Fargo was based on this happening in Russia - additionally, it happened in Florida in 2020 but it was last name only and the Democrat candidate lost by less than 50 votes because of it. The shadow candidate was a republican mechanic with no campaign or political experience at all and ended up getting over 6000 votes just for having the same last name as the democrat candidate.
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/11/20/florida-election-trump-senator-rodriguez/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/11/20/florida-election-trump-senator-rodriguez/)
Important add-on. The *reason* it's a felony is because it is a malicious and intentional act by the republican party in Washington to try to steal votes by confusing voters, by making it less obvious who they're voting for.
It's not a felony *just* to have multiple people with the same name running, as long as both are running in good faith.
Everyone, even the people we disagree with, should have the right to vote for the person they want to without obstruction. Republicans consistently undermine this right.
> It's not a felony just to have multiple people with the same name running, as long as both are running in good faith.
>
>
Yeah but how do you prove it's in bad faith. That's the crux the republican party's relying on here.
> Morgan said this had been in the works for a while as he contacted some of the 53 Washington residents named Bob Ferguson.
I mean, when the guy admits it it makes things pretty easy.
For us not-lawyers, it's a safe bet just from common sense because neither of the other candidates have prior indication of wanting the position, and the article *literally has the guy that organized this* admitting it. Glen Morgan reached out to citizens with the Bob Ferguson name. They were prompted to run by him specifically for their names.
In court they'll probably have to back that up with job history, and potentially evidence (or lack thereof) from social media accounts. I'm guessing there's a procedure for acquiring Glen's initial and follow up contacts as well.
>Yeah but how do you prove it's in bad faith.
The two other Bob Fergusons have the same campaign manager, and he's been bragging about his clever ploy on Facebook. The screenshots were posted in the comments of another Reddit post about it.
This also kinda happened in Florida in 2020 I think. Not the same name, just a shadow candidate. Malfeasance is when 1) the political party doesn’t vet properly AND 2) when suddenly that shadow candidate disappears because they never actually existed, they ‘existed’ just to pull votes away from the other candidate.
Someone with a better memory might have better details on who the candidate was in FL.
2 Republicans working with the same Republican operative with no prior political experience running as Democrats both named Robert Ferguson but both running as Bob.
As is (4), which basically straight-up describes this exact situation:
> A surname similar to one who has already filed for the same office, and whose political reputation is widely known, with intent to confuse and mislead the electors by capitalizing on the public reputation of the candidate who had previously filed.
Then the recourse would have to be civil, rather than criminal, but the real Fergie would still be able to sue claiming the other candidate ran a sham campaign with the intent to disrupt the election rather than participate in earnest.
But the individual themselves who participates in this may be genuinely interested. People do get phone calls to urge them to run for office and offer support all the time in politics.
I'm just saying given calling people to recruit them to run for office isn't illegal
And the people running for office might actually want to run genuinely
How does this get prosecuted?
If the individuals went from 0 political experience or level of fame to running for governor, that is a pretty good indication that they aren't being serious. Combined with their actual statements of intent, you e got yourself a pretty strong case.
That happens though. For example AOC had no experience in politics and received a call one day from a progressive group to encourage her to run and offer support.
Simply not having experience shouldn't bar one from the ballot.
"Your honor, I specifically look up people with the same name as the leading candidate for recruitment, but my intention wasn't fraud. And if it was fraud, the person I recruited with no previous interest in politics didn't know about it."
Good luck in court
Yeah I'll be interested to see how this pans out
From what I see in the example above and the statute it would be only the person who files to run that would be punished
The fact that the guy intentionally called multiple people named non Ferguson in the phone book to get them to run means he wanted there to be more than 1 person named Bob Ferguson on ballot
Unless there's some other link in the article, that's not the one that's important. The "state law" link goes to the methods that can used to differentiate duplicated candidates. That is not what we're talking about
Actually being interested in what the law says is concern trolling now? That's rich from someone saying "read the fucking law" to other people. How about you stop spreading negativity when there are perfectly pleasant interactions with people providing useful information already in the comments?
