Attachments:

Kids can't vote.

Hunh? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kids can't vote.


That won't stop Democrats from attempting to register them and have them vote absentee!

Hunh? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kids can't vote.

True.

The Cooch is done for. A goner. Politically, he's already a corpse.

I am voting for E.W. Jackson, the only honest one in the bunch. Oh wait, he lied or misled on his website?

http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/state-regional/government-politics/no-records-to-prove-jackson-was-red-sox-chaplain/article_2c86ba6b-c3da-5674-bace-8fcdea126818.html

FUNdamental Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am voting for E.W. Jackson, the only honest one
> in the bunch. Oh wait, he lied or misled on his
> website?
>
> http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/state-regional/g
> overnment-politics/no-records-to-prove-jackson-was
> -red-sox-chaplain/article_2c86ba6b-c3da-5674-bace-
> 8fcdea126818.html


So youre certainly not voting for Tmac then from all the lies about his company being intellectually honest and all?

Radiophile youve never voted for an R in your life or seen a D you didnt love

Terry McAwful, involved in just about every scam that's been around for the past two decades. My gosh, this guy is true scum.....

Washington Post Headline:

McAuliffe among investors in Rhode Island insurance scam that preyed on dying people

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/mcauliffe-among-investors-in-rhode-island-insurance-scam-that-preyed-on-dying-people/2013/10/10/b7d937e0-3127-11e3-89ae-16e186e117d8_story.html

At this point (October 11) in 2009, McDonnell was up by 9 over Deeds. He ended up winning by 18.

Cooch has work to do, but it's far from over. He needs to get his base to show up and let the slow drip of WaPo stories on McAuliffe's lies and unethical scams on the old, poor and dying drag him down.

Cuccinelli is about to unleash a barrage of ads, citing liberal media outlets like the WaPo and NYTimes detailing Fast Terry's recent past. His numbers will drop and independents that were leaning D will sit it out.

McAwful Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Terry McAwful, involved in just about every scam
> that's been around for the past two decades. My
> gosh, this guy is true scum.....
>
> Washington Post Headline:
>

McAuliffe among investors in Rhode Island
> insurance scam that preyed on dying people

>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-polit
> ics/mcauliffe-among-investors-in-rhode-island-insu
> rance-scam-that-preyed-on-dying-people/2013/10/10/
> b7d937e0-3127-11e3-89ae-16e186e117d8_story.html


"Federal court documents do not accuse McAuliffe of wrongdoing, and it wasn’t clear whether he had made money or lost money on the investments."

involved Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> McAwful Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Terry McAwful, involved in just about every
> scam
> > that's been around for the past two decades.
> My
> > gosh, this guy is true scum.....
> >
> > Washington Post Headline:
> >

McAuliffe among investors in Rhode Island
> > insurance scam that preyed on dying people

> >
> >
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-polit
>
> >
> ics/mcauliffe-among-investors-in-rhode-island-insu
>
> >
> rance-scam-that-preyed-on-dying-people/2013/10/10/
>
> > b7d937e0-3127-11e3-89ae-16e186e117d8_story.html
>
>
> "Federal court documents do not accuse
> McAuliffe of wrongdoing, and it wasn’t clear
> whether he had made money or lost money on the
> investments."


Just another scam he was involved in. Whether he made money or not isn't the issue. He made $18 million on the Global Crossing theft while a few thousand retirees and middle class investors lost their life savings so that makes up for any loss he might have incurred on this one. No way anyone can believe Fast Terry is ethical or trustworthy. You might vote for him just because he has a D next to his name, but don't lie to yourself about his character. He's a 6 foot tall pile of poop. Even his supporters at the WaPo and New York Times admit it.

Don't forget

Terry LOVES Obamacare and redistributing YOUR wealth. He wants all of our illegal felons back from MD and for you to live in a third-world shithole.

Go ahead, kids, vote your future goodbye.

DNC Fact Checker Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Don't forget
>
> Terry LOVES Obamacare and redistributing YOUR
> wealth. He wants all of our illegal felons back
> from MD and for you to live in a third-world
> shithole.
>
> Go ahead, kids, vote your future goodbye.


McAuliffe's campaign is hitting the college campi hard. Lot's of rallies with trinkets and semi-hot chicks. Not noticing a real ground swell like I did for Obama, but he's trying to gin up the troops. The message is skewed to the girls.

fastterry.com Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> involved Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > McAwful Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Terry McAwful, involved in just about every
> > scam
> > > that's been around for the past two decades.
> > My
> > > gosh, this guy is true scum.....
> > >
> > > Washington Post Headline:
> > >

McAuliffe among investors in Rhode Island
> > > insurance scam that preyed on dying
> people

> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-polit
>
> >
> > >
> >
> ics/mcauliffe-among-investors-in-rhode-island-insu
>
> >
> > >
> >
> rance-scam-that-preyed-on-dying-people/2013/10/10/
>
> >
> > >
> b7d937e0-3127-11e3-89ae-16e186e117d8_story.html
> >
> >
> > "Federal court documents do not accuse
> > McAuliffe of wrongdoing, and it wasn’t clear
> > whether he had made money or lost money on the
> > investments."
>
>
> Just another scam he was involved in. Whether he
> made money or not isn't the issue. He made $18
> million on the Global Crossing theft while a few
> thousand retirees and middle class investors lost
> their life savings so that makes up for any loss
> he might have incurred on this one. No way anyone
> can believe Fast Terry is ethical or trustworthy.
> You might vote for him just because he has a D
> next to his name, but don't lie to yourself about
> his character. He's a 6 foot tall pile of poop.
> Even his supporters at the WaPo and New York Times
> admit it.

Lol this is a Limbaugh talking point. You dittohead ;)

McAuliffe made a fantastic profit through an insider deal that allowed him to buy Global Crossing stock before it was offered to the public. Cuccinelli’s ad, without directly saying so, clearly links McAuliffe’s gain to the downfall of the company and the woes of its employees.

There’s no evidence McAuliffe had a management role in Global Crossing. He was an investor who bought low and sold about half of his holdings at peak value. He held on to the rest of his shares until they were virtually worthless. All of the shares were publicly traded, so it’s far-fetched to suggest McAuliffe raided the company’s coffers.

