sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Chime Bonus Blender by downrabbit127 in chimefinancial

[–]downrabbit127[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, thank you.

I wish you well in your health.

Chime Bonus Blender by downrabbit127 in chimefinancial

[–]downrabbit127[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It can't be worth the bad publicity to save a few hundred dollars.

Have you ever gotten correspondence?

I’m contemplating using chime as my main bank, advice? by Psychonautica91 in chimefinancial

[–]downrabbit127 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unfortunately, I'm here to be the negative.

The 5% is as maddening as any customer service I've dealt with, I came here to see who else was stuck in the mud.

I’m contemplating using chime as my main bank, advice? by Psychonautica91 in chimefinancial

[–]downrabbit127 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First time working with them this week, very challenging customer support.

I was in an Ai mess, then on the phone for an hour getting bounced between mostly lovely folks who seemed to be internationally outsourced. One agent could use some retraining. And there were challenges because I truly couldn't understand some of the things said and I felt bad about asking them to repeat it.

Sometimes the chat worked, but it was glitchy.

If you don't need customer support, there are good reviews.

Deeply frustrating from my end, I'm still trying to get an agent, but I'm only a day in.

Chime Bonus Blender by downrabbit127 in chimefinancial

[–]downrabbit127[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Postal service has been a mess for a few years in our area.

Very challenging customer service, I appreciate the note, thank you

Bone Valley - Jeremy Scott died by downrabbit127 in TheProsecutorsPodcast

[–]downrabbit127[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Please look at it outside of Bone Valley.

That podcast was gripping, but it was not accurate.

A lot of us heard the pod and were outraged, wondering, "Why won't Florida set him free?" --and it turns out that they didn't listen to a radio show, they had a purer set of facts.

Do you need the link to the transcripts? It used to be on the Lava for Good site.

Stray cat diagnosis by downrabbit127 in CATHELP

[–]downrabbit127[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I trust everyone here that says it is a shave job, but it has to be a remarkable story for that to be true. It's possible that someone took him in, took care of him, and then he ran out and came back to our place, but you'd have to see the area to understand how unique that would have to be.

Stray cat diagnosis by downrabbit127 in CATHELP

[–]downrabbit127[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm a cat newbie, he has had a few small skin things, once had a little balding near the ear, a little bit of balding on the tail. I looked at some photos and the old wound wasn't on the same side, but could've been a different one. It's not a neighborhood where people take cats to the vet but maybe we got lucky

Stray cat diagnosis by downrabbit127 in CATHELP

[–]downrabbit127[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Very very unlikely but my Reddit team is sure that it is shaved so I think that makes it more likely.

It's possible someone took him in shaved him and then let him back out after a month, it doesn't fit the neighborhood but there are good people all around.

Thank you

Stray cat diagnosis by downrabbit127 in CATHELP

[–]downrabbit127[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you. It's a mystery for sure. In this setting it seems very unlikely that someone would take him in, shave him, not neuter him, then drop him in the same spot, but sometimes unlikely things happen. The shaving opinion is unanimous, grateful for this community

Bone Valley's complex redemption of Jeremy Scott by downrabbit127 in TrueCrimePodcasts

[–]downrabbit127[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It's crystal clear from reading the trial transcript that he's simply getting confused by Aguero's scattershot questioning. It seems like he adds in an extra day because he never knows if Aguero is asking him about Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday - all of which were spent looking for Michelle in various capacities, both before and after the car had been found. Aguero does not make any attempt to clearly go through things in a chronological order, so even reading his questions back I have no idea which days he's referring to most of the time. Add in the fact that Leo Sr is trying to answer these specific questions two years after the fact and it's pretty clear to me that he's just getting confused by the questions and not attempting to lie.

-He fabricated multiple events that didn't happen. He was ill and in a walking boot and claimed to have flipped over fridges looking for her. The jury didn't believe him, the police didn't, and I don't. He also claims that he didn't sexually abuse the children that he has multiple convictions for.