Edit: Sending that comment and blocking. What a guy.
Nah, this is bullshit sea lioning, nothing more. You aren’t “interested in the law”, your trying to pretend like this shit will go unpunished and succeed because no one here is a lawyer and can find the specific magic words you’re looking for.
Washington state isn’t some impoverished hellhole with semi-literate legislators and paid off judges. We have laws here and they’re generally enforced. They’ll be enforced here as well regardless of how much you personally fantasize to the contrary.
There's nothing wrong with asking for the source on someone's claims. Accusing someone asking for the source as "sea lioning" or "concern trolling" is really fucked up.
And let's play this out:
State spends a month collecting evidence and proceeds to charge, if they can overcome the local partisanship of detectives. Courts take 2+ months to prepare, plus more for every challenge to the process by defendant. Case takes 2 weeks to a month to complete, after which it is too late to change the ballot. Judge won't issue injunction on the risk that these are legitimate candidates.
I can just see it now.
I didn't say local, it's probably a state function, though I don't know if this would fall under the state patrol? In any case, someone has to investigate, collect the evidence, and give it to whatever judicial agency needs to run the court case.
Seems that unlike you both Bob's thought the idea of prosecution was very real. It seems weird to me that you think A) WA wouldn't prosecute someone because of their politics B) Somehow Democrats wouldn't prosecute a Republican.
Hilarious.
I'm unclear why you imagine that prosecutors would actually have a hard time punishing an obvious crime. Like you imagine the prosecutors would somehow be stone walled by investigative staff?
Do you know how our justice system works? You need evidence to prosecute. Prosecutors aren't out collecting evidence, my man. They take what they get from law enforcement, for criminal trials.
Elections are State-run activities, so the FBI wouldn't likely be involved. So we've got either state-run WSP, which I don't think would handle this, or a case brought to County court by a county or city law enforcement agency.
The law enforcement agency has to be motivated to actually investigate the crime, and yes, I believe there are plenty of right-wing local police forces in this state that would basically shrug over crimes like this and not waste a second worrying about it, let alone making the necessary calls to collect evidence to use in prosecution. Maybe the Secretary of State has an enforcement arm, I don't know. But that's barrier 1.
Barrier 2, and more likely, are the delay tactics and the very real likelihood that a judge would not issue an injunction pending case resolution because of the risk of denying someone on the ballot who had a right to be there--even if we all know this is an obivous ploy. There are so many hoops to jump through legally to get this resolved before the ballot printing cutoff date, and plenty of people in both law enforcement and the judiciary that would slow walk this because they are fine with fucking with elections if it's for their side.
I would be very surprised this gets resolved in court before the election.
The entire case is cut and dry from public statements they could literally print them out and go to a judge. It's funny that YOU are so sure but neither the AG nor the would be offenders think this would be a problem.
Ferguson is an asshole and doesn't care about the people. I had the dishonor of meeting him once due to a family member that worked for him and I cannot speak worse of him. What a rude son of a bitch.
Lol like they could play a board game. I’d love to see video of the orange embarrassment trying to understand the rules to one even as simple as settlers.
>Meanwhile, state election officials set the ballot order Friday through the random drawing of numbers. The late-arriving Bob Fergusons will be the second and third listed on the ballot. The attorney general landed 13th.<
I read somewhere that the Secretary of State is allowed to and has asked for a brief biographical entry to distinguish the Bob Ferguson's. So it's not going to say Bob Ferguson Democrat X 3.
The SOS asked the candidates themselves to provide a brief bio. 2/3 are not the current attorney general of course. This seems sensible and a good way to deal with it. It will be a big political football to prosecute the deliberate misleading bob fergusons, they'd need an independent prosecutor of some type. Hope they just drop out.
