IN-SEN Gravis: Braun +1 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 05:48:29 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2018 Senatorial Election Polls
  IN-SEN Gravis: Braun +1 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: IN-SEN Gravis: Braun +1  (Read 8479 times)
#gravelgang #lessiglad
Serious_Username
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,615
United States


« on: May 17, 2018, 03:05:20 PM »

He deserves to lose after voting to confirm a war criminal.
Logged
#gravelgang #lessiglad
Serious_Username
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,615
United States


« Reply #1 on: May 17, 2018, 04:29:35 PM »


3/51 republicans voted against a war criminal or would have if not for health (McCain) = 5.8% chance he wouldn't vote for a war criminal. Which is greater than the 0.0% chance from Donnelly.
Logged
#gravelgang #lessiglad
Serious_Username
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,615
United States


« Reply #2 on: May 18, 2018, 08:17:41 AM »


3/51 republicans voted against a war criminal or would have if not for health (McCain) = 5.8% chance he wouldn't vote for a war criminal. Which is greater than the 0.0% chance from Donnelly.
what? um... you must see the faulty logic... after all, braun would likely be a standard trumplican. Also, as bad as torture is, I think giving the rich more tax cuts will likely have more widespread bad effects pon our country

I don't. Tax cuts can be repealed or tweaked. Tacit acceptance of torture can't.
Logged
#gravelgang #lessiglad
Serious_Username
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,615
United States


« Reply #3 on: May 18, 2018, 11:01:41 AM »

Why would Braun vote against Gina Haspel? He's not a moderate, he's a semi-Trumpist who is quite conservative.

Saying Donnelly deserves to lose after voting for a war crimal ≠ saying Braun would be better.
Logged
#gravelgang #lessiglad
Serious_Username
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,615
United States


« Reply #4 on: May 18, 2018, 04:13:13 PM »


3/51 republicans voted against a war criminal or would have if not for health (McCain) = 5.8% chance he wouldn't vote for a war criminal. Which is greater than the 0.0% chance from Donnelly.
what? um... you must see the faulty logic... after all, braun would likely be a standard trumplican. Also, as bad as torture is, I think giving the rich more tax cuts will likely have more widespread bad effects pon our country

I don't. Tax cuts can be repealed or tweaked. Tacit acceptance of torture can't.
that was a bad example, braun would have voted haspel anyway

I'm going to direct you to this:
Why would Braun vote against Gina Haspel? He's not a moderate, he's a semi-Trumpist who is quite conservative.

Saying Donnelly deserves to lose after voting for a war crimal ≠ saying Braun would be better.

I understand that our two party system necessitates making ethical compromises in the voting booth, but ultimately, every voter must draw the line at what he or she seems an appropriate compromise. My line is voting to confirm a person who I very much consider to be a war criminal. If I still lived in Indiana, I'd leave the Senate race blank or vote for the green party candidate, if there is one
Logged
#gravelgang #lessiglad
Serious_Username
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,615
United States


« Reply #5 on: May 19, 2018, 07:26:04 PM »

[Snip - this has gotten way too long!]
well, sadly, in our current that is the equivalent of throwing away your vote.

There are plenty of Democratic-leaning voters who'd refuse to vote for a pro-life candidate or a gun control candidate or any number of other "things." The Haspel vote is my "thing." I'm a single issue voter on torture and to me, it's worth a protest vote.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.024 seconds with 14 queries.