Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They're all pretty inexperienced. It was one criticism I had about all of them in an earlier thread. Collins was the only one that came close to working his way up the political ladder from lower positions with a longer track record.
Loeffler is completely inexperienced in politics, so I find that criticism on Warnock not to be incorrect... but it cuts both ways. She worked her way up in a business organization with a final boost that came from marrying the boss after earlier success at lower levels. Warnock worked his way up too. You don't become pastor of Ebeneezer Baptist by merely being any other pastor. That is a position you work your way into as well.
Ossof could use more experience, but so could have Perdue. This was his first term of anything really and his personal achievements in the senate have been low. He has mostly just gone in for votes and voted the party line. He got the position with family ties to Sonny. He has had some success in business, but he also deserves some criticism from how he ran the businesses and impacts on his past employees here in Georgia.
For the record... I really believe most people should start out in the state house and over time work their way up into other positions in politics before entering more important positions. Having a track record and knowing how to write and negotiate legislation is important and it is not a skill many people naturally have. That is not something these 4 candidates can really claim. This pool of candidates is very weak on experience, but I definitely won't sit back and let the criticisms cut one way.
Lastly, I find it hilarious that a conservative in Georgia is using Christian Religious Zealot-ism as something against a Democratic candidate. That is traditionally something many have looked for in Republicans in this state.
They're all pretty inexperienced. It was one criticism I had about all of them in an earlier thread. Collins was the only one that came close to working his way up the political ladder from lower positions with a longer track record.
Loeffler is completely inexperienced in politics, so I find that criticism on Warnock not to be incorrect... but it cuts both ways. She worked her way up in a business organization with a final boost that came from marrying the boss after earlier success at lower levels. Warnock worked his way up too. You don't become pastor of Ebeneezer Baptist by merely being any other pastor. That is a position you work your way into as well.
Ossof could use more experience, but so could have Perdue. This was his first term of anything really and his personal achievements in the senate have been low. He has mostly just gone in for votes and voted the party line. He got the position with family ties to Sonny. He has had some success in business, but he also deserves some criticism from how he ran the businesses and impacts on his past employees here in Georgia.
For the record... I really believe most people should start out in the state house and over time work their way up into other positions in politics before entering more important positions. Having a track record and knowing how to write and negotiate legislation is important and it is not a skill many people naturally have. That is not something these 4 candidates can really claim. This pool of candidates is very weak on experience, but I definitely won't sit back and let the criticisms cut one way.
Lastly, I find it hilarious that a conservative in Georgia is using Christian Religious Zealot-ism as something against a Democratic candidate. That is traditionally something many have looked for in Republicans in this state.
I'm not a "Conservative" nor am I a republican. In fact the only republican I have ever voted for in Georgia was Zell Miller but when I voted for him he was a Democrat so not sure that really counts. Warnock is an awful candidate in the same way Ossoff is. What I do find funny is now all the sudden its ok to be a religious zealot and run for office. Before that was frowned upon so why is it all the sudden acceptable? What changed? Democratic, Republican, or Independent we don't need religious leaders shaping government policy it is extremely dangerous for obvious reasons. You seem to be saying its ok for there to be a religious zealot as long as they are a Democrat and not republican. I am saying it isn't ok for either so who is the hypocrite here? Sure isn't me.
Sorry, not a conservative... you just take up all their positions, protect conservative candidates, and demonize democrats in most of the times it comes up... It's a little hard to keep track sometimes.
That must make you one of those faux 'Libertarian' (?) or a faux independent because being a major party supporter isn't cool, but really you take up the conservative arguments during most discussions. That just makes you not a 'Republican.'
No sell.
I don't see Warnock as a zealot, but I'm listening... and still laughing.
Sorry, not a conservative... you just take up all their positions, protect conservative candidates, and demonize democrats in most of the times it comes up... It's a little hard to keep track sometimes.
That must make you one of those faux 'Libertarian' (?) or a faux independent because being a major party supporter isn't cool, but really you take up the conservative arguments during most discussions. That just makes you not a 'Republican.'
No sell.
I don't see Warnock as a zealot, but I'm listening... and still laughing.
Wife and I voted for Teresa Tomlinson instead of Ossoff in primary. We have never and will never be voting for Perdue or Kemp or Loeffler and the list goes on. However, we don't just check a box because someone has a 'D' by their name because that is as low information as it gets. We won't be voting for Ossoff or Warnock either but that doesn't make us conservative, republican, independent, or libertarian. Its completely ok to acknowledge when your side has awful candidates. That is called not being a delusional partisan hack. I'm still laughing how now all the sudden it is ok to be a religious zealot after years of it being mocked and discouraged. I have chastised and criticized Kemp and Loeffler on here many times. You on the other hand are trying to rewrite the script on religious political candidates all the sudden. How cute and funny. Same can be said about folks who check a box just because someone has an 'R' by their name.
But you always attack liberal or even moderates and seem to give a large pass on conservatives.
You can call yourself whatever you want, but if you want people to believe what you're selling you seriously take up self-reflection on the opinions you commonly post. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, walks like a suck, and it quacks like a duck... its a duck!
As for my thoughts. I have given my unabridged thoughts on this matter. The candidates aren't awful. There are some pros and cons, but they are all weak on experience and I'm not giving a pass on conservative candidates on that, while only attacking the liberal ones....
But you always attack liberal or even moderates and seem to give a large pass on conservatives.
You can call yourself whatever you want, but if you want people to believe what you're selling you seriously take up self-reflection on the opinions you commonly post. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, walks like a suck, and it quacks like a duck... its a duck!
