating republicans.

CheesySpartan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
shocking turn of events, right.  

Bob said republicans don't like veterans.  Which is odd because most are republican and vote republican.

Off topic- I'm so sorry- but your analysis that all veterans that you know are republicans probably says a lot more about your social circles than it does about veterans. I can introduce you to liberal veterans if you want. (Note- I'd guess that more than 50% are in fact republican. But i think there's a lot more to that than just military service. I've already strayed way too far off topic as is.)

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

CheesySpartan wrote:

Bob said republicans don't like veterans. Which is odd because most are republican and vote republican.

they're welcome to vote for America-hating republicans.

Glad you're giving your permission. I'm sure that's really important to them.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

CheesySpartan wrote:

Bob said republicans don't like veterans.  Which is odd because most are republican and vote republican.

Off topic- I'm so sorry- but your analysis that all veterans that you know are republicans probably says a lot more about your social circles than it does about veterans. I can introduce you to liberal veterans if you want. (Note- I'd guess that more than 50% are in fact republican. But i think there's a lot more to that than just military service. I've already strayed way too far off topic as is.)

I said "most" and I stand by that. Most are business connections FWIW.

CheesySpartan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:they're welcome to vote for America-hating republicans.

Glad you're giving your permission. I'm sure that's really important to them.

I hope so.

CheesySpartan wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
Off topic- I'm so sorry- but your analysis that all veterans that you know are republicans probably says a lot more about your social circles than it does about veterans. I can introduce you to liberal veterans if you want. (Note- I'd guess that more than 50% are in fact republican. But i think there's a lot more to that than just military service. I've already strayed way too far off topic as is.)

I said "most" and I stand by that.  Most are business connections FWIW.

No, you didn't. 

"Most veterans and current military I know or have met are all Republicans."

Most of the GOP veterans have never had to use the VA for services and were fortunate enough to work for companies that provided good health care coverage.

Most law enforcement and firefighters I know are Republican voters too and now they scream like stuck hogs because the MI GOP wants to tax their pensions.

They bitch about Hillary Clinton and Benghazi but when you ask them to describe what happened most don't know that the security team casualties were former Seals who signed on as government contractors, not active duty USN special forces.

Most also can't give a coherent answer on why Bush2 was correct in making Iraq a decade long conflict or why it took Obama less time to find bin Laden while Bush2 said he could care less. A lot of opinions based on 30 second sound bytes from Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly. All of whom never served in any military.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

CheesySpartan wrote:

I said "most" and I stand by that.  Most are business connections FWIW.

No, you didn't. 

"Most veterans and current military I know or have met are all Republicans."

GRR Spartan wrote:Most of the GOP veterans have never had to use the VA for services and were fortunate enough to work for companies that provided good health care coverage.

Most law enforcement and firefighters I know are Republican voters too and now they scream like stuck hogs because the MI GOP wants to tax their pensions.

They bitch about Hillary Clinton and Benghazi but when you ask them to describe what happened most don't know that the security team casualties were former Seals who signed on as government contractors, not active duty USN special forces.

Most also can't give a coherent answer on why Bush2 was correct in making Iraq a decade long conflict or why it took Obama less time to find bin Laden while Bush2 said he could care less. A lot of opinions based on 30 second sound bytes from Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly. All of whom never served in any military.

Republicans enjoy themselves some mainstream media, that's for sure.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
No, you didn't. 

"Most veterans and current military I know or have met are all Republicans."

I'm obviously not an english major but doesn't that quote read like "most veterans I know are republicans"? Adding the "all" where I did doesn't really matter. If I had said "All veterans I know" that would be different IMO.

CheesySpartan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

I'm obviously not an english major but doesn't that quote read like "most veterans I know are republicans"? Adding the "all" where I did doesn't really matter. If I had said "All veterans I know" that would be different IMO.

yeah I'm an idiot.. so I don't really know. I just thought it was kinda funny.