We rate the claim False.

http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2013/sep/23/ken-cuccinelli/cuccinell-ad-says-mcauliffe-cashed-demise-global-c/

Scandals won't matter. Everyone knows Terry is a dirtball.

McAuliffe will win the race because Ken Cuccinelli is the worst candidate the GOP could muster, and independents and even moderate Republicans can't swallow the idea of voting for him.

Votes against Cuccinelli will push Terry over the top. If we didn't have a flawed system that made it so a Sarvis vote would be "wasted", I would vote for him to make a point that the D and R candidates are terrible.

Does not matter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Scandals won't matter. Everyone knows Terry is a
> dirtball.
>
> McAuliffe will win the race because Ken Cuccinelli
> is the worst candidate the GOP could muster, and
> independents and even moderate Republicans can't
> swallow the idea of voting for him.
>
> Votes against Cuccinelli will push Terry over the
> top. If we didn't have a flawed system that made
> it so a Sarvis vote would be "wasted", I would
> vote for him to make a point that the D and R
> candidates are terrible.


Most will sit it out, not go to the polls to vote for a "dirtbag". As has been written over and over on this very "blog", this election will come down to whether or not McAuliffe can get a decent turnout. Cuccinelli is trying to depress any crossovers or independents from voting for McAuliffe. Sarvis actually gives those who would have done that a (not really) viable candidate to register a protest. In the end, that hurts McAuliffe as Cuccinelli's base will crawl over glass to vote for him. No way McAuliffe has that kind of base devotion. It will be close, but if Sarvis can get up to 12 points or so, that's probably going to be enough to rob McAuliffe of the independents that he needed to win this.

Sabato's Left Nut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Does not matter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Scandals won't matter. Everyone knows Terry is
> a
> > dirtball.
> >
> > McAuliffe will win the race because Ken
> Cuccinelli
> > is the worst candidate the GOP could muster,
> and
> > independents and even moderate Republicans
> can't
> > swallow the idea of voting for him.
> >
> > Votes against Cuccinelli will push Terry over
> the
> > top. If we didn't have a flawed system that
> made
> > it so a Sarvis vote would be "wasted", I would
> > vote for him to make a point that the D and R
> > candidates are terrible.
>
>
> Most will sit it out, not go to the polls to vote
> for a "dirtbag". As has been written over and
> over on this very "blog", this election will come
> down to whether or not McAuliffe can get a decent
> turnout. Cuccinelli is trying to depress any
> crossovers or independents from voting for
> McAuliffe. Sarvis actually gives those who would
> have done that a (not really) viable candidate to
> register a protest. In the end, that hurts
> McAuliffe as Cuccinelli's base will crawl over
> glass to vote for him. No way McAuliffe has that
> kind of base devotion. It will be close, but if
> Sarvis can get up to 12 points or so, that's
> probably going to be enough to rob McAuliffe of
> the independents that he needed to win this.


Agreed. Cuccinelli wins with a plurality of about 45%, McAuliffe pulls in about 40 and Sarvis has a good showing at 15.

Word on the street is that McAuliffe was trying to marginalize Sarvis for the past 2 months but might now be trying to play ball with him to get him to double team Cuccinelli. Terry's a scumbag, but he's not dumb. He knows the path to victory for him is through Sarvis.

You dittohead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Lol this is a Limbaugh talking point. You
> dittohead ;)
>
> McAuliffe made a fantastic profit through an
> insider deal that allowed him to buy Global
> Crossing stock before it was offered to the
> public. Cuccinelli’s ad, without directly saying
> so, clearly links McAuliffe’s gain to the
> downfall of the company and the woes of its
> employees.
>
> There’s no evidence McAuliffe had a management
> role in Global Crossing. He was an investor who
> bought low and sold about half of his holdings at
> peak value. He held on to the rest of his shares
> until they were virtually worthless. All of the
> shares were publicly traded, so it’s far-fetched
> to suggest McAuliffe raided the company’s
> coffers.
>
> We rate the claim False.
>
> http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2013
> /sep/23/ken-cuccinelli/cuccinell-ad-says-mcauliffe
> -cashed-demise-global-c/


The only part that they rated is false is that he had some direct involvement in causing the fall of the company. The rest of the story is correct.

- He did profit as an insider from a relatively minor investment to the tune of many millions, the source of which was other investor's funds. Which is somewhat of a pattern for Terry (e.g., see also the union pension fund scam that he was involved in where he greatly profited for a trivial personal investment at the expense of others.)

- He gained the opportunity to invest as an insider due to his political connections.

- He did "coincidentally" choose the best possible time to dump most of his stock.

- He was "coincidentally" sitting in the same office as the Winnick and other principals of Global Crossing at the time.

- There should have been more of a pursuit of the case but that was squashed by those at higher political levels.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2013/09/09/cuccinellis-attack-on-mcauliffes-global-crossing-investment/

The Facts

The basic details of McAuliffe’s investment in now bankrupt Global Crossing are not in dispute: He was given an opportunity to invest in the fiber-optics telecommunications firms before it went public, which is the kind of insider deal not available to most investors. Obviously there is some risk involved in any stock purchase, but people who get shares before a company goes public almost always make good returns, because the offering price for public shareholders is going to be higher than the insider price.

McAuliffe got this opportunity after spending a year as a consultant for business executive Gary Winnick, who put together Global Crossing, according to news reports cited by the Cuccinelli campaign.

McAuliffe invested $100,000—of his own money, according to a spokesman. Various reports have pegged McAuliffe’s return as either $18 million or $8.1 million, citing McAuliffe as a source. McAuliffe once bragged to The New York Times in 1999 that the value of the shares had grown to as much as $18 million, but then in 2009 he documented to the Associated Press that his actual return was $8.1 million because he held onto some shares that eventually were nearly worthless.

The ad flashes a headline showing $18 million. Richard T. Cullen, communications director for Cuccinelli campaign, cites various news accounts for that number, though as we noted McAuliffe later downsized it.