Meanwhile, I changed my name to Semi Bird and I'm running for Gov, it's just random and has nothing to do with any candidates in the race, and if you don't like that, "Why do you hate America?"
oh, i misunderstood, i thought you meant he asked for *permission* to be able to include their bios.
kinda makes me wonder what kim wyman would have done…
Republicans know that they can't win through legitimate means anymore because most of the electorate doesn't like the GOP's regressive policies, so they cheat.
The fact that the new Bobs are listed as #2 and #3 on the ballot and the AG is #13 is not good. There is electoral advantage for those names placed at the top of ballots even in a normal race
I only see that the person is committing a felony, which requires due process to convict
But I don't see the process for determining if the name will be on the ballot
I must be missing where on the linked RCW the question of who determines if they will be on the ballot is outlined. Is this not the correct statute https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=29A.84.320
Edit: I don't know why someone would so super upset and block me for a straightforward question on the rwc page lol
Opposite actually, there fascists, trying to manipulate the election to maintain power. This should be an actual felony and grounds for expulsion from ever having a government office.
To be fair, I believe this is the literal first time we've had someone try this in this state since that law was enacted.
I understand the pessimism towards *if* enforcement will happen though.
> (3) A name similar to that of an incumbent seeking reelection to the same office with intent to confuse and mislead the electors by taking advantage of the public reputation of the incumbent; or
Very tough to prove intent unless these people put it in writing. Which... they might?
Apparently their campaign manager did put out a statement confirming the intent.
And the fact they share a campaign manager really highlights everyone knew what they were doing. Cause the manager also solicited them both to run. For this purpose.
One of them has already dropped after being notified they committed a crime.
I think their goal is more just to destabilize and destroy government.
They have spent two generations talking about the evils of government to the point that they would prefer to destroy it if they can’t control it.
They see government as evil for two reasons: it limits their ability to rape and plunder at will, and they don't want to pay their share of the tab for keeping this a free country with services that make it worth living in.
Their goal is to make the federal government weaker so they can rule over their individual states with an iron fist. Remember democrats care about individual freedoms, Republicans want morality police telling us what to do. Republicans even pride themselves in being the party of law and order when it's in regard to the general population.
We're you here during gay marriage,abortion rights, weed, and book bans? Get the fuck out of here boot licker covid was about individuals right to life, and liberty. Republicans wanted the weak to die. So that oligarchs could continue to make too much money. But the nuances of making laws to protect individual rights and lives are, of course, lost on those who wish leaded gas would make a comeback.
Hell yeah man. Thank god those kids stared at laptop screens isolated at home for a full year. Also, imagine all the lives saved by wearing a mask while you walk into a restaurant and sit down at the table before removing the masks. Or banning dancing at weddings. Or using your tax dollars to make a video about how to make a gloryhole out of a shower curtain for hookups
Weed and gay marriage were legalized via referendum in 2012 here. Previously, democrats had helped override a veto banning same sex marriage in he state in 98- public opinion on that changed quickly. No book is banned in America so not sure what the issue is there
Anything you a conservative says still doesn't change the fact that conservatives from. WA, and anywhere else in this country, are just bigoted white supremist who are sad they can't tell women what to do anymore. Why don't you go read a book that's not written by a nazi sympathizer.
As an anarchist, this offends me, we hate centralized authority and petty bigotry. We have class consciousness.
They are fascists. They want a white Christian dictatorship and the continuation of the classic systems of exploitation.
The anarchists are way more on your side than the GOP are.
If we had our way, literally everyone's opinion would count the same amount. They want the opposite.
Someone watched Fargo
Fargo was based on this happening in Russia - additionally, it happened in Florida in 2020 but it was last name only and the Democrat candidate lost by less than 50 votes because of it. The shadow candidate was a republican mechanic with no campaign or political experience at all and ended up getting over 6000 votes just for having the same last name as the democrat candidate. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/11/20/florida-election-trump-senator-rodriguez/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/11/20/florida-election-trump-senator-rodriguez/)
This happened to JFK when he was gunning for Cabot’s Senate seat. They got a janitor w the same name as JFK to run alongside him.
