Lisa is wrong: Her vote will be interpreted as an endorsement of the leader and his practices. Any other interpretation (i.e. I like my local guy) is either naiveté or a rationalization.
And Warren, you make a far better interviewee than interviewer: Let the woman speak, for the love of God.
They have to give us a reason to stay on the train. In my case, I expect the testimony of those four before the JC. I also expect no DPA. Without both, I won’t be voting for my own party.
Lisa is wrong: Her vote will be interpreted as an endorsement of the leader and his practices. Any other interpretation (i.e. I like my local guy) is either naiveté or a rationalization.
And Warren, you make a far better interviewee than interviewer: Let the woman speak, for the love of God.
Fair criticism!
B,
They have to give us a reason to stay on the train. In my case, I expect the testimony of those four before the JC. I also expect no DPA. Without both, I won’t be voting for my own party.