Did the Republican win yet?

CheesySpartan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

I'm obviously not an english major but doesn't that quote read like "most veterans I know are republicans"?  Adding the "all" where I did doesn't really matter.  If I had said "All veterans I know" that would be different IMO.

I used quotes when I said wiretap. Duh.

Anyway, so miscommunication, you meant most. That's fine. But I do think it's dangerous to make too many assumptions based purely on our own social (or business for that matter) circles. Despite people coming from different walks of life, just based on the fact that you're both there your views are likely to align in some way or another.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

CheesySpartan wrote:

I'm obviously not an english major but doesn't that quote read like "most veterans I know are republicans"?  Adding the "all" where I did doesn't really matter.  If I had said "All veterans I know" that would be different IMO.

I used quotes when I said wiretap. Duh.

Anyway, so miscommunication, you meant most. That's fine. But I do think it's dangerous to make too many assumptions based purely on our own social (or business for that matter) circles. Despite people coming from different walks of life, just based on the fact that you're both there your views are likely to align in some way or another.

yep.

Fake news is a real thing. Just look at the election.

of course, people tend to believe what they wanna believe. Especially the gullible, paranoid folks who are driven by fear and hate.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

CheesySpartan wrote:

I'm obviously not an english major but doesn't that quote read like "most veterans I know are republicans"?  Adding the "all" where I did doesn't really matter.  If I had said "All veterans I know" that would be different IMO.

I used quotes when I said wiretap. Duh.

Anyway, so miscommunication, you meant most. That's fine. But I do think it's dangerous to make too many assumptions based purely on our own social (or business for that matter) circles. Despite people coming from different walks of life, just based on the fact that you're both there your views are likely to align in some way or another.

I agree Travis. I was just stating my own experiences to date.

Daily Kos Elections‏Verified account @DKElections
More
Right now the early vote totals we're seeing are necessary, but not sufficient, for Ossoff to break 50%. Looonnng way to go #GA06

Jeff B/DDHQ‏Verified account @EsotericCD 16m16 minutes ago
More
Chances of Ossoff shocking the world and breaking 50% outright in #GA06 are rising by the minute.

Charlie Harper‏ @CharlieBHarper 1m1 minute ago
More
With 41/43 precincts in DeKalb reporting, Ossoff at 57%. He needed to be over 60% in DeKalb to get over 50% district wide.

I'm surprised the D did as well as he did. I still don't think he can win the runoff, but I based my conclusion on it being a southern state and history of the GA-6th. What I only just learned on Tuesday morning was the narrow victory Donnie got back in the General. I still think this stays red.

tGreenWay wrote:I'm surprised the D did as well as he did. I still don't think he can win the runoff, but I based my conclusion on it being a southern state and history of the GA-6th. What I only just learned on Tuesday morning was the narrow victory Donnie got back in the General. I still think this stays red.

Me too. But as I've said, I wouldn't take these town halls as "paid people" rabble rousing. Too many at too many locations. It's different.

Bottom line, perhaps the passion from both sides now will cause longer lines at all voting locations. In the end, that's a victory.

I'm still looking for some sweet paid protester money. Can someone show me where to sign up?

DWags wrote:

tGreenWay wrote:I'm surprised the D did as well as he did. I still don't think he can win the runoff, but I based my conclusion on it being a southern state and history of the GA-6th. What I only just learned on Tuesday morning was the narrow victory Donnie got back in the General. I still think this stays red.

Me too. But as I've said, I wouldn't take these town halls as "paid people" rabble rousing. Too many at too many locations. It's different.

Bottom line, perhaps the passion from both sides now will cause longer lines at all voting locations. In the end, that's a victory.

There was a longer line at my spot than in November, but I think that was mostly due to inefficiency and 2 forms that needed to be filled out (which wasn't the case in November). Yard signs outnumbered Presidential yard signs by at least 500/1 (not in people's yards...the ones that get thrown up on public property). More TV ads also (both sides).

so.. what happened?