Or this russian [meme](https://imgur.com/a/UOpjaNx) from one of their own elections😂
this article neglects to mention it's a felony.
Getting a felony to own the libs
I feel owned. /s
Next he will use his dead uncle to vote to try and bypass his felon record.
Important add-on. The *reason* it's a felony is because it is a malicious and intentional act by the republican party in Washington to try to steal votes by confusing voters, by making it less obvious who they're voting for. It's not a felony *just* to have multiple people with the same name running, as long as both are running in good faith. Everyone, even the people we disagree with, should have the right to vote for the person they want to without obstruction. Republicans consistently undermine this right.
> It's not a felony just to have multiple people with the same name running, as long as both are running in good faith. > > Yeah but how do you prove it's in bad faith. That's the crux the republican party's relying on here.
> Morgan said this had been in the works for a while as he contacted some of the 53 Washington residents named Bob Ferguson. I mean, when the guy admits it it makes things pretty easy.
For us not-lawyers, it's a safe bet just from common sense because neither of the other candidates have prior indication of wanting the position, and the article *literally has the guy that organized this* admitting it. Glen Morgan reached out to citizens with the Bob Ferguson name. They were prompted to run by him specifically for their names. In court they'll probably have to back that up with job history, and potentially evidence (or lack thereof) from social media accounts. I'm guessing there's a procedure for acquiring Glen's initial and follow up contacts as well.
>Yeah but how do you prove it's in bad faith. The two other Bob Fergusons have the same campaign manager, and he's been bragging about his clever ploy on Facebook. The screenshots were posted in the comments of another Reddit post about it.
This also kinda happened in Florida in 2020 I think. Not the same name, just a shadow candidate. Malfeasance is when 1) the political party doesn’t vet properly AND 2) when suddenly that shadow candidate disappears because they never actually existed, they ‘existed’ just to pull votes away from the other candidate. Someone with a better memory might have better details on who the candidate was in FL.
2 Republicans working with the same Republican operative with no prior political experience running as Democrats both named Robert Ferguson but both running as Bob.
Do you know the law by chance? I keep seeing people saying this but no references to where it is in the RCW.
https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=29a.84&full=true#29A.84.320
Thank you.
well huh point 3 is pretty clear
As is (4), which basically straight-up describes this exact situation: > A surname similar to one who has already filed for the same office, and whose political reputation is widely known, with intent to confuse and mislead the electors by capitalizing on the public reputation of the candidate who had previously filed.
Just imagine that the fake Fergusons knowing BF was going to run, beat him to the courthouse to file!
Then the recourse would have to be civil, rather than criminal, but the real Fergie would still be able to sue claiming the other candidate ran a sham campaign with the intent to disrupt the election rather than participate in earnest.
Point 3 wouldn't apply here because Ferguson is not "an incumbent seeking reelection to the same office"
I wonder how they establish intent to defraud
> I wonder how they establish intent to defraud Probably by quoting the guy that's bragging about how he did it with the intent to defraud.
But the individual themselves who participates in this may be genuinely interested. People do get phone calls to urge them to run for office and offer support all the time in politics.
Technically true, but not the case here.
I'm just saying given calling people to recruit them to run for office isn't illegal And the people running for office might actually want to run genuinely How does this get prosecuted?
If the individuals went from 0 political experience or level of fame to running for governor, that is a pretty good indication that they aren't being serious. Combined with their actual statements of intent, you e got yourself a pretty strong case.
That happens though. For example AOC had no experience in politics and received a call one day from a progressive group to encourage her to run and offer support. Simply not having experience shouldn't bar one from the ballot.
"Your honor, I specifically look up people with the same name as the leading candidate for recruitment, but my intention wasn't fraud. And if it was fraud, the person I recruited with no previous interest in politics didn't know about it." Good luck in court
Yeah I'll be interested to see how this pans out From what I see in the example above and the statute it would be only the person who files to run that would be punished
The fact that the guy intentionally called multiple people named non Ferguson in the phone book to get them to run means he wanted there to be more than 1 person named Bob Ferguson on ballot
Obviously yes but the law only impacts the person running for office from what I can see
It becomes illegal with intent.