As for my thoughts. I have given my unabridged thoughts on this matter. The candidates aren't awful. There are some pros and cons, but they are all weak on experience and I'm not giving a pass on conservative candidates on that, while only attacking the liberal ones....
You seem to have selective reading comprehension. It doesn't shock me that you are trying to excuse Warnock's religious position as being perfectly ok while criticizing someone else that might not be on the same side of the aisle. I am saying both are equally bad, dangerous, and unacceptable for national public office. I'll stand by my nearly 33 year Democratic Party voting record in Georgia over some random guy on the internet that is trying to spin like a Maytag washing machine. These candidates are awful (all of them) and we as Georgians deserve better. How much money has Ossoff wasted in his political endeavors? Its absurd. Probably about as much as Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue have made via inside trading. You probably don't know or remember then Governor Bill Clinton's quote on partisan politics but you might be served to look it up and digest it. Is President Clinton a conservative or a republican now? Getting on the internet and saying someone is conservative or a republican just because they aren't going to vote for awful candidates is a bit well... disingenuous and tone deaf.
You're emphasizing criticism on one side, while ignoring the same thing on the other, and you have a history of being the conservative in the room. I also haven't criticized Republicans for much in this forum, but I did acknowledge their history of pandering to evangelical conservatives. It is rather funny.
As for Warnock... please tell me how he is a zealot? This is is actually a serious question I've brought up that has gone unanswered. Are we assuming anyone with a religious background is a zealot or is there a specific item I'm simply unaware of?
You're emphasizing criticism on one side, while ignoring the same thing on the other, and you have a history of being the conservative in the room. I also haven't criticized Republicans for much in this forum, but I did acknowledge their history of pandering to evangelical conservatives. It is rather funny.
As for Warnock... please tell me how he is a zealot? This is is actually a serious question I've brought up that has gone unanswered. Are we assuming anyone with a religious background is a zealot or is there a specific item I'm simply unaware of?
I'm not? What part of both do you not understand? It isn't ok for any candidate be they Democrat or republican to be an evangelical religious zealot. You are the one doing the ignoring here simply because Warnock happens to be on the Democratic ticket. If he had an 'R' by his name you wouldn't be ok with it lets just be honest ok? I am saying it isn't ok for anyone regardless of party affiliation. Do you understand this? Warnock via his beliefs and position of power in a religious organization would be extremely dangerous as a legislator. So would 'Pastor Bubba Smith Republican' from Moultrie Georgia if such a person existed and were running for Senate. Evangelicals have no place in government it is why we have separation of church and state. I'm not the one with the hypocrisy here so please stop trying to accuse me of doing the very thing you are actually doing. It's a very bad look.
I'm not? What part of both do you not understand? It isn't ok for any candidate be they Democrat or republican to be an evangelical religious zealot. You are the one doing the ignoring here simply because Warnock happens to be on the Democratic ticket. If he had an 'R' by his name you wouldn't be ok with it lets just be honest ok? I am saying it isn't ok for anyone regardless of party affiliation. Do you understand this? Warnock via his beliefs and position of power in a religious organization would be extremely dangerous as a legislator. So would 'Bubba Smith Republican' from Moultrie Georgia if such a person existed and were running for Senate. Evangelicals have no place in government it is why we have separation of church and state. I'm not the one with the hypocrisy here so please stop trying to accuse me of doing the very thing you are actually doing. It's a very bad look.
Ahh the evolving argument...
So anyone who is a Pastor is a zealot. A zealot is about the fanaticism about it that it drives all or most their political beliefs. If you want to call someone out for merely being a pastor, then do so... call it what it is.
I think most pastors coming out is black churches are often described more as zealots for social justice, than they are religion. Not to say they are religious or say they don't have beliefs, but to say it isn't their political driving force. However, for many people in Georgia who are self-identified evangelical protestant Christians, religion is the first thing they mention in their political beliefs.
I welcome further arguments on that matter, but you've been mostly side-stepping that by throwing up smoke and mirrors and not actually discussing your argument on being a zealot very much.
As for your other opinions, this thing where you come onto the forum playing conservative and pretending to not be one is fascinating. I'm talking about more than this thread. You've always been one of the 1 or 2 conservative opinions in this room and are constantly one to go after democrats more. That is why I'm not buying what your selling in subsequent arguments.
So anyone who is a Pastor is a zealot. A zealot is about the fanaticism about it that it drives all or most their political beliefs. If you want to call someone out for merely being a pastor, then do so... call it what it is.
I think most pastors coming out is black churches are often described more as zealots for social justice, than they are religion. Not to say they are religious or say they don't have beliefs, but to say it isn't their political driving force. However, for many people in Georgia who are self-identified evangelical protestant Christians, religion is the first thing they mention in their political beliefs.
I welcome further arguments on that matter, but you've been mostly side-stepping that by throwing up smoke and mirrors and not actually discussing your argument on being a zealot very much.
As for your other opinions, this thing where you come onto the forum playing conservative and pretending to not be one is fascinating. I'm talking about more than this thread. You've always been one of the 1 or 2 conservative opinions in this room and are constantly one to go after democrats more. That is why I'm not buying what your selling in subsequent arguments.
You are doing the very thing in this thread that you are trying to accuse me of doing. It's called projection. You also seem to not understand the meaning of the words 'both' or 'partisan'. No matter how many times I say over and over that no, it isn't ok for evangelicals of any persuasion to be running on political tickets you will continue to stick your fingers in your ears and ignore it then try and spin spin spin my very clear statements on this issue and make baseless accusations all because of your biases.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