Either way, $18 million or $8.1 million, it’s a fantastic return on McAuliffe’s $100,000 investment. And the ad accurately says, “Political insider and investor Terry McAuliffe cashed in, walking away with millions.”

But interspersed between these facts are interviews with workers at Global Crossing whose lives were ruined when Global Crossing collapsed, in part because their retirement plans were invested in the company stock.

But McAuliffe was only an investor, and had nothing to do with the management, or mismanagement, of the company. Winnick—who earned at least $700 million from his sales of Global Crossing stock—was never charged with any criminal wrong-doing; the SEC staff wanted to pursue civil charges over the company’s accounting practices but they were overruled by SEC commissioners.

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cuccinelli wins with a plurality of about
> 45%, McAuliffe pulls in about 40 and Sarvis has a
> good showing at 15.

Hmmm... Current polling has T-Mac @ 45%, the Kookster @ 39%, and that other guy @ 9%. It sounds like you didn't learn a whole lot from Mitten's 2012 "don't believe the polls" debacle. Oh well!

GOP-tards!

LoLz!


Attachments:

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sabato's Left Nut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Does not matter Wrote:
> >

>
> Agreed. Cuccinelli wins with a plurality of about
> 45%, McAuliffe pulls in about 40 and Sarvis has a
> good showing at 15.
>
> Word on the street is that McAuliffe was trying to
> marginalize Sarvis for the past 2 months but might
> now be trying to play ball with him to get him to
> double team Cuccinelli. Terry's a scumbag, but
> he's not dumb. He knows the path to victory for
> him is through Sarvis.

Wishful thinking! The Democrats could win with a ham sandwich in this election.

Cuccinelli's polling reflects his negatives with the electorate. Four years of tea party politics in a purple state has taken its toll.

He can run all the attack ads his underfunded campaign can spit out between now and the election and it won't make a difference. With less than a month to go, the fact that he, the only current office holder in the race, can still only eke out second place against a comparative unknown in the Commonwealth doesn't bode well.

Of course, there is always the last refuge of the dying Republican party, voter suppression!

Ghost of Tip O'Neill Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Wishful thinking! The Democrats could win with a
> ham sandwich in this election.

Youre partially correct. Impossible to know the winner until the election happens, but the fact that people will vote for someone as despicable as TMac because he has a D next to his name does show liberal partisan voters would in fact vote for a ham sandwich if a D was next to it.

Can you tell me what specifically you like about TMac and how he would be a great choice? So far not one of you will answer this question. You can just be honest and say its because of the D and youre being a partisan, at least that would be truthful.

So the polls say the whack job will lose to the sleaze. Proud to be a Virginian.

Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Impossible to know the winner until the election
> happens, but the fact that people will vote for
> someone as despicable as TMac because he has a
> D next to his name does show liberal partisan
> voters would in fact vote for a ham sandwich if
> a D was next to it.

The fact is, any reasonable voter would gladly vote for a ham sandwich were it's opponent the Kookster, regardless party affiliation!

> Can you tell me what specifically you like about
> TMac and how he would be a great choice?

T-Mac's best quality, in my opinion, is that he's not a rabid-right socially draconian wingnut.

GOP-tards!

LoLz!

Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ghost of Tip O'Neill Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Wishful thinking! The Democrats could win with
> a
> > ham sandwich in this election.
>
> Youre partially correct. Impossible to know the
> winner until the election happens, but the fact
> that people will vote for someone as despicable as
> TMac because he has a D next to his name does show
> liberal partisan voters would in fact vote for a
> ham sandwich if a D was next to it.
>
> Can you tell me what specifically you like about
> TMac and how he would be a great choice? So far
> not one of you will answer this question. You can
> just be honest and say its because of the D and
> youre being a partisan, at least that would be
> truthful.


I don't like much about McAuliffe at all, but compared to the whack job, he's better. I'm not voting for him because I'm a partisan democrat, I'm voting for him because he's not Cuccinelli.

Honestly, Cooch is probably fucked. He hasn't led in a poll since mid-July and the tightening that seemed to be occurring through September has opened back up (even if you exlude the BS PPP poll)*. I suspect he'll score higher than his average in the polls both because of his determined followers and because alot of the Sarvis vote will melt away, if history is any guide.

But he'll probably still fall short. I'd guess T-Mac gets 50 or 51% of the vote, but that could be less (maybe even under 50%, though still a plurality, depending upon the Sarvis factor).

Voters hate both of these guys (and though I'm a Cooch voter, I see why). Cooch has run a piss-poor campaign and hasn't been able to pivot and talk to the center the way Bob McDonnell did. I've said before I don't think he's actually a bad guy and I believe that. But he's been unable (or unwilling) for the most part to pivot outside of his base. I think he thought that T-Mac was such an odious candidate (and he certainly is!) that with his theoretically devoted base he could win by default.

But the way he got the nomination ticked off some of his base and T-Mac has successfully painted him as "scary". If voters really believe that, scary loses to sleazy.

Downticket will be interesting. I've long thought EW Jackson would get his ass handed to him and that the AG race was more or less "lean GOP". (Obenshain has run a pretty good campaign, has more money, and has avoided most of the slime from the top-ticket races).

But polling has shown that while Obenshain is generally even or ahead, Jackson isn't getting crushed. He's usually tied or up or down within the margin of error - presumably because folks aren't paying attention. (Also, Ralph Northam, whatever his virtues, is an incredibly lazy campaigner. He clearly thought - and granted alot of us did - that he won by default when EW got the nomination).

Imagine Governor T-Mac with Lt. Governor EW Jackson. Truly an amazing year in Virginia politics (and not in a good way).

*In the modern era, to my knowledge only Doug Wilder (D, 1989) and Tim Kaine (D, 2005) have been down at this point in the race and gone on to win.

Fat-Ass-Girl wrote:
> > Can you tell me what specifically you like
> about
> > TMac and how he would be a great choice?
>
> T-Mac's best quality, in my opinion, is that he's
> not a rabid-right socially draconian wingnut.
>

^^^ This. This is what's wrong with today's politics. I haven't heard one good word from the dems about McA, just negative stuff about Cooch, even when asked specifically. They don't want Terry in at all, they just want Kook out.