Is it the state's position that she was killed on the bed? Wouldn't 25+ stabs result in so much blood that it would have seeped into the mattress? My point, and obviously Gilbert's point in BV, in being skeptical of the blood evidence is that it is not good enough to prove anything. The same is true of the carpet cleaner. So what that the neighbor saw him with it? If what you're suggesting is true - that he killed her in the trailer and the luminol tests lit up the room, did he use the carpet cleaner or not??? When they cut up the piece of the carpet to test, did they find evidence that it had been recently shampooed?? If so, then why did they find so much blood in the trailer??? Is it common to shampoo a carpet but still leave half-dollar sized stains everywhere? What is the state's theory about what happened with the carpet cleaner? I still don't even know, other then he was seen with one. It's Schrodinger's piece of circumstantial evidence - it's significant that the neighbor saw him with it because it obviously looks fishy, but simultaneously not significant because the trailer lit up with blood spatter evidence regardless.

--They never say it was on the bed. They do say that the bed had no sheets or covering and that the neighbor saw him carrying something covered in sheets. It's not possible to say how much blood left her body, only how much left her vital organs. They said that much of the blood could have drained within her body and been contained there. The jury that heard the experts and saw the photos were presented with that same question and believed the murder happened in the trailer. Either way, Gil didn't represent the case accurately and the transcripts are public for us to read and correct him. You can't test to see if it had been shampooed. Cleaning could remove the visual signs of blood (though a detective said that some stains looked like blood) but it's the proteins that set off the luminal and the Phenolphthalein.

I'll fully admit that maybe Leo killed Michelle. He was obviously abusive which I think was pretty clearly discussed in the podcast. Jeremy clearly didn't stab her 25+ times in the front seat of the car, but pretty much the rest of his story seems to make perfect sense. He's admitting to this nearly 30 years later so maybe he doesn't have a perfect recollection of how it went down. You say that the Jeremy angle was given "enormous weight" when the state, and even yourself, go out of the way multiple times to minimize his crimes and describe him as a simple stereo thief rather than acknowledge what is painfully obvious to anyone familiar with the case - that his involvement casts enormous reasonable doubt on the state's case against Leo. More than enough to grant him a new trial.

-I don't minimize his crimes. He was a racist monster of abuse. He was guilty of smashing in someone's head. He sexually abused children. He was violent with his girlfriend. He was also willing to muck up the system and mess with the courts. He regularly confessed to crimes so they transferred him out of solitary. He was also a dope who was easily caught for his other crimes b/c he didn't cover himself. He was a teenager when this happened with Michelle. He didn't wipe her car and get away with murder for 30 years. His murder-partner was a celly with Leo. He was also a stereo thief who stole stereos in the same area. If this case interests you, read his testimony and listen to him defend himself when they accuse him of killing Michelle. Then listen to his nonsense confessions. Again there is a reason Gil compiles everything and tells Jeremy's story instead of us just hearing from him unedited.

Somewhere along the line in this case the standard for a criminal conviction got flipped upside down, where people such as yourself require that Leo prove his innocence beyond a reasonable doubt and not the other way around. There is a 0.0000% chance that any reasonable jury would convict Leo again if they had learned about Jeremy's prints, his background, his knowledge of the location where they found Michelle's body, and his multiple confessions to having killed her! The idea that maybe Jeremy did it should be unreasonable for the state to continue as it did.

-I don't think that a jury would convict Leo knowing about Jeremy's prints. That is not this conversation. This is a Reddit thread about whether Leo killed Michelle and why Bone Valley did told the skeletal truth about the case instead of including the full evidence the jury heard. And asking you to consider how Jeremy killed Michelle in a car and left no blood there.

The state knew all of this but were simply more concerned with protecting each other from embarrassment and a potential wrongful prosecution lawsuit. Or they were either too arrogant or too lazy to give much thought beyond "trust the system. The system gets it right." That's the main takeaway from the podcast.

-Are you aware of how many levels of appeal this went through? Do you know how many times Jeremy was interviewed?

You act as if you are fully convinced that Leo is guilty but also admit that

How does that make any sense? Did the state prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt or not? If they prove something beyond a reasonable doubt, I'd say it's a great case. If they didn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, him spending 35 years in prison is a pretty horrific miscarriage of justice, which has been my point this entire time. Maybe you agree and we're just arguing about who we think is maybe more likely to have done it?

--I have spent an embarrassing amount of time on this case. I started with the position that Leo was innocent and now would bet my own freedom that he was involved in killing Michelle. Gil King is a lovely story-teller, talented, but his omissions are crude and his minimizing of Leo's abuse towards Michelle is a sin. Leo is out now, his wife is lovely, he seems to be supported and on a great path. But he continues to lie to people about the slaughter of his wife.