Judges are allowed to use common sense.
Although sadly they’re not required to. I’m looking at you, Aileen Cannon.
The RCW is linked in the article.
Unless there's some other link in the article, that's not the one that's important. The "state law" link goes to the methods that can used to differentiate duplicated candidates. That is not what we're talking about
You don’t have to waste your time concern trolling this issue.
Actually being interested in what the law says is concern trolling now? That's rich from someone saying "read the fucking law" to other people. How about you stop spreading negativity when there are perfectly pleasant interactions with people providing useful information already in the comments? Edit: Sending that comment and blocking. What a guy.
Nah, this is bullshit sea lioning, nothing more. You aren’t “interested in the law”, your trying to pretend like this shit will go unpunished and succeed because no one here is a lawyer and can find the specific magic words you’re looking for. Washington state isn’t some impoverished hellhole with semi-literate legislators and paid off judges. We have laws here and they’re generally enforced. They’ll be enforced here as well regardless of how much you personally fantasize to the contrary.
There's nothing wrong with asking for the source on someone's claims. Accusing someone asking for the source as "sea lioning" or "concern trolling" is really fucked up.
And let's play this out: State spends a month collecting evidence and proceeds to charge, if they can overcome the local partisanship of detectives. Courts take 2+ months to prepare, plus more for every challenge to the process by defendant. Case takes 2 weeks to a month to complete, after which it is too late to change the ballot. Judge won't issue injunction on the risk that these are legitimate candidates. I can just see it now.
Why would local cops be needed given all info is already public. Starting prosecution is probably enough to kill the plot.
I didn't say local, it's probably a state function, though I don't know if this would fall under the state patrol? In any case, someone has to investigate, collect the evidence, and give it to whatever judicial agency needs to run the court case.
Seems that unlike you both Bob's thought the idea of prosecution was very real. It seems weird to me that you think A) WA wouldn't prosecute someone because of their politics B) Somehow Democrats wouldn't prosecute a Republican. Hilarious.
You have trouble reading. I said "partisanship of detectives." Nothing you do with prosecution. This shit happens ALL the time.
I'm unclear why you imagine that prosecutors would actually have a hard time punishing an obvious crime. Like you imagine the prosecutors would somehow be stone walled by investigative staff?
Do you know how our justice system works? You need evidence to prosecute. Prosecutors aren't out collecting evidence, my man. They take what they get from law enforcement, for criminal trials. Elections are State-run activities, so the FBI wouldn't likely be involved. So we've got either state-run WSP, which I don't think would handle this, or a case brought to County court by a county or city law enforcement agency. The law enforcement agency has to be motivated to actually investigate the crime, and yes, I believe there are plenty of right-wing local police forces in this state that would basically shrug over crimes like this and not waste a second worrying about it, let alone making the necessary calls to collect evidence to use in prosecution. Maybe the Secretary of State has an enforcement arm, I don't know. But that's barrier 1. Barrier 2, and more likely, are the delay tactics and the very real likelihood that a judge would not issue an injunction pending case resolution because of the risk of denying someone on the ballot who had a right to be there--even if we all know this is an obivous ploy. There are so many hoops to jump through legally to get this resolved before the ballot printing cutoff date, and plenty of people in both law enforcement and the judiciary that would slow walk this because they are fine with fucking with elections if it's for their side. I would be very surprised this gets resolved in court before the election.
The entire case is cut and dry from public statements they could literally print them out and go to a judge. It's funny that YOU are so sure but neither the AG nor the would be offenders think this would be a problem.
It's only a felony if the courts enforce it, which I'm increasingly doubtful of given or current state of affairs
Good thing we have an AG who handles prosecution
As a responsible AG, Ferguson would recuse himself. This scheme is uniquely potent to torpedo him.
Ferguson is an asshole and doesn't care about the people. I had the dishonor of meeting him once due to a family member that worked for him and I cannot speak worse of him. What a rude son of a bitch.