BUT, I'll ask the question again, what will McAulliffe do for the Commonwealth?

Moeron Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fat-Ass-Girl wrote:
> > > Can you tell me what specifically you like
> > about
> > > TMac and how he would be a great choice?
> >
> > T-Mac's best quality, in my opinion, is that
> he's
> > not a rabid-right socially draconian wingnut.
> >
>
> ^^^ This. This is what's wrong with today's
> politics. I haven't heard one good word from the
> dems about McA, just negative stuff about Cooch,
> even when asked specifically. They don't want
> Terry in at all, they just want Kook out.
>
> BUT, I'll ask the question again, what will
> the Commonwealth do for McAuliffe?

FIFY

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
Attachments:

RJR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I don't like much about McAuliffe at all, but
> compared to the whack job, he's better. I'm not
> voting for him because I'm a partisan democrat,
> I'm voting for him because he's not Cuccinelli.


Actually if you didnt like either you wouldnt vote. Youre obviously comfortable voting for TMac. Theres nothing better about a guy whose only record of success is stealing millions through government connections while screwing over his voters and the people. Hes everything thats wrong with politics. There literally may not be a worse candidate nation wide.

Don't count your chickens just yet. The relentlessly breeding Duggar family is coming to lend their support to the cooch.

McAwfull is Not going to Carry the main state of Va. He will carry Nova. Richmond, Hampton Roads but, because hes such a lousey pick many Dems will sit it out because

1. The truth about his business deals are surfacing and are horrid

2. Obama Care is just starting to make people think twice about Dem Lies.

3. He will be salvoed with #1 and 2 in the final days.

4. Some positive movement has been accomplished with illegal voting in Va

Koooch by a nose .. Its not over Till the "Fat Bottom Lady" Sings..Or at least

Bitches...

Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Actually if you didnt like either you wouldnt
> vote.

Is that actually true? As a RINO™ Squish, I've voted for a lot of candidates I've had reservations about. Cooch will be one of them. I've never "not voted" and I've never voted for the other guy (because I think not voting is cheap and I can't honestly endorse the other guy).

I've always suspected this happens for folks on the other side too. Not liking a candidate doesn't make you vote for the other guy. And to the extent that it does (which I suspect is very little these days), the "other guy" needs to be a blankish slate or someone incredibly unoffensive.

What do you mean by statement #4?

And thats all

Woith regard to illegal voting

I will vote for kooch. To those who are not sure.. Hold Your Nose close your eys and Vote .. for Kooch


because a Vote for McAwfull means

Scandle

Scandle

Scandle

Nothing happining in Richmond 4 years

Lies Lies Lies

And in the End Disgust..


Kooch stay the hell out of the womans arena with abortion We know its MURDER

But Its the law and the country will have to fall out to shit which its doing before anyone cares. Let it fester like Obama Care and the people will take care of it in due time

Moeron Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------>
> ^^^ This. This is what's wrong with today's
> politics. I haven't heard one good word from the
> dems about McA, just negative stuff about Cooch,
> even when asked specifically. They don't want
> Terry in ate all, they just want Kook out.
>
> BUT, I'll ask the question again, what will
> McAulliffe do for the Commonwealth?

I don't know, but I don't especially care. Among other things, my guess is that McAuliffe will do his best to roll back the ridiculous abortion clinic requirements. Hopefully, he will provide a counterbalance to the right wing nuts in Richmond. Presumably, he will provide more support to issues pertaining to Northern Virginia, especially involving transportation.

Some things he won't do - impose his fundamentalist views on a population that has entered the current century, force the top university in the state to spend ridiculous amounts of money to defend themselves against his nutty views on climate change, adamantly oppose the LGBT community (on moral grounds, of course), try to outlaw birth control, etc.

All McAuliffe really has to do is not be a self-righteous disengenuous loon. Sadly, that is the best we can hope for in the current environment.

RoadMusings_ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Is that actually true? As a RINO™ Squish, I've
> voted for a lot of candidates I've had
> reservations about. Cooch will be one of them.
> I've never "not voted" and I've never voted for
> the other guy (because I think not voting is cheap
> and I can't honestly endorse the other guy).

Theres a difference between reservations about a candidate though and a candidate like Terry. Terry isnt a guy you vote for to vote against the other guys. A moderate or less scummy type can win over other voters in those situations or voting for the 3rd guy in the race, but not a TMac. If TMac had an R in front of his name he would be absolutely crucified by the media, even with the D hes getting A LOT of bad press. Even some liberals are jumping ship on him for Cooch.

> I've always suspected this happens for folks on
> the other side too. Not liking a candidate doesn't
> make you vote for the other guy. And to the extent
> that it does (which I suspect is very little these
> days), the "other guy" needs to be a blankish
> slate or someone incredibly unoffensive.

It depends what type of voter youre talking about. People that just vote party will vote for whoever. No one worries about those voters since you already have their support. Moderates and independents though generally tend to disfavor voting against someone. A percentage will come out to vote against the other guy, but you win elections by giving people a reason to vote for you not vote against the other guy.

Then you also have to take into account its an off year election. Theres no presidential election to ride the coat tails of for party support. Off years get a very low turn out of usually the most motivated voters. People voting against someone are generally the least motivated group. Rain or a line at the poll can be enough to make them say not worth it or just simply not wanting to put the effort in. Even the motivated part of your base usually has a lower turn out when all theyre motivated to do is vote against the other guy.

Interestingly, in polling, McAuliffe leads in Arlington/Alexandria/Falls Church/Fairfax/Prince William, but loses Loudoun and Stafford.

I believe the last time a Democrat won while losing Loudoun was 2001 with Warner. You don't usually lose Loudoun (or further south, Henrico) and still win statewide.

Just an interesting tidbit...

I really don't feel like I'm voting for Terry McAuliffe as much as I'm voting against Ken Cuccinelli. But you better believe I'm voting soley b/c of that.

