Minnesota's new Senator???
-
STiSchucky;254234 wrote:
Wow, nice ignorant remark.More like I voted Coleman last time, felt like I received absolutely nothing from him being a senator rather than him collecting the paycheck.
Probably not the only one to think that. Plus he comes off to me as a douche.
I guarantee I'm not the only one who thinks that.
I don't try to be politically correct.
My statement was meant to convey this...A large portion of people voted that way I bet, not EVERYONE voted that way. In no way did I say you voted for him because of that, just that a large chunk of people probably did. Not everyone is as informed on politics as people on this board even. A large portion of voters base their decision soley on political ads or because of the letter next to the persons name, rather than what the person stands for or believes.
-
So persuade me.
What has Coleman done for him to receive my vote again?
-
What did you expect him to do?
-
integra_gsr98;254237 wrote:
What did you expect him to do?
I dont know, Im the idiot, apparently. It's not like the states 6,000,000,000 dollars in debt, thats a start I'd guess. -
DaveH;254240 wrote:
You might want to check into what a Senator actually does.
Hey the Govt's making it rain liek Chuck does at the Northern, why not give a state in the actual union a little bit of that cheese. -
ND didn't need any money?
Conservative State = budget surplus
Liberal State full of Whiners = in the holemakes you think hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
-
So..nobody going to tell me why I should've voted for Coleman?
-
thrash;254204 wrote:
if the nukes are truly gone from ND (are they? that's news to me), that means uncle sam will be that much less interested in stopping us
No, I'm talking about the hundreds of silos that they've been filling in over the past 10-15 years to make Russia happy.
Per the information I was given a few years ago - Had ND Receded from the union during the cold war it would've been the most powerful country in the world based off of military power.
(now is where Chuck or Dave or someone steps in and confirms/denies this claim)
-
STiSchucky;254249 wrote:
So..nobody going to tell me why I should've voted for Coleman?Usually when someone is in office you keep them there unless they do something you don't like or have done something to hurt your lifestyle...so...what did he do?
I can do some digging tomorrow regarding things he has done or has been involved in.
-
When considering the legislature, incumbency is actually important, because seniority (# of terms served) determines your standing within subcommittees, and most important work happens in subcommittees.
So if you want your guy to be able to bring home the bacon maximally, he needs to be in the right subcommittees and he needs to have been there for a while. So you have to be pretty upset with a guy to unseat the incumbent.
But this is really besides the point, because Al Franken sucks. To vote for him you'd need to make the case that coleman sucked more.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login