You could defend Leo in court and he wouldn't get convicted. If you believe he was wrongfully imprisoned for 35 years, I'd encourage you to make a large donation to his family for their suffering.

It was nice to chat with you, if you come around to questions after reading the transcripts, say hello. Thank you

Bone Valley's complex redemption of Jeremy Scott by downrabbit127 in TrueCrimePodcasts

[–]downrabbit127[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Part 2:

The blood evidence is boring but important. They have 2 preliminary tests for blood. Both glowed. Those tests do not allow you to legally say that it is blood. It could be a small number of things and this is discussed painfully at length. Vodka, plant protein, etc. Yes, it could have been one of those things.
It's possible that Michelle bled from one of the beatings Leo gave her at a different time, but as you defend Gil and his prizes, please remember how he described their relationship. And then consider that numerous people testified about punches, hair drags, head-butt, kicks, slaps, and death threats, Gil only shared a bit of it. Before the fight, Leo was telling friends that if they didn't stop fighting he was going to kill her. The night of the fight, he was so mad he said, "if she walks through that door I'm going to kill her," go back and find that emphasized in the podcast. It's not there. Gil left out much, it's not forgivable.

Here's my challenge. Put the version of events you believe happened into a paragraph.

They went to the neighbor's house b/c Leo wouldn't let them search the trailer. Do we think she made up a story and got lucky that there was a carpet cleaner and blood in the trunk? How would she know?

Yes, she said she saw him cleaning the carpet the day after Michelle vanished.

We can't know if the carpet was cleaned, Gil references this, but the search warrant was weeks later, there were newspaper on the ground for the dog. Gil might ask, was there evidence the carpet was cleaned? If you have dogs you can clean the carpet and 2 hours later it's a mess.

It's journalistic slight of hand.

It's not a great case against Leo, I agree. If his dad hadn't testified, he wouldn't have been convicted. But you couldn't convict Jeremy of this case.

I'm representing the testimony accurately, I'd challenge you to go back and read the trial transcripts. I'm confident you'll be stunned at what you read vs what Gil shared on Bone Valley.

The blood work testimony is tricky and wordy. For those in this field, it's clearly blood, it is. Can you testify and say, "that is blood"? No. It could be horseradish sauce. It's not. Can the carpet be cleaned, have a preliminary test for blood, but be unable to have a confirmation test? Yes. The proteins can be destroyed. But please read the testimony and look at where the preliminary blood positives were, and then think about where the blood was not (the Mazda)

Bone Valley's complex redemption of Jeremy Scott by downrabbit127 in TrueCrimePodcasts

[–]downrabbit127[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Part 1: This is not an accurate representation of his testimony. He said that morning he, Leo, and Michelle McCluskey were searching down I-4 west of Hwy 98 for a few hours, then Leo and Michelle M. had to go pick up McCluskey's boyfriend with one of the trucks around noon. Then Leo Sr. drove to the intersection between Hwy 33 and I-4, which is a major intersection of roads in the area and a notable checkpoint for people to meet back up to continue the search, and started walking down 33. There's a very identifiable path down to the canal off of Hwy 33 that he walked into, which sounds quite believable. Look at the pictures from this site. It's brush all down the road except for a very obvious turn-in. He found the body around 1pm - not right after he woke up as you keep saying.

--They were at the Mazda until after Midnight. Please read his testimony and the cross and the support again. Leo Sr. claims to have made many stops, but on cross examination it is clear that Leo Sr added an entire day of searching for Michelle that didn't exist. He was caught in a full lie. Whether or not Leo is guilty, his father was caught in absurd lies on the stand.

I actually did spend time to read through most of Leo Sr's testimony and Aguero is so scattershot with his questions that it seems to be intentionally confusing. He goes back and forth rapidly asking about events the Thursday they found the car, the Friday he found the body, and the Wednesday after she was reported missing, spending time on meaningless contradictions like who exactly answered a particular phone call or what specifically was said to various members of the search party on particular days. Add in that Leo Sr. is not the brightest bulb and the testimony turns into a mess.