Robert J Sakimano wrote:so.. what happened?

No one got 50%. Runoff in June (as expected).

NigelUno wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:so.. what happened?

No one got 50%. Runoff in June (as expected).

okay -thanks.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

No one got 50%. Runoff in June (as expected).

okay -thanks.

More votes for Republicans (overall) than Democrats.

Maybe Ossoff will move into the district by June.

Lol

NigelUno wrote:.

Maybe Ossoff will move into the district by June.

Don't rush him, he needs to see if he gets the job first.
By the way, does Congress pay moving expenses when you move into your district after the election?

Wait, this joker doesn't even live in the district he's running in and the Dems flew in celebrities and dumped unprecedented amounts of outside money into this congressional race?

What a sad time to be a democrat.

The_Dude wrote:Wait, this joker doesn't even live in the district he's running in and the Dems flew in celebrities and dumped unprecedented amounts of outside money into this congressional race?

What a sad time to be a democrat.

What a sad time to be ignorant and biased.

You've accomplished both quite well.

Congrats.

Dems will lose this race.

Democrats will never be able to outspend republicans.  If that's the game they're going to play, they will lose and the money always wins.  The republican party has gone all wonky alt-right, libertarianesque, might-makes-right.  The rich love this.  It's the natural extension of corportions are people and money is speech (Citizen's United).  I see it in my state everywhere.  If the center right doesn't forcefully take back the party, it will continue to be what it is now which is a core of ultra-rich who use their money to fool people into thinking they actually represent their interests, but more importantly, set up straw men like individual liberty, terrorism, and immigration to keep the average joe voting R.  The Democrats are essentially republicans of the 1980s with a few more liberal social policies.  What do they have to really differentiate themselves?  That's why they hammer on race and gender rights.  It's all they have.  They are scared of the Sanders populist message even though it's the only thing that can save them.

Democrats are losers and they still haven't figured it out.

Rocinante wrote:Dems will lose this race.

Democrats will never be able to outspend republicans.  If that's the game they're going to play, they will lose and the money always wins.  The republican party has gone all wonky alt-right, libertarianesque, might-makes-right.  The rich love this.  It's the natural extension of corportions are people and money is speech (Citizen's United).  I see it in my state everywhere.  If the center right doesn't forcefully take back the party, it will continue to be what it is now which is a core of ultra-rich who use their money to fool people into thinking they actually represent their interests, but more importantly, set up straw men like individual liberty, terrorism, and immigration to keep the average joe voting R.  The Democrats are essentially republicans of the 1980s with a few more liberal social policies.  What do they have to really differentiate themselves?  That's why they hammer on race and gender rights.  It's all they have.  They are scared of the Sanders populist message even though it's the only thing that can save them.

Democrats are losers and they still haven't figured it out.

that's the first time that's been mentioned in this thread.

Rocinante wrote:Dems will lose this race.

Democrats will never be able to outspend republicans.  If that's the game they're going to play, they will lose and the money always wins.  The republican party has gone all wonky alt-right, libertarianesque, might-makes-right.  The rich love this.  It's the natural extension of corportions are people and money is speech (Citizen's United).  I see it in my state everywhere.  If the center right doesn't forcefully take back the party, it will continue to be what it is now which is a core of ultra-rich who use their money to fool people into thinking they actually represent their interests, but more importantly, set up straw men like individual liberty, terrorism, and immigration to keep the average joe voting R.  The Democrats are essentially republicans of the 1980s with a few more liberal social policies.  What do they have to really differentiate themselves?  That's why they hammer on race and gender rights.  It's all they have.  They are scared of the Sanders populist message even though it's the only thing that can save them.

Democrats are losers and they still haven't figured it out.

Ummmm...Democrats will (most likely) lose the runoff because it's a Republican district. Nothing more. Nothing less.