The icing on the cake is the Duggar's coming out for him. I love it. Please, bring out every reality tv type freak show for him so he can look even crazier than he is. WTF is up with that though? They aren't even from Virginia, it seems very strange and random to me.

Its Three Weeks Away! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [T-Mac] will carry Nova. Richmond, Hampton Roads

Yes, he will, and that will be more than enough to win.

> 1. The truth about his business deals are
> surfacing and are horrid

You mean those lies & half-truth spun by Kookster supporters? It's not working.

> 2. Obama Care is just starting to make people
> think twice about Dem Lies.

D'oh! Too bad for GOP-tards that voter opinions of the ACA are improving by the day.

> 3. He will be salvoed with #1 and 2 in the final
> days.

(I think you mean 'pilloried'.) And it won't matter.

> 4. Some positive movement has been accomplished
> with illegal voting in Va

Uh?

> Koooch by a nose ..

T-Mac 53%, the Kookster 48%

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Cuccinelli wins with a plurality of about
> > 45%, McAuliffe pulls in about 40 and Sarvis has
> a
> > good showing at 15.
>
> Hmmm... Current polling has T-Mac @ 45%, the
> Kookster @ 39%, and that other guy @ 9%. It
> sounds like you didn't learn a whole lot from
> Mitten's 2012 "don't believe the polls" debacle.
> Oh well!
>
> GOP-tards!
>
> LoLz!
>
>


Polling is only as good as the turn-out projects on which they are based. Most polls are using the 2012 model in Virginia. If they used the 2009 model, Cuccinelli is ahead by 2 points. I doubt McAuliffe will generate the same turnout as Obama did last year, but he has deep pockets so he will do better than Deeds. Sarvis is the wildcard. His numbers have been going up and there's still 3½ weeks until the election. Unless your a super-partisan nutcase, calling this "over" is spin.

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Polling is only as good as the turn-out projects
> on which they are based. Most polls are using the
> 2012 model in Virginia. If they used the 2009
> model, Cuccinelli is ahead by 2 points. I doubt
> McAuliffe will generate the same turnout as Obama
> did last year, but he has deep pockets so he will
> do better than Deeds. Sarvis is the wildcard.
> His numbers have been going up and there's still
> 3½ weeks until the election. Unless your a
> super-partisan nutcase, calling this "over" is
> spin.

Hmmm... Where have I hear self-delusion like that before...

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/11/why_romney_was_surprised_to_lose_his_campaign_had_the_wrong_numbers_bad.html

GOP-tards!

LoLz!

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:


"Polling is only as good as the turn-out projects[sic] on which they are based." Huh? Do you mean "projections?"

"Most polls are using the 2012 model in Virginia. If they used the 2009 model, Cuccinelli is ahead by 2 points."

What exactly are you trying to say with this drivel? Is this another right wing tin foil hat supposition about "oversampling Democrats?" Didn't do so well in Stat 101, did we? The Wikipedia article about over and under sampling in data analysis and why it's done is actually pretty good. I suggest you read it -- many times if necessary.

"I doubt McAuliffe will generate the same turnout as Obama did last year?" Your observation is trivial, and therefore meaningless. What off-year election has ever generated the voter turnout normal in an presidential election?

"Sarvis is the wildcard. His numbers have been going up and there's still 3½ weeks until the election." Oh, this is rich. First you refute the validity of current polls, and then you appeal to them in support of a subsequent assertion. Or do you have your own super secret poll?

Regardless, Mr. Sarvis' "numbers" bode ill for Mr. Cuccinelli. To quote Chris LaCivita, Mr. Cuccinelli's senior strategist, "“Going in and casting a ballot for Robert Sarvis is casting a ballot for Terry McAuliffe”. http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/virginia-governor-race-robert-sarvis-ken-cuccinelli-97591.html#ixzz2hWwxnaRJ

"Unless your a super-partisan nutcase, calling this "over" is spin." Fair enough. What then is the term for denying the high probability of Event A occurring?

The current likelihood of Mr. McAuliffe's win reminds me of one of the most colorful quotes in American politics by one of its most colorful scoundrels, Edwin Edwards -- four time governor of Louisiana:

"The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy".

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Polling is only as good as the turn-out
> projects
> > on which they are based. Most polls are using
> the
> > 2012 model in Virginia. If they used the 2009
> > model, Cuccinelli is ahead by 2 points. I
> doubt
> > McAuliffe will generate the same turnout as
> Obama
> > did last year, but he has deep pockets so he
> will
> > do better than Deeds. Sarvis is the wildcard.
> > His numbers have been going up and there's
> still
> > 3½ weeks until the election. Unless your a
> > super-partisan nutcase, calling this "over" is
> > spin.
>
> Hmmm... Where have I hear self-delusion like that
> before...
>
> http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/po
> litics/2012/11/why_romney_was_surprised_to_lose_hi
> s_campaign_had_the_wrong_numbers_bad.html
>
> GOP-tards!
>
> LoLz!


You prove my point. Romney's campaign was believing his internals which were based more on the 2010 turnout than the 2008 turnout. Obama was able to drive down Romney's numbers with 6 months of negative ads AND turn out his base. McAuliffe has driven down Cuccinelli's numbers with 6 months of nothing but negative ads but he still has to get out his base. Obama won VA by less than 100K votes with his base turning out. Maybe McAuliffe can do that, but it's an uphill climb. And Obama didn't have to worry about a 3rd party alternative to siphon votes like McAuliffe is facing.

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And Obama didn't have to worry about a 3rd party
> alternative to siphon votes like McAuliffe is facing.

In what parallel universe does a libertarian candidate take votes from a Democratic Party candidate?

LoLz!

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > And Obama didn't have to worry about a 3rd
> party
> > alternative to siphon votes like McAuliffe is
> facing.
>
> In what parallel universe does a libertarian
> candidate take votes from a Democratic Party
> candidate?
>
> LoLz!


Sarvis' support in polling by self-identified voters has run roughly at about:

44% Independents
33% Republicans
23% Democrats

Among 18- to 29-year-olds:

Sarvis polls at 22%.
Cuccinelli 23%
McAuliffe 29%

RoadMusings_ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Imagine Governor T-Mac with Lt. Governor EW
> Jackson. Truly an amazing year in Virginia
> politics (and not in a good way).


