The Fog Of War...👀
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (34)
sorted by:
Has Oz been properly explained and vetted?
No, we are simply to do what we're told. The only difference is Trump is telling us what to do as opposed to the GOP/uniparty telling us what to do. It surprises me the amount of anons on here who don't see this as a problem. Barnette is politically un-savy. She seems to not be part of "the plan" while Oz must be under control. Perhaps this is THE reason for Trumps endorsement and lack of addressing PA's real concerns with OZ. If this is so, does PA want a candidate with a full blown liberal past that Trump is telling us to vote for or a not so politically clever candidate who has rambled about the globalists and social issues much like Trump used to?
If I were in PA, I would trust Trump's judgement on this. There doesn't seem to be an 100% good choice here.
Sands would be better....no race card to play.
So bring a "politically un-savy" (your words) to contend in the general election?
Not logical. Also, Barnett is funded by anti-Trump The Club for Growth....surprised The Lincoln Project isn't backing her too.
Your "rambled" like "Trump used to" doesn't sound very complimentary....are you a Cruzer or never-Trumper?
Sands might be better.
I do not care for Barnette talking race issues. I do consider this negatively and weigh it according in my opinion.
Being well versed in political insider communication is not a prerequisite to being electable. It may or may not be a strength or weakness in the general election. Whoever wins the pa primaries are almost for sure going to win the general.
Logic has to do with perspective. I'll ask again. Are you in PA?
Cruzer/never Trumper? I guess you can't go against the man once with expecting that question.
I'll look into Oz's funding. How much more has he spent than Barnette?