Lively is probably unelectable most anywhere. Being anti-gay isn't really a selling point anywhere anymore and the Oregon battery thing doesn't help either. He's only gotten this far because he's not Baker.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Governor Charlie Baker vs Scott Lively
- Thread starter thousm
- Start date
Would you really rather have Maura Healey as governor?
Baker isn’t great, but he is better than any Democrat we would get and there is no viable Republican alternative.
This is Massachusetts — a conservative won’t win statewide office. The best we can hope for is a moderate, which is what Baker is.
Baker is doing an objectively good job running the state. He just isn't conservative... which is mostly fine with me EXCEPT for the 2A issue, where he's been a massive disappointment.
The "progressive" alternative would be worse.
Mike
The "progressive" alternative would be worse.
Mike
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2016
- Messages
- 382
- Likes
- 341
kevin9
NES Member
Reading comprehension???
Wikipedia is OK for matters of actual fact. For matters of opinion, politics, and where balanced reporting is required, Wikipedia is of a strong progressive bias and thus not a very factual cite.
Here's the money quote on his LGBQ perspective direct from Scott Lively's campaign site: "In every way that Christianity is restricted in public life, the LGBT agenda should be restricted." I can agree with that.
I'm just suggesting people read what Scott is actually saying now vs. what those who have a clear bias against him, and an abysmal track record WRT objectivity, are saying that he said. Then decide based on the facts you find rather than someone's opinions about what they claim he has said.