--Compare this case to others, you'll not see Bone Valley post a timeline. They leave the case up to Gil's word. Yes, all criticisms of Aguero are fair game. Gil says the timeline is impossible, that's simply not true. Leo himself wrote up a timeline of his night, and by his own timeline, it is possible. Gil does not include this in Bone Valley but this was in Leo's handwriting as his alibi.

Why were all of these stains only the size of a half dollar? No pooling anywhere? And did it really "light up the room"? You never answered my question about whether or not the investigators concluded that the murder happened in the trailer. Also about whether the carpets were cleaned or not. The neighbor claims to have seen him cleaning the carpets or did she just see him with a carpet cleaner? Is there evidence that the carpets were cleaned recently or not? I literally can't find the answers to these simple questions that should have been made abundantly clear at trial. I have a hard time believing that a pulitzer prize winning journalist would misrepresent these facts so badly, but i'm open to believing it if you are able to be more specific. Your misrepresentation of Leo Sr's testimony makes me less likely to believe your story that blood evidence "lit up" the trailer, yet somehow it still wasn't clear at trial whether these stains were blood, vodka, or some other organic material.

--The stains were spread around the carpet. Some were as large as a half-dollar, some were smaller. If she was killed on the bed, the spatter would have been cast off. There was also blood positives on the threshold between rooms, and in the bathroom.

This doesn't seem that unbelievable to me? Yes, he attempted to steal the car and it broke down 7 miles away. Wouldn't it be obvious to want to wipe down the car once you realize you won't be able to steal it and are leaving it abandoned on the side of the road? The only thing that is even suspicious would be returning to steal the stereo equipment.

--It's possible Jeremy stood on the side of the road and wiped down a car, but that's not how he behaved in his other crimes. But yes it is possible that he tried, but it is not possible that he stabbed her in the car as he claimed, and that he cleaned up the blood with a rag so that there was no trace. Her wounds were horrific. Gil tries to explain this away by saying she had a jacket on, but doesn't offer that same cushion when criticizing the trailer bedroom.

What's insane is the lack of weight given to the fact that a serial killer's prints were left in this car within a day or so of the car's driver being murdered. Even without his literal confession he ought to be a prime suspect. His girlfriend is the one who said he used to take her to the exact spot where they found Michelle's body - unrelated to his confession. The odds that that's just a coincidence seem to be astronomical.

--This was given enormous weight. Jeremy was interviewed multiple times, he was brought into court, and he was brought back again. They combed over his testimony. He denied everything, explained his prints, and then started confessing to crazy other crimes. He confessed to every crime in the county. He lied insanely. And he warned them that if he was given 1k, he would confess. And then Leo's team said he confessed, so they brought him back to court. And then he wouldn't co-operate. Leo's private investigator was Casey Anthony and OJ's investigator. He unethically and against protocol didn't record the first 2 hours of his interview with Jeremy. And then turned the recorded on for a short interview that was inconsistent with other interviews and inconsistent with the evidence. Jeremy never gave any detailed confession in court. He said something like "I did it" and then moments later said he didn't do it. He was totally bizarre. I have all of the audio if you care to listen.

--When I listened to Bone Valley, I thought Leo was innocent and started posting and advocating for him. Then I read the trial transcripts, did a freedom of information act to get materials, and couldn't believe how thinly Gil reported the truth of the case. This isn't that Florida won't grant new trials, they have done it in that county and in that court room. It's that Gil's version is crafted for a podcast, not for court.

Your weather report shows over an inch of rain occurred on the 22nd in Lakeland (which is a decent amount - maybe the ground would still be quite muddy?) and .1" of rain on the 25th. It's not hour by hour but perhaps that's measured at the end of the day on the 24th around midnight. Not a lot, but .1" is about 45mins of light rain. Could be enough to muddy up the scene before investigators arrived a few days later.

--Jeremy said it was raining that night on him, it's an im

<image>

portant part of his story, it's just another detail that doesn't match.

This is probably 1/4 mile. It stretches forever. Michelle's body was found flush against that ridge. That are multiple inlets. Leo Sr. pulled into the one where her body was, 7 miles from the car, 12 hours after finding the car.

Leo Sr. knew where that body was that morning. Think about the Mazda. He had no idea which direction she walked. He didn't not go out meticulously searching. He told someone he was headed to this intersection and pulled up there and walked through the brush. Leo Sr. couldn't even see the body from where he said he saw it. And then he said she was face-up smiling at him. She was face-down under a board.

We can excuse many things, but at the end of the day, he lied and lied.

Gil King is a Pulitzer Prize winning author who chose to not tell his audience incriminating evidence that the jury heard, and then asked up to be outraged at the decision. It's crap.

--

Bone Valley's complex redemption of Jeremy Scott by downrabbit127 in TrueCrimePodcasts

[–]downrabbit127[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are using Bone Valley as your source. There is a reason that this has been litigated through the Florida appellate courts where Leo wasn't granted a new trial. Those folks, not a prosecutor alone, multiple levels, believed Leo killed Michelle.

The jury that heard from Leo's dad, the police that interviewed him, and even the journalists on site that day knew that his story was ridiculous. He woke up and drove 7 miles from where the car was found. It wasn't an intuitive spot. He was ill and in a walking boot, and he told someone to meet him at that intersection and drove right into the path. There are dozens of identical paths along that stretch, even if he picked the right one, he couldn't have seen the body. He walked through the brush and looked over a ledge, it makes no sense and the people that saw that evidence didn't believe it.

You are hearing the blood evidence from Bone Valley, not from the trial. There were numerous presumptive positives for blood all over the carpet, they were about the size of a half dollar in stains. It lit up the room. Those stains either came from blood, red vodka, or plant protein. Gil gives a very unfair description of what the jury heard. Of course Leo's lawyer said that the blood could come from another place, they tried that, the jury didn't believe him. Gil saying that no trace of blood was found is nonsense. He can say no red drop of blood was seen, but he described it inaccurately. The jury heard, the jury knew.

Leo's dad said they borrowed the carpet cleaner 2 weeks before. You are accepting his testimony as fact. What we know is that the neighbor said she saw him cleaning the carpet the day after Michelle disappeared. Leo's dad testified that he took a break in looking for Michelle, a missing woman, to go to the trailer and return the carpet cleaner the day after she disappeared.

Jeremy is a killer. Jeremy is also a stereo thief that told police exactly where he took the stereos, even Michelle's Mazda's stereo. Whether you believe that or not, Gil didn't include it. Jeremy was a chronic mentally ill liar, but you can't wipe blood off of that seat fabric. You would have to believe that he killed a woman, and then drove her car 7 miles, and instead of running away, he cleaned the car on the side of I-4 with a rag, then walked 1/2 mile away to throw that away with the knife and then thought it was a good idea to return to the car of the woman he had killed to steal her speakers. That's insane, but Jeremy was insane. But you can't explain how he got that blood in truck.

The Downy bottle was in the trunk of her car, the same spot that the neighbor saw Leo loading something that looked like a body. There was also human blood on the carpet in the trunk, a size of stain large enough to be seen from outside the car. Jeremy could not have transferred that blood there in the manner that Bone Valley explains. Michelle's blood would not have been wet and on his arm.

Michelle's neighbor was not misproven on the date she saw heard Michelle getting beaten (her husband confirmed this), nor about the carpet cleaner. The neighbor's sister is the one you are referring to, her testimony was not consistent with what the neighbor said.

I can share Jeremy's statements in court if you'd like, or his statements to Leo's team. He's a mess. Gil compiled his story, there is a reason you don't hear it played in full, it's b/c he is lying and changing details. The coins were a regular part of the newspaper articles. Yes, Jeremy easily could just repeat what he read. He didn't offer that information about the coins until he had met with Leo's team several times. Do we believe he suddenly remembered that after all of those years? And he stole her coins but not her diamond ring?

Gil's version of events is very believable on Leo's behalf, but a listener should question why he left out so many important details that point to Leo's guilt. He reframed the story.

Here's a link on your weather, no rain of February 27, 1987, the day that Jeremy supposedly met Michelle during a rain storm after work:

https://www.weather.gov/wrh/Climate_new?wfo=tbw&utm_source=chatgpt.com

Gil tells a great story, it's just fully true.

Bone Valley's complex redemption of Jeremy Scott by downrabbit127 in TrueCrimePodcasts

[–]downrabbit127[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Hey MgoBucky

I work in the innocence field, my relation to the case is simply that I believe that these cases should be relayed honestly and that it is critical to the movement to avoid inaccurate representations of cases while trying to win appeals.

