• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Right now Warnock and Walker are Headed for a run-off election.

Who do you think will win the Run-off in Georgia?

  • Total voters
    21
Herschel should pull out.
 
Lutherf said:
Warnock will win the runoff. Democrats will pour a billion dollars into that runoff if they feel the need and I have no doubt that they are prepping an entire army of lawyers to make sure of their victory.
Click to expand...

Maybe they could convince Trump to campaign with Walker.
 
Chomsky said:
Re: 3rd Party voter motivation in major party run-offs

You may take an interest in this post below, from one of my favorite DP posters. I think it exemplifies what I didn't know, but my gut seemed to be saying.

You may note where he claims:



If Perotista claims it, I strongly suspect he has numbers to back it up.

Anyway, here's the post:
Click to expand...

Well, I used to be "Libertarian." A card-carrying member of the California Party. I am well-aware how contrarian and un-cooperative Libertarians can be. o_O

But the issue here IMO is how factually authoritarian and socialist leaning the current Democrat Party appears.

I think a significant percentage of Libertarians would vote for a Party candidate that opposes increased taxes and massive government growth, as opposed to letting it continue.

Enough might do so to help tip the scales. Of course, most are total "individualists" so there is that problem. LOL.
 
Captain Adverse said:
Well, I used to be "Libertarian." A card-carrying member of the California Party. I am well-aware how contrarian and un-cooperative Libertarians can be. o_O
Click to expand...

And that you seem to stick with Libertarian principles, garners my respect. You often take positions I'm steadfastly against, but since the positions are generally in concert with your lean ideology, and you're consistent with that, I can respect it and accept that you are acting from an honest place. IOW, I sense it's what you genuinely believe.

Captain Adverse said:
But the issue here IMO is how factually authoritarian and socialist leaning the current Democrat Party appears.
Click to expand...

Uh, no, its about individual motivation, though I suspect that's what you were getting to.

Captain Adverse said:
I think a significant percentage of Libertarians would vote for a Party candidate that opposes increased taxes and massive government growth, as opposed to letting it continue.
Click to expand...

If they're motivated to come out, and of course not disliking the candidate's party. Not all Libertarian's fancy the Republican Party. I know I didn't like either party, when I had my flirtation with Libertarianism

Captain Adverse said:
Enough might do so to help tip the scales. Of course, most are total "individualists" so there is that problem. LOL.
Click to expand...

Haha! You got that right!
 
Captain Adverse said:
Just reported that Raphael Warnock and Herschel Walker are going to have to wait for a run-off election.
Click to expand...
That is just insane. An educated preacher against a brain damaged sports star who's only in the race because they expect him to be compliant.

What has happened to the republican party?
 
Gateman_Wen said:
That is just insane. An educated preacher against a brain damaged sports star who's only in the race because they expect him to be compliant.

What has happened to the republican party?
Click to expand...
Both are not good candidates and I'm not shocked in the least this went to a runoff. Big Dem money will probably pull Warnock over the line but it it will certainly be interesting to see if people who abstained from voting for Walker now show up for him.
 
Artymoon said:
Both are not good candidates and I'm not shocked in the least this went to a runoff. Big Dem money will probably pull Warnock over the line but it it will certainly be interesting to see if people who abstained from voting for Walker now show up for him.
Click to expand...

My issue is that I don't want the Democrats trying to "pack the Court," which they keep threatening to do to SCOTUS if they don't get their way.

I like a SCOTUS that let's things go back to the States to handle, as I don't like the growing centralization of power in the Federal government.
 
RetiredUSN said:
I have no idea.

Walker is a few fries short of a happy meal.

Warnock is a slumlord and exploited poor people for their money via the church to live like a king.
Click to expand...
Walker is more than that. He is also, according to his own children, an abuser of women and children and a deadbeat dad.
 
JasperL said:
That is a lie, but I guess it's not surprising you'd believe the lies told by the right wing smear machine....

Last I checked the building owned by the church charged tenants something like $125 per month, in downtown Atlanta. And I think there was something like 1 or 2 evictions during COVID, both started pre-COVID. I'd love to hear how those kinds of results are "exploiting" poor people, or akin to "slumlord" tactics.

BTW, ever checked out the Trump Org's policies? How about Jared's?
Click to expand...
Prove what you say and you have a argument to make.

He took PPP money and went the eviction route.
 
RetiredUSN said:
I have no idea.

Walker is a few fries short of a happy meal.

Warnock is a slumlord and exploited poor people for their money via the church to live like a king.
Click to expand...
Candidate quality matters. Here's a case for not having any in the race.

More DeSantis. Less Trump. I think that's what the Republicans need to take from the election results.
I wonder if they will.
 
Bok_Tukalo said:
This SCOTUS doesn't do that.

Carson v Makin
Click to expand...

"Maine’s “nonsectarian” requirement for otherwise generally available tuition assistance payments to parents who live in school districts that do not operate a secondary school of their own violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. Chief Justice Jonh Roberts authored the majority opinion of the Court...." https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-1088

I agree with that decision and its rationale. Some of the best schools were religious. In NYC there was a Catholic School two blocks away, and it was considered a good one to attend if one could afford the tuition payment.

My family opted not to due to not being able to afford it, so we attended Public School.

Bok_Tukalo said:
New York State Rifle & Piston Association Inc. v Bruen
Click to expand...

Sorry, but you should know I am a firm Second Amendment proponent. I fully agree with that decision, and subsequent others in regards to the right to keep and bear arms. I've discussed this often in this Forum over the years.
 
Minerva said:
Is it your contention that the GOP sucks at prepping entire armies of lawyers to contest an election?
Click to expand...
Oh they can round up lawyers! The problem the GOP has is rounding up lawyers that can competently argue in front of a judge cut from strict constructionist cloth.
 