This is my dream result.

Then when T-Mac goes to jail, we get that crazy negro as governor!

He'll be the most entertaining governor since Huey Long!

Why does the OP support criminals?

Retard detector Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why does the OP support criminals?

To what crime(s) do you refer?

Fraud is a crime.

Fraud is a crime Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fraud is a crime.

So is Defamation.

Why do Fatty and Tip support criminals?

How embarassaing is it that there is even a candidate with such a thick Great Lakes nasal accent for her governor?

Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe (D) was one of dozens of investors with a Rhode Island estate planner charged with defrauding insurers by using the stolen identities of terminally ill people, according to court documents filed Wednesday by federal prosecutors in Providence.

....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/mcauliffe-among-investors-in-rhode-island-insurance-scam-that-preyed-on-dying-people/2013/10/10/b7d937e0-3127-11e3-89ae-16e186e117d8_story.html





What a piece of shit McAuliffe is.

The Post had this today .....

To Mr. Cuccinelli, the world is full of outrages that he would use government’s big stick to correct: Climate-change science is a hoax perpetrated on taxpayers. Illegal immigrants should be deported, and legal ones should be denied unemployment benefits if they are fired for not speaking English on the job. Abortion clinics should be regulated out of existence. Homosexuals, who by their sexual conduct invite “nothing but self-destruction, not only physically but of their soul,” don’t merit equal protection under the law.

And now Mr. Cuccinelli says he would be focused on jobs and the economy? Don’t count on it. The far more likely scenario is that if he were to become governor, Mr. Cuccinelli would plunge Virginia into the venomous, corrosive culture wars that have paralyzed Washington.

Ben Dover Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Post had this today .....
>
> To Mr. Cuccinelli, the world is full of outrages
> that he would use government’s big stick to
> correct: Climate-change science is a hoax
> perpetrated on taxpayers. Illegal immigrants
> should be deported, and legal ones should be
> denied unemployment benefits if they are fired for
> not speaking English on the job. Abortion clinics
> should be regulated out of existence. Homosexuals,
> who by their sexual conduct invite “nothing but
> self-destruction, not only physically but of their
> soul,” don’t merit equal protection under the
> law.
>
> And now Mr. Cuccinelli says he would be focused on
> jobs and the economy? Don’t count on it. The far
> more likely scenario is that if he were to become
> governor, Mr. Cuccinelli would plunge Virginia
> into the venomous, corrosive culture wars that
> have paralyzed Washington.

If the Washington (Com)Post had their way all straight white men would be rounded up and shot. Everyone would have to learn Spanish as their primary language. There would be no firearms or 2nd Amendment. Sandra Fluke would be President for life once Queen Hillary is too old to cut the mustard. There would be no Border Patrol and all existing borders would cease to exist.
Fuck the Washington (Com)Post.

McAwful Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Terry McAwful, involved in just about every scam
> that's been around for the past two decades. My
> gosh, this guy is true scum.....
>
> Washington Post Headline:
>

McAuliffe among investors in Rhode Island
> insurance scam that preyed on dying people

>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-polit
> ics/mcauliffe-among-investors-in-rhode-island-insu
> rance-scam-that-preyed-on-dying-people/2013/10/10/
> b7d937e0-3127-11e3-89ae-16e186e117d8_story.html


THIS IS ALL TRUE. SO WHAT? He's still better than the Cooch. So he gets my vote.

(Reminds me of when David Duke ran against Edwin Edwards for Louisiana governor. A racist v. a known crook. The crook won. Not to long after he was indicted and went to jail).

Fuck all the shit that The Post Supports, know the difference between right and wrong..and what a racist is, take a look in the mirror asshole.

sowhat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> THIS IS ALL TRUE. SO WHAT? He's still better than
> the Cooch. So he gets my vote.

Why? Aside from the fact that you were going to vote for the D no matter what of course.

Still havent heard a single reason to vote for Tmac other than he has a D in front of his name.

Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Still havent heard a single reason to vote for
> Tmac other than he has a D in front of his name.

T-Mac has deep, broad business experience, so he knows conditions are needed to foster job creation.

T-Mac has excellent interpersonal skills, which will enable him to influence the GOP-tard VA legislature.

T-Mac has executive experience earned through managing large, complex organizations.

Okay, your turn. Is there any particular reason to vote for the Kookster, other than his being a rabid-right socially draconian wingnut.?

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Still havent heard a single reason to vote for
> > Tmac other than he has a D in front of his
> name.
>
> T-Mac has deep, broad business experience, so he
> knows conditions are needed to foster job
> creation.

None. He got started at his Dad's (a big Dem supporter) bank when it basically failed during the Savings and Loan crisis. From there he's always relied on political connections and insider deals where usually only he made any money at the expense of others.

>
> T-Mac has excellent interpersonal skills, which
> will enable him to influence the GOP-tard VA
> legislature.
>

Interpersonal skills? WTF is this an entry-level customer service postion? Does he also work well within a multi-disciplinary team environment? lmao


> T-Mac has executive experience earned through
> managing large, complex organizations.
>

None. As above. He's not managed any. Most of his business experience involves single-owner and small partnerships with his other rich pals. His latest venture at GreeenTech is a failure. His experience running a primary campaign was a failure both results-wise and financially.

Terry McFail Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Blah, blah. blah.

Okay, your turn LL. Is there any particular reason to vote for the Kookster, other than his being a rabid-right socially draconian wingnut?

Terry McAuliffe is a opportunist thats all he is. Looking out for himself, he could care less about anything else then that, If being a Democrat is the route to power so be it. As it stands he's done well with his Democrat friends .He has been involved in many seamy business dealings, He does not care nor will he change.

Kooch on the other hand is more of a man of old school honor.. something that is missing from the political arena . He has convictions and he stands for them.

Not LL But Its Simple Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kooch ... has convictions and he stands
> for them.

Yep, his rabid-right socially draconian convictions. That's precisely why he won't be the Commonwealth's next Governor.

Gee, you're right: That is simple.