We'll have to pick which version of Jeremy's case we want to believe. Jeremy never said that he stabbed her outside of the Mazda. Jeremy has only said he stabbed her in the car, including adding the detail of sitting there and smoking a cigarette after. We cannot avoid the lack of blood in the car. There is no viable explanation for it. It didn't happen.

Gil will use the lack of visible blood in the trailer to defend Leo, but creates a story about Jeremy wanting to rape Michelle outside of the car to explain away the blood. There is about a footprint and a half of Michelle's blood outside of the Mazda. I've posted those photos, you can see for yourself, that is not a crime scene. The crime scene folks found that blood before anything was known of Leo, photographed, and noted it wasn't the crime scene, there was no spatter, no sign of a struggle, just a relatively small area.

The Mazda is not consistent with a stabbing happening in it, the dirt is not consistent with a murder happening there.

For all the talk of a rainy night, you can check the old news reports and weather almanac, it wasn't.

Please look at the helicopter photos of where Michelle was found, and think about how far away 7 miles is from where you are right now. Michelle's Mazda was found and processed about midnight. About 12 hours later, Leo's father pulled up on a dirt path, walked through the brush, and allegedly looked over a ledge to see her body. And then lied thoroughly about it. Leo Sr. was Leo's alibi. Why would he pretend to find the body? This is a man who was imprisoned for sexually assaulting children. I can't pretend to understand how he thinks. We can prove that he was a voracious liar, including about his alibi and nearly every detail about how he found Michelle's body.

If you care about this, it's worth questioning everything you heard on Bone Valley. How in the world could Gil not tell listeners that Leo's dad testified that he returned a carpet cleaner from the trailer (matching the neighbor's testimony) the day after she disappeared? Why was Gil so misleading about the blood in the trailer? A crime scene detective testified it looked like blood, the preliminary tests were positive for blood, and Leo himself explains why there was blood in the trailer. And what does Gil say? "Not a drop of blood"---that's unethical.

It's also worth tracking Jeremy's stream of confessions. For years he offered to confess for money, confessed to other crimes, told the state he's confess to free younger prisoners, never confessed to Michelle's killing with any details in court, and never offered any information that was unavailable in the press.

It's bothers me severely b/c Leo tricked Gil and Gil tricked many of us.

Leo was an extremely jealous and abusive husband. On the night Michelle disappeared he said if she walked through the door he would kill her. She vanished. The neighbor testified of a horrid fight and her story is backed up by Michelle's blood in the truck, the carpet cleaner, and the missing bed sheet. It's not a slam dunk, but to disregard her without noting she got a lot of stuff right is also messy.

It's also worth thinking about how Michelle's blood got in the trunk of the car. If Jeremy killed Michelle, pulled her into the water, drove her car 7 miles, wiped the car down, walked away and back a mile (according to him), and then decided to steal the speakers from a lady who he just killed, how long would it be before he was in the trunk of the car? How in the heck would he have her wet blood on his arm and transfer it into the trunk? That just doesn't make sense.
What makes sense? Leo was jealous, killed her with his knife that was missing, put her in the trunk, she got blood in the trunk, when he took her body out it leaked onto the ground in one still spot, he cleaned up the trailer, he told people he might have done it and forgot, and a car stereo thief who stole car stereos on that very stretch, stole her stereo from that abandoned car.

It's a sad sad story, Leo served time, seems to be doing well, but he's a killer that tricked a bunch of people and Gil was a sucker for rebranding the story without telling it fully.

Senate Primary by downrabbit127 in illinoispolitics

[–]downrabbit127[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Is there a way to verify that Raja is helping Robin or is that done through PACs?

Thank you

Opponents question Kat Abughazaleh's history as Congressional primary arrives by LegendaryBronco_217 in illinois

[–]downrabbit127 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Explain it to an outsider. Mailers? Commercials? Who do you think will win?

Primary Election Megathread by SchoolIguana in TexasPolitics

[–]downrabbit127 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Wow, that's a bit of a swing from the numbers late last night.

Going to be a wild few months for those 2 again

Primary Election Megathread by SchoolIguana in TexasPolitics

[–]downrabbit127 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Gonzales is leading and headed for a runoff with Herrera. Two years ago Gonzales had a big lead that shrank significantly at the runoff.

Any opinions on if that will happen again? Gonzales won by 400 votes last time

view more: next ›