Artymoon said:
Both are not good candidates and I'm not shocked in the least this went to a runoff. Big Dem money will probably pull Warnock over the line but it it will certainly be interesting to see if people who abstained from voting for Walker now show up for him.
Click to expand...
No. One is a good candidate. The other is a victim.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Prove what you say and you have a argument to make.

He took PPP money and went the eviction route.
Click to expand...
I cited my sources last time you spread these lies. You ignored them of course, and repeat the lies....

But I am curious what the 'charge' is here. There's no question the residents are paying about a tenth the going rate in Atlanta. Should he just go full on landlord, jack up the rents to market value, and evict like Jared's companies do, Trump's? If he was in total charge, just let everyone live for free, forever, in a prime location in downtown Atlanta? It's not up to Warnock, but the church's governing board, but if I sat on that board I'm positive I'd be voting for charging rent! Otherwise, it's a poor use of the charity's assets to just let resident live for free in prime real estate in downtown Atlanta.

I volunteered for many years for a charity that houses homeless, many of them veterans. We charged about the same amount in rent - roughly $100 per month - because we believed they should work, clean the house, cook, and learn to pay their bills. We didn't kick them out for non-payment unless they could work and would not work, or used drugs or alcohol. Is that wrong? If we didn't charge rent we couldn't do what we did for them, which was treatment for addiction, provide food, help getting them out from under court restrictions after stints in prison, lined up medical and mental health treatments, and more, but maybe you think otherwise.

So what is the problem exactly? Charities shouldn't charge rent on property they own? Or ever evict people failing to pay 1/10th or so the going rate? Seems stupid as hell to me, but maybe you can clarify.
 
eohrnberger said:
I suspect that the Democrat [sic] party will send Mark Elias, political assassin and election law contortionist, down there for that.
Click to expand...
I love when you guys do that. I read your comment without seeing who wrote it, got to the bolded, and knew right wing garbage was to follow. Thanks!!
 
I don't know who will win but it will be pretty weird if, after all this great "success" for the Dems and "failure" for the GOP yesterday, the final outcome actually ends up being that the GOP ends up taking both the House and Senate. Whew, emotions would take a radical change!
 
JasperL said:
I cited my sources last time you spread these lies. You ignored them of course, and repeat the lies....

But I am curious what the 'charge' is here. There's no question the residents are paying about a tenth the going rate in Atlanta. Should he just go full on landlord, jack up the rents to market value, and evict like Jared's companies do, Trump's? If he was in total charge, just let everyone live for free, forever, in a prime location in downtown Atlanta? It's not up to Warnock, but the church's governing board, but if I sat on that board I'm positive I'd be voting for charging rent! Otherwise, it's a poor use of the charity's assets to just let resident live for free in prime real estate in downtown Atlanta.

I volunteered for many years for a charity that houses homeless, many of them veterans. We charged about the same amount in rent - roughly $100 per month - because we believed they should work, clean the house, cook, and learn to pay their bills. We didn't kick them out for non-payment unless they could work and would not work, or used drugs or alcohol. Is that wrong? If we didn't charge rent we couldn't do what we did for them, which was treatment for addiction, provide food, help getting them out from under court restrictions after stints in prison, lined up medical and mental health treatments, and more, but maybe you think otherwise.

So what is the problem exactly? Charities shouldn't charge rent on property they own? Or ever evict people failing to pay 1/10th or so the going rate? Seems stupid as hell to me, but maybe you can clarify.
Click to expand...

Are the local news outlets lying?

Is the Fulton County Magistrate lying too?



 
RetiredUSN said:
Are the local news outlets lying?
Click to expand...
About what? You didn't cite the "locals."
RetiredUSN said:
Is the Fulton County Magistrate lying too?



Click to expand...
You didn't answer my questions. Should they not charge rent at all? If tenants don't pay, is it only right that they get to live there forever without paying? If you were on the board of the charity, is this how you'd vote to run the building?

And what you have so far is one eviction filed in Sept 2021. We don't know if he was evicted. The second filed something 9/28/22 that said he was out of his place for a day. Evicted? Who knows. The third is an eviction from a month ago. And you notice the monthly rent? $115 per month for one person. Seems reasonable, given it's about 1/10th the going rate, if not less.

So I'm not sure what your problem is with 1 or 2 evictions, maybe, in the two and a half years since COVID started, in a place that provides rooms to low income people at 1/10th or less the going rate in downtown Atlanta. How does that record reflect badly on Warnock, assuming he's making those decisions, and he's not because those are made by the church's governing board, since it's the church that employs him not Warnock who owns that property?
 
JasperL said:
About what? You didn't cite the "locals."

You didn't answer my questions. Should they not charge rent at all? If tenants don't pay, is it only right that they get to live there forever without paying? If you were on the board of the charity, is this how you'd vote to run the building?

And what you have so far is one eviction filed in Sept 2021. We don't know if he was evicted. The second filed something 9/28/22 that said he was out of his place for a day. Evicted? Who knows. The third is an eviction from a month ago. And you notice the monthly rent? $115 per month for one person. Seems reasonable, given it's about 1/10th the going rate, if not less.

So I'm not sure what your problem is with 1 or 2 evictions, maybe, in the two and a half years since COVID started, in a place that provides rooms to low income people at 1/10th or less the going rate in downtown Atlanta. How does that record reflect badly on Warnock, assuming he's making those decisions, and he's not because those are made by the church's governing board, since it's the church that employs him not Warnock who owns that property?
Click to expand...
He's a slum lord and exploits poor black people to live like a king off their donations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom