You must log in or register to comment.

Heynony t1_iu9r83a wrote

I saw the ads and Jahana Hayes is apparently responsible for global inflation and the global recession that may happen next year or sometime in the next few years. She is, according to these ads, a very very bad person.

Seems like we need to vote against her to eliminate global inflation and prevent this possible future recession from happenning. Seems like a good deal.


elizabif t1_iuaxo6p wrote

She also has been seen putting on a coat (they keep using this one shot…)


Heynony t1_iub0i6d wrote

> She also has been seen putting on a coat

I had no idea. Why isn't she in jail. much less running for office?


BeerJunky t1_iuazo3j wrote

I still don’t get the coat shot. Is it Versace or something?


elizabif t1_iub83el wrote

I don’t think so but it looks nice on her.


happyjammy123 t1_iubaflm wrote

What a waste of money, spending time putting on a coat, what kind of message does that send, its gonna be a cold winter?


SomaCityWard t1_iubite0 wrote

Amazing how powerful state reps are! Must be the deep state at work!


FxTree-CR2 t1_iuc4yoh wrote

It’s wild to me because… I visited her office and the offices of a few members of the CT delegation on a couple of work trips.

While it was always functional, effective, sharp, and knowledgeable, It was also always the most disorganized of them all.

Now to be totally clear, that’s not specifically on Hayes herself — her office staff were mostly people starting out. Most House offices of members who aren’t long-standing Reps and/or members without nationally recognized names are staffed this way (universally statute instituted abhorrent pay) and are just as if not MORE disorganized.

(I prefer this tbh because I don’t think members should be incumbents for life, so ofc there’s turnover and less opportunity for people to use the name to get into lobbying firms.)

But for people to actually believe one Junior member can be the cause of any major issue is… laughable at best.

People are stupid.


MikeSCARN95 t1_iud9wxr wrote

If your mind is changed by a political ad on TV I'd say you probably shouldn't be voting.


Jayson_n_th_Rgonauts t1_iudfqv5 wrote

This shows a poor understanding of advertising


MikeSCARN95 t1_iudh3b7 wrote

No no, I understand advertising pretty well, I'm not saying they don't work on people, I'm saying those the commercials work on shouldn't be voting.


Jayson_n_th_Rgonauts t1_iudhjt8 wrote

But it’s not like one commercial works on practically anybody, they just slowly wear down your subconscious over months, years, decades


MikeSCARN95 t1_iuel9ci wrote

...and political ads aren't run for years or decades.


Heynony t1_iudxl4o wrote

You seem to be suggesting that Jahana Hayes is NOT a very very bad person. How could that be? All these random people in the ads over & over again say she's done all these terrible things to the world economy; they wouldn't lie to us, would they?


MikeSCARN95 t1_iuelpp7 wrote

I dont know what the