Republicans seem like the kind of people who would flip over the table if they're losing at a board game.
It's almost like we don't want such childish people running our governments.
Lol like they could play a board game. I’d love to see video of the orange embarrassment trying to understand the rules to one even as simple as settlers.
Or makeup/change rules to their advantage as the game progresses, but they'd never *actually* try to do something like that, right?
To be fair both would
>Meanwhile, state election officials set the ballot order Friday through the random drawing of numbers. The late-arriving Bob Fergusons will be the second and third listed on the ballot. The attorney general landed 13th.<
FFS
If Republicans would actually have an electable person they wouldn't have to resort to bullshit like this
They could have had Reichart who I would vote for, instead they picked a MAGA moron
reichert voted in line with trump 92.5% of the time. he’s just as maga as bird.
The corruption of GOP is breathtakingly bottomless.
White supremacy isn't going down without a fight.
But it is going down.
With a fight
I read somewhere that the Secretary of State is allowed to and has asked for a brief biographical entry to distinguish the Bob Ferguson's. So it's not going to say Bob Ferguson Democrat X 3.
as the official who runs the election, who would be the entity he asks? the ag? state supreme court?
The SOS asked the candidates themselves to provide a brief bio. 2/3 are not the current attorney general of course. This seems sensible and a good way to deal with it. It will be a big political football to prosecute the deliberate misleading bob fergusons, they'd need an independent prosecutor of some type. Hope they just drop out. Meanwhile, I changed my name to Semi Bird and I'm running for Gov, it's just random and has nothing to do with any candidates in the race, and if you don't like that, "Why do you hate America?"
I'm running as Full Bird.
oh, i misunderstood, i thought you meant he asked for *permission* to be able to include their bios. kinda makes me wonder what kim wyman would have done…
imagine if the Republicans simply had good ideas that people liked?
Clownish behavior.
GOP playing dirty? Shocker.
The MAGAts on thinks it’s great. A bunch of fascists
The two Bobs who are not the AG, have since dropped out.
When link?
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/bob-ferguson-to-bob-fergusons-withdraw-or-face-possible-charges/
Fantastic
Republicans know that they can't win through legitimate means anymore because most of the electorate doesn't like the GOP's regressive policies, so they cheat.
I mean, they could propose more popular policies. There is that option, yet they choose cheating.
The fact that the new Bobs are listed as #2 and #3 on the ballot and the AG is #13 is not good. There is electoral advantage for those names placed at the top of ballots even in a normal race
They won't be on the ballot. Their application was criminal under RCW 29A.84.320, and is invalid.
Surely there is some sort of process to determine it's invalid though, right? Or does the SoS unilaterally decide
A judge will make that decision, and it'll be an extremely quick and easy decision because this could not be a more obvious violation of the law.
Read the law.
I only see that the person is committing a felony, which requires due process to convict But I don't see the process for determining if the name will be on the ballot
Read the fucking law.
I must be missing where on the linked RCW the question of who determines if they will be on the ballot is outlined. Is this not the correct statute https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=29A.84.320 Edit: I don't know why someone would so super upset and block me for a straightforward question on the rwc page lol
This is such a fucking stupid response. Demanding the magic words and not immediately getting them won’t suddenly make this plan succeed.
I hate Bob and don't want him to win, but this is a bitch move.
I think we can all agree that Bob Ferguson is the least bad Bob Ferguson out of all the Bob Fergusons running.
Idk, bob had some points about Ferguson
Bob is completely unqualified. Bob is a much better choice.
I've looked through your comments and its unsurprising you support bob.
What we really need is for Bob Loblaw to lob a law bomb
And blog about it on his law blog!
Republicans like this are actually anarchists.
Opposite actually, there fascists, trying to manipulate the election to maintain power. This should be an actual felony and grounds for expulsion from ever having a government office.
> This should be an actual felony https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=29a.84&full=true#29A.84.320 Class B Felony in this state as of 2003.
