Reply With Quote
Given the long history of Repug dirty tricks going back to Nixon/A er/The Plumbers, the Repugs stealing OH in 2004, and the extreme weirdness of the SC election, the Repugs are presumed guilty until proven innocent.
Talk about a sore loser, he thinks something is fishy. First two paragraphs of SC candidate protests primary loss to mystery Dem:
A U.S. Senate candidate asked for a new Democratic primary Monday after he lost last week to an unemployed military veteran who raised no money and had no signs and no ads.
The Democratic Party's 92-member executive committee plans a hearing Thursday on former state lawmaker Vic Rawl's protest and could order the primary results overturned. State party leaders can't remember that ever happening before. Rawl could also appeal to the state Supreme Court.
Given the long history of Repug dirty tricks going back to Nixon/A er/The Plumbers, the Repugs stealing OH in 2004, and the extreme weirdness of the SC election, the Repugs are presumed guilty until proven innocent.
Dirty tricks?
Give me a break. If this were a dirty trick, someone would have been spending money on an actual campaign commercials and promotions.
Rawl must have really been a poor candidate, and the unknown must have been better than a known bad, in voter's eyes.
I think it would be interesting to find out how he paid to run for office. I read somewhere it's like 10,000.00.
LOL@ dirty tricks!!!!!
He saved up the money for two years. Has no contributions to his campaign either.
The Dems just hate the fact that Greene's name was first on the ballot, as people are pretty apathetic and just go with the first name on the ballot. They think if there's a new election, more people will vote for the honest white man than the shady black man.
60% of the vote is not an accident!!
$10,400.
No wonder everyday working people don't go into politics. It's a rich man's game. Filing fee of $10,400, advertising, sucking ass to contributors...
I agree it would be interesting, but not important. It appears democrats are out on a witch hunt here. I don't see this as being anything other than a unknown running and getting lucky.
I can see how Rawl lost. I went though his campaign ads that were on YouTube. You can tell his words aren't genuine. Just another politician blaming "30 years of republicans" for the problems. Maybe the SC voters as a whole simply didn't like him, and voted for the unknown, the same way I did not vote to reelect senator Smith in my state. I spoiled my vote.
No kidding. That's a solid win.60% of the vote is not an accident!!
As between two ordinary stains, vote for the top of the ballot. Next.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
