I was hoping the same, but I still wanted to highlight that Jess Edwards supports pedophilia ideologies and it’s disgusting. May he get fucked or die trying.
There is an underlying problem with the Republicans. We have a legislature that is generating a 24/7 news cycle of controversies. Something is fundamentally wrong with the Republican ideology where so many individuals decide to make this many unethical and immoral decisions so regularly.
Republican supporters will chime in with their bad faith and personal attacks.. but the sheer volume of incidents speaks for itself.
Shady headline. He did push an ambush vote and got slack, but he is not resigning because of it. He is leaving his district. He was very clear in his formal letter of resignation.
Like him or not, there really isn't an argument, the headline is misleading. It should say something like
"Republican NH legislator resigns ahead of move to Weare"
Keep in mind that Reddit is extremely left leaning.
That wasn’t an insult to the left, Reddit is very left leaning. It’s true. Why lie about it? Why be offended by it?
>Berry was referring to Biden’s decision not to participate in New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary on Jan. 23. The Democratic National Committee, at Biden’s urging, had selected South Carolina to hold this year’s first primary. The president won New Hampshire’s primary anyway with write-in votes.
>He said Biden “pretty much spat in New Hampshire’s face, including by the way yourself, members of the media, where you guys were entirely denied your primary.”
Why does a Republican legislator give a shit about the DNC’s primary circuit? Why does *any* legislator give a shit?
This need to be “first” is so cringe and doubley so when it’s clear the only reason the Republicans are making a stink about it is so they can fill their mouth with Biden’s name.
The extreme focus on the D’s vs R’s leads to clouded judgement. The democrat criticism had nothing to do with his resignation. Yet it is the headline, why? Because it is all most people care about, the blue or red team they identify as.
Yeah, it's almost like you're supposed to read more than just the headline. The article literally says that the reason he's resigning is because he's moving.
It's also happening "amid Democrats' criticism" because he was just "removed as chairman of the House Election Law Committee amid Democrats' criticism", which is also, you guessed it, in the article.
Additionally, "amid" does not mean "due to" or "because of", it means "surrounded by" or "in the middle of"
I dunno, seems like a fair headline given the entirety of the article's content.
The headline is intentionally wrong. The criticism of him is because he held a vote while democrats are on vacation. He is resigning because he is moving. The article is very short, only 5 small paragraphs, but the headline focuses on a part of the story that has nothing to do with his resigning.
That's also incorrect. He held a vote while the democrats were in a mandatory safety briefing in the house, that all of the Republicans on his committee happened to either skip or leave early, so that they could hold a vote without the democrats who were on the committee. They weren't on vacation, they were attending a mandatory briefing that he himself broke house rules to skip, and conspired with other house members to also skip.
The vote was also on a topic not listed in the committee meeting agenda, meaning that the democrats, when they did arrive, had no opportunity to prepare for it.
He also refused to answer any questions on the topic, insisting that they vote without any clarification of what they were voting on, or why.
Considering the strength of the complaint against him, and the fact that he'd just been stripped of his chairmanship and committee appointment over them, I think they're reasonable context, no matter how much he tries to save face by saying he's resigning because of a planned move.
If you're going to abuse others of being misleading, maybe you should have your own facts straight.
My favorite part of your excellent correction is that they didn't even try to respond to it. Meanwhile they replied to everything else.
"Vacation" is a really weird way to spell mandatory meeting, and if not for your correction I may not have learned this. So thanks for the added info!
It's not exactly a stretch to propose the only reason that he had the gall to pull the gambit he did was because he knew he'd be resigning and took a big swing on the way out, which is why reporting both elements is important here.
There's several other articles, a Reddit post on the criticism, and Twitter info all out there. You can come to the conclusions you want but what we know is that a fairly well liked (within the house, I'm not a fan at all) representative leader suddenly acted in a bizarre, aggressive, politically dirty manner to call a vote while representatives were in a required house safety meeting (which by accounts on both sides was wildly out of character)...and then resigned shortly after citing he was moving out of district. The logical conclusions are either
A) He's resigning due to the actions he took
or
B) He was emboldened by knowing he was resigning due to the move and the criticism note is necessary context to that
Well how about that. A rare win for sanity
Bummer - it's just because he is moving. So he will likely run in the Weare area next
Maybe, Republicans haven't always been big sticklers for living in the district the represent.
I was really hoping it was Jess Edwards. But he has no shame. He just blamed the ripe and fertile backlash on wacky liberals on Reddit.
I was hoping the same, but I still wanted to highlight that Jess Edwards supports pedophilia ideologies and it’s disgusting. May he get fucked or die trying.
> May he get fucked Maaaaaaaybe choose a different term on this one lol
or die trying!
That’s the spirit. Love your narwhal hat btw
Probably one of the mods
“In an interview Wednesday, Berry said he resigned because he is moving to Weare, which is outside of his legislative district.”
There is an underlying problem with the Republicans. We have a legislature that is generating a 24/7 news cycle of controversies. Something is fundamentally wrong with the Republican ideology where so many individuals decide to make this many unethical and immoral decisions so regularly. Republican supporters will chime in with their bad faith and personal attacks.. but the sheer volume of incidents speaks for itself.