Face the real facts, nothing will change no matter who wins. Your taxes will still go to build nice roads in the rest of the state. Women will still be able to get abortions.

That you have no honor, guts or glory. No sense of right or wrong since you totaly support the Democrat agenda. Drone On Fat one..Dont be too surprised that a lot of Virginians do have honor..

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Still havent heard a single reason to vote for
> > Tmac other than he has a D in front of his
> name.
>
> T-Mac has deep, broad business experience, so he
> knows conditions are needed to foster job
> creation.

Yea its called using political connections to start a fake car plant out of state that makes him millions.

That of course wont do a single bit of good for the state or making any actual jobs but hell get richer.

> T-Mac has excellent interpersonal skills, which
> will enable him to influence the GOP-tard VA
> legislature.

Dems dont even take him seriously, the State House certainly isnt going too.

> T-Mac has executive experience earned through
> managing large, complex organizations.


Seriously is this a joke?

If I want someone to run a scam for me to make me money hed be my first call, as far as actually running anything that really exists though not a chance.

Youre either trying for troll of the year at this point or your more delusional than we all thought.

When your second reason is something that a tennage would list on a resume who has no work history thats pathetic. The other two are the same BS about his business history hes currently under investigation for since its just a fraudulent shill company that he made millions off of at the expense of others.

Nice try, but Terry has never been accused of anything negative in the business world. Why don't you make up some other facts?

Kooch would be a bad governor because he doesn't have good people skills like Terry.

It Is Simple Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That you have no honor, guts or glory. No sense of
> right or wrong since you totaly support the
> Democrat agenda. Drone On Fat one..Dont be too
> surprised that a lot of Virginians do have honor..

You're anonymously posting bullshit on an internet forum.

What's honorable, gutsy or glorious about that?

GOP-tards!

LoLz!

Dear Fat:

If it is, as you say, all over for the Kooch, why do you keep posting over and over again in different threads defending your guy? Seems like a waste of time to me.

I think you have serious problems.

Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Blah, blah. blah.

Okay, your turn LL. Is there any particular reason to vote for the Kookster, other than his being a rabid-right socially draconian wingnut?

By the way, I'm gay as fuck and LOVE sucking dicks.

Question?? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think you have serious problems.


Attachments:

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> By the way, I'm gay as fuck and LOVE sucking
> dicks.

You do realize my sucking dicks wouldn't ever be 'gay', right?

GOP-tards!

LoLz!

The only one on this forum who has posted there real name.. Has been Kooch.

Touche .. you do have a point with your quip..I give you +1 for that but thats it.

Im not stupid I dont know about you.. McAwfull is the worst worst Gov canidate ever in Va History .


But it will be fun to watch his ass get into trouble and you try to defend him
with the "Spin"

Fellas,

We all know the liberal media has skewed these polls by about 10 percentage points. See you all at the WW2 memorial for another round of press conferences and fundraising rounds.

Peace!

RP

Its So Simple Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> McAwfull is the worst worst Gov canidate ever in Va History .

Nope.


Attachments:

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nice try, but Terry has never been accused of
> anything negative in the business world. Why
> don't you make up some other facts?
>

Yeah, if you don't count:

His first bank being cited by bank regulators for unsafe or unsound business practices and having to sell its assets into another bank.

Sketchy loans given to politicians by his bank.

Being sued by the RTC related to his bud Richard Swann's failed bank.

The union pension scheme where he walked with millions for a piddling $100 investment and they lost big and being sued by the Dept. of Labor.

Or the insider trading accusations re Global Crossing.

Or the current SEC investigation into his visa for sale scheme at GreenTech.

Or a second investigation into GreenTech’s sister company, Gulf Coast Funds Management run by Hillary's bro.

Or his latest investment in a scam to rip off old and dying people in Rhode Island.

Yeah, other than that he's a real stand-up guy.

lmao

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nice try, but Terry has never been accused of
> anything negative in the business world. Why
> don't you make up some other facts?

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-08-02/politics/40987370_1_terry-mcauliffe-visa-program-sec-investigation

Just a coincidence right that theres under investigation for the thing that Terry was directly involved in and was the one with the political connections to make happen.

> Kooch would be a bad governor because he doesn't
> have good people skills like Terry.

Clearly trolling, but glad we could get the investigation crap cleared up for anyone confused

no woman with a brain would vote for Cuccinelli

Terry McScum Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Nice try, but Terry has never been accused of
> > anything negative in the business world. Why
> > don't you make up some other facts?
> >
>
> Yeah, if you don't count:
>
> His first bank being cited by bank regulators for
> unsafe or unsound business practices and having to
> sell its assets into another bank.
>
> Sketchy loans given to politicians by his bank.
>
> Being sued by the RTC related to his bud Richard
> Swann's failed bank.
>
> The union pension scheme where he walked with
> millions for a piddling $100 investment and they
> lost big and being sued by the Dept. of Labor.
>
> Or the insider trading accusations re Global
> Crossing.
>
> Or the current SEC investigation into his visa for
> sale scheme at GreenTech.
>
> Or a second investigation into GreenTech’s
> sister company, Gulf Coast Funds Management run by
> Hillary's bro.
>
> Or his latest investment in a scam to rip off old
> and dying people in Rhode Island.
>
> Yeah, other than that he's a real stand-up guy.
>
> lmao

Name the bank!

Name the politicians!

"Being sued by the RTC..." I'll stop here. The RTC (Resolution Trust Corporation) sunsetted in August of 1995! So I doubt very much if he's being sued by a quasi-government agency that hasn't existed for, what, 18 years! If you are going to lie, at less fashion some believability into them.

Ghost of Tip O'Neill Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Name the bank!

Which?

Federal City National Bank was his.

American Pioneer was Swann's (his father-in-law).

>
> Name the politicians!
>

Gephardt at the time that McAuliffe also was finance manager for his campaign (Gephardt later repaid the favor in another scheme), Coelho (you may recall his other troubles), Jim Wright.