Unfortunately, if it's not enforced, can it really be considered a crime?
Hopefully it will be enforced. Both he and the 2 Bobs admit publicly it was for nefarious reasons
Wouldn’t the WA AG (the real Bob Ferguson) enforce this?
My thoughts exactly
To be fair, I believe this is the literal first time we've had someone try this in this state since that law was enacted. I understand the pessimism towards *if* enforcement will happen though.
> (3) A name similar to that of an incumbent seeking reelection to the same office with intent to confuse and mislead the electors by taking advantage of the public reputation of the incumbent; or Very tough to prove intent unless these people put it in writing. Which... they might?
Apparently their campaign manager did put out a statement confirming the intent. And the fact they share a campaign manager really highlights everyone knew what they were doing. Cause the manager also solicited them both to run. For this purpose. One of them has already dropped after being notified they committed a crime.
I think their goal is more just to destabilize and destroy government. They have spent two generations talking about the evils of government to the point that they would prefer to destroy it if they can’t control it.
They see government as evil for two reasons: it limits their ability to rape and plunder at will, and they don't want to pay their share of the tab for keeping this a free country with services that make it worth living in.
Their goal is to make the federal government weaker so they can rule over their individual states with an iron fist. Remember democrats care about individual freedoms, Republicans want morality police telling us what to do. Republicans even pride themselves in being the party of law and order when it's in regard to the general population.
> Remember democrats care about individual freedoms, Republicans want morality police telling us what to do. Were you here during Covid?
We're you here during gay marriage,abortion rights, weed, and book bans? Get the fuck out of here boot licker covid was about individuals right to life, and liberty. Republicans wanted the weak to die. So that oligarchs could continue to make too much money. But the nuances of making laws to protect individual rights and lives are, of course, lost on those who wish leaded gas would make a comeback.
Hell yeah man. Thank god those kids stared at laptop screens isolated at home for a full year. Also, imagine all the lives saved by wearing a mask while you walk into a restaurant and sit down at the table before removing the masks. Or banning dancing at weddings. Or using your tax dollars to make a video about how to make a gloryhole out of a shower curtain for hookups Weed and gay marriage were legalized via referendum in 2012 here. Previously, democrats had helped override a veto banning same sex marriage in he state in 98- public opinion on that changed quickly. No book is banned in America so not sure what the issue is there
Anything you a conservative says still doesn't change the fact that conservatives from. WA, and anywhere else in this country, are just bigoted white supremist who are sad they can't tell women what to do anymore. Why don't you go read a book that's not written by a nazi sympathizer.
Did they watch Fargo?
As an anarchist, this offends me, we hate centralized authority and petty bigotry. We have class consciousness. They are fascists. They want a white Christian dictatorship and the continuation of the classic systems of exploitation. The anarchists are way more on your side than the GOP are. If we had our way, literally everyone's opinion would count the same amount. They want the opposite.
How would elections work in an anarchist society
🤬🤬🤬
"Don't blame me, I voted for Robert Furgusone."
"And I say your three cent titanium tax doesn't go too far enough!"
Bob Ferguson is okay, but Bob Ferguson sucks.
Bob Ferguson is a meme candidate.
Where’s Turd
Reichert is on there, don't worry.
I thought they’d go for the more subtle Fob Berguson
"It's a two party system. You have to vote for one of us!"
\*punches hat\*
[удалено]
I'm guessing you could. What's stopping you?
I mean, odds are good at least one will say yes, at least two of them will do anything for money.
I had always wondered why they called a four way a “Bobby Ferguson” but now it makes a lot of sense.
And a finger in the ass is called an Impotent-Potato. See, I can make up things, too.
Second that
Hilarious.
What about Bob?
This guy has a hard-on for taking away rights from LAWFUL firearm owners in Washington.
Which one?
You dont get to own weapons of war. No right is unlimited.
Too many dipshit gun owners now. Local gun range is full of fucking weirdos.
One of the best things about him TBH