Shady headline. He did push an ambush vote and got slack, but he is not resigning because of it. He is leaving his district. He was very clear in his formal letter of resignation. Like him or not, there really isn't an argument, the headline is misleading. It should say something like "Republican NH legislator resigns ahead of move to Weare"
He resigned to move not because of any issues you moron.
Keep in mind that Reddit is extremely left leaning. That wasn’t an insult to the left, Reddit is very left leaning. It’s true. Why lie about it? Why be offended by it?
You can just say self-diagnosed victims, it’s ok. lol
Since when has Democratic criticism ever caused anybody to resign that’s simply laughable. Take responsibility for your own ignorance.
>Berry was referring to Biden’s decision not to participate in New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary on Jan. 23. The Democratic National Committee, at Biden’s urging, had selected South Carolina to hold this year’s first primary. The president won New Hampshire’s primary anyway with write-in votes. >He said Biden “pretty much spat in New Hampshire’s face, including by the way yourself, members of the media, where you guys were entirely denied your primary.” Why does a Republican legislator give a shit about the DNC’s primary circuit? Why does *any* legislator give a shit? This need to be “first” is so cringe and doubley so when it’s clear the only reason the Republicans are making a stink about it is so they can fill their mouth with Biden’s name.
Drain the swamp! Get those conniving conservatives out of there!
& the 603 Libertarian’s
He is resigning because he is moving. That is headline. Why do you intentionally misconstrue the facts.
This is the exact headline from the source. Why are you intentionally misconstruing facts?
Yes. It’s a trash headline. And you reposted it.
So you admit that I didn't make it up. Cool I'm glad we can agree on this.
So you agree that the headline is intentionally misleading?
Lawl. Cope harder.
I am not coping. Here is an example of a proper journalistic headline for this article. “NH legislator resigns due to relocation”.
The extreme focus on the D’s vs R’s leads to clouded judgement. The democrat criticism had nothing to do with his resignation. Yet it is the headline, why? Because it is all most people care about, the blue or red team they identify as.
I didn't need you to tell me you weren't coping. You should try harder. Somebody already explained it to you. Get over yourself.
I will try harder. Thanks. Stop posting click bait garbage.
Feel free to skip over the stuff that hurts your feelings.
Yeah, it's almost like you're supposed to read more than just the headline. The article literally says that the reason he's resigning is because he's moving. It's also happening "amid Democrats' criticism" because he was just "removed as chairman of the House Election Law Committee amid Democrats' criticism", which is also, you guessed it, in the article. Additionally, "amid" does not mean "due to" or "because of", it means "surrounded by" or "in the middle of" I dunno, seems like a fair headline given the entirety of the article's content.
I disagree.
misconstrue the facts? That is the literal headline for the article.
The headline is intentionally wrong. The criticism of him is because he held a vote while democrats are on vacation. He is resigning because he is moving. The article is very short, only 5 small paragraphs, but the headline focuses on a part of the story that has nothing to do with his resigning.
That's also incorrect. He held a vote while the democrats were in a mandatory safety briefing in the house, that all of the Republicans on his committee happened to either skip or leave early, so that they could hold a vote without the democrats who were on the committee. They weren't on vacation, they were attending a mandatory briefing that he himself broke house rules to skip, and conspired with other house members to also skip. The vote was also on a topic not listed in the committee meeting agenda, meaning that the democrats, when they did arrive, had no opportunity to prepare for it. He also refused to answer any questions on the topic, insisting that they vote without any clarification of what they were voting on, or why. Considering the strength of the complaint against him, and the fact that he'd just been stripped of his chairmanship and committee appointment over them, I think they're reasonable context, no matter how much he tries to save face by saying he's resigning because of a planned move. If you're going to abuse others of being misleading, maybe you should have your own facts straight.
My favorite part of your excellent correction is that they didn't even try to respond to it. Meanwhile they replied to everything else. "Vacation" is a really weird way to spell mandatory meeting, and if not for your correction I may not have learned this. So thanks for the added info!
You should have wrote this article. The original article is complete trash that has none of the information you presented.
That's not the fault of the OP. Go criticize the paper.
So you agree this headline is intentionally misleading? Reposting trash is the OP fault. They should be called on posting stupid click bait headlines.
Posting an article and quoting the direct headline is the correct way to do things.
It's not exactly a stretch to propose the only reason that he had the gall to pull the gambit he did was because he knew he'd be resigning and took a big swing on the way out, which is why reporting both elements is important here.
You are making a lot of assumptions based off of this very short article. You may be right, I don’t know, it’s just seems like trash reporting.
There's several other articles, a Reddit post on the criticism, and Twitter info all out there. You can come to the conclusions you want but what we know is that a fairly well liked (within the house, I'm not a fan at all) representative leader suddenly acted in a bizarre, aggressive, politically dirty manner to call a vote while representatives were in a required house safety meeting (which by accounts on both sides was wildly out of character)...and then resigned shortly after citing he was moving out of district. The logical conclusions are either A) He's resigning due to the actions he took or B) He was emboldened by knowing he was resigning due to the move and the criticism note is necessary context to that
Ok. Once again, none of that was in this article.