What does it say about republicans when 45% of a certain Florida district still votes for Mark Foley? This is the man who resigned, effective immediately, because of his molestation (not proven "physical" yet, but certainly mentally and emotionally) of minors - boys, no less? How delusional are you that you feel you MUST vote your party even though that candidate is basically a sex-offender?
2006-11-09 16:28:13 · 13 answers · asked by abcdgoodall 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Yes, its "says", not same... thanks, mrs. obvious.
And, yes I know it was another candidate in his place. the question stands. your republican vote was on MARK's name!
2006-11-09 16:41:51 · update #1
Considering the absurd reasons people base there votes on, I too was surprised that people could bring themselves to check Foley's name even knowing it was for another guy.
2006-11-09 17:05:17 · answer #1 · answered by FSJD 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It tells me this.
Democrats peg Foley as a gay pedophile.
(If Foley were Democrat, he would still be in office as a proud out of the closet congressman.) This tells me that it's OK to be a gay pedophile, only if you are a Democrat.
From the party of open-mindedness, they sure shut the door on this one.
Webb got in. Did you see what that muckin foron wrote?
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/media-ignore-webbs-incest-homoerotic-pedophile-writings
Webb get's office after writing about putting a little boys penis in a mouth. Webb ran as a Democrat. What does it say about you Democrats when a certain state such as Virginia narrowly allows a sicko such as Webb to win by 7200 votes.
So the next time you go "exposing" pedophiles and molesters, remember who your party supposedly stands up for.
2006-11-10 05:28:33 · answer #2 · answered by shield77 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Foleys name was on the ballot, but the vote was really for a different candidate.
2006-11-10 00:29:55 · answer #3 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
The vote wasn't for Foley, it was for his replacement but I don't know that I think that makes it any better...voting for the invisible man. hmmm...
2006-11-10 00:38:00 · answer #4 · answered by Sage 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nice try Poindexter,
It was too late to remove Foleys name from the ballot. Those folks were not voting for Him, they were voting for the poor sap who had to run under the queers name. Read a paper sometime, will ya?
2006-11-10 00:32:59 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 3⤋
When the scadal broke, the ballots had already been printed. They were not voting for him, they were voting for whoever would replace him.
2006-11-10 00:34:59 · answer #6 · answered by kitty fresh & hissin' crew 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
this is not a political issue. I don't stop voting for what i believe just because of one sick bastard. a sicko is a sicko, regardless of political affiliation.
2006-11-10 00:33:22 · answer #7 · answered by AEracer40 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sad, isn't it? There are so many mindless sheep in this country. I just heard that we have a whole generation of poorly educated people and now I believe it.
2006-11-10 00:36:56 · answer #8 · answered by notyou311 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
i don't believe they were able to take his name off the ballot with such short notice,the same i guess for dead candidates.
2006-11-10 00:38:09 · answer #9 · answered by my_mas0n 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
IT says the voters did their homework.
2006-11-10 05:03:30 · answer #10 · answered by wondermom 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