> "Being sued by the RTC..." I'll stop here. The
> RTC (Resolution Trust Corporation) sunsetted in
> August of 1995! So I doubt very much if he's
> being sued by a quasi-government agency that
> hasn't existed for, what, 18 years! If you are
> going to lie, at less fashion some believability
> into them.


In the past obviously. The post was responding to "never been accused of anything negative in the business world." The suit was associated with the failure of and RTC's takeover of American Pioneer and associated property titles which were held in McAuliffe's name (also separately some in Dorothy's name).

And then there were the shady Prudential and Teamsters deals...

It's a looonnngggg list with Terry.

Terry McScum Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In the past obviously. The post was responding to
> "never been accused of anything negative in the
> business world." The suit was associated with the
> failure of and RTC's takeover of American Pioneer
> and associated property titles which were held in
> McAuliffe's name (also separately some in
> Dorothy's name).
>
> And then there were the shady Prudential and
> Teamsters deals...
>
> It's a looonnngggg list with Terry.

Apparently, Virginians don't care.


Attachments:

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Terry McScum Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > In the past obviously. The post was responding
> to
> > "never been accused of anything negative in the
> > business world." The suit was associated with
> the
> > failure of and RTC's takeover of American
> Pioneer
> > and associated property titles which were held
> in
> > McAuliffe's name (also separately some in
> > Dorothy's name).
> >
> > And then there were the shady Prudential and
> > Teamsters deals...
> >
> > It's a looonnngggg list with Terry.
>
> Apparently, Virginians don't care.
>
>
Attachments:

It's going to be a blood bath for teabaggers. Virginia is moving solidly into the blue column. Kooch will lose by 20 points. By 2016, the lower house will be in Democratic hands and the baggers fully routed. All FFU posters can do is snivel and cry, and snivel some more.


The only thing left for ya is to go back to that tuck stop glory-hole and work it, work hard.

mjcc1987 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's going to be a blood bath for teabaggers.
> Virginia is moving solidly into the blue column.
> Kooch will lose by 20 points. By 2016, the lower
> house will be in Democratic hands and the baggers
> fully routed. All FFU posters can do is snivel and
> cry, and snivel some more.


The sad thing is you probably seriously believe this.

I see someone's a bit delusional.

Peace!

RP

Hopefully the result is the end of the social radicals running the GOP. They are what make the "party of stupid".

Reince Priebus warned against more candidates like the Cooch after Romney lost. Apparently the VA GOP ignored that. In a few weeks, the nail will finally be in the coffin. Get some classic conservative candidates who are interested in limited (but not no) government, moderate taxation (but not none) and efficient spending rather than "drowning" the government. Conservatives who leave religion in church and what goes on in the bedroom only to the folks who are in the bedroom.

Let's face it, it was all over for the Cooch and the Republicans when they decided to run a whack job for governor and a super-duper mega whack job for lieutenant governor. What were they thinking?

Fiscal Conservative Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hopefully the result is the end of the social
> radicals running the GOP. They are what make the
> "party of stupid".
>
> Reince Priebus warned against more candidates like
> the Cooch after Romney lost. Apparently the VA
> GOP ignored that. In a few weeks, the nail will
> finally be in the coffin. Get some classic
> conservative candidates who are interested in
> limited (but not no) government, moderate taxation
> (but not none) and efficient spending rather than
> "drowning" the government. Conservatives who
> leave religion in church and what goes on in the
> bedroom only to the folks who are in the bedroom.

Please tell me how Cooch and Romney whose barely a conservative have anything in common besides the letter in front of their name?

Name names of GOP members who want no government and no taxes?

Let us know when you rejoin reality and dont just want to spew tried bullshit talking points you heard on MSNBC.

Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fiscal Conservative Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Hopefully the result is the end of the social
> > radicals running the GOP. They are what make
> the
> > "party of stupid".
> >
> > Reince Priebus warned against more candidates
> like
> > the Cooch after Romney lost. Apparently the
> VA
> > GOP ignored that. In a few weeks, the nail
> will
> > finally be in the coffin. Get some classic
> > conservative candidates who are interested in
> > limited (but not no) government, moderate
> taxation
> > (but not none) and efficient spending rather
> than
> > "drowning" the government. Conservatives who
> > leave religion in church and what goes on in
> the
> > bedroom only to the folks who are in the
> bedroom.
>
> Please tell me how Cooch and Romney whose barely a
> conservative have anything in common besides the
> letter in front of their name?
>
> Name names of GOP members who want no government
> and no taxes?
>
> Let us know when you rejoin reality and dont just
> want to spew tried bullshit talking points you
> heard on MSNBC.


+1

Libtards....LoLz!

Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Conservatives who leave religion in church
> and what goes on in the bedroom only to the
> folks who are in the bedroom.

I hear ya, brother. The Kookster is by far the most polarizing politician in the Commonwealth. So hell-bent on nominating this whack job were the teabaggers, that they eschewed a primary and instead engineered a convention to ensure Bolling wouldn't rain reality down upon their nutjob fantasy parade. Now, of course, all of the RPVA’s wingnut hopes & dreams are coming undone. Although you’ll try mightily tag something, anything external as being responsible, you’ll have no one but yourselves to blame. Great choice, GOP-tards!

LoLz!

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Liberal Logic 28 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Conservatives who leave religion in church
> > and what goes on in the bedroom only to the
> > folks who are in the bedroom.
>
> I hear ya, brother. The Kookster is by far the
> most polarizing politician in the Commonwealth.
> So hell-bent on nominating this whack job were the
> teabaggers, that they eschewed a primary and
> instead engineered a convention to ensure Bolling
> wouldn't rain reality down upon their nutjob
> fantasy parade. Now, of course, all of the
> RPVA’s wingnut hopes & dreams are coming undone.
> Although you’ll try mightily tag something,
> anything external as being responsible, you’ll
> have no one but yourselves to blame. Great
> choice, GOP-tards!
>
> LoLz!


 
Attachments:

Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
>  

You really just have absolutely no life whatsoever huh?

lmao

It's true Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Fat~Bottom~Girl Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> >  
>
> You really just have absolutely no life whatsoever
> huh?
>
> lmao


LOL!
 
Attachments:

This should not be a topic of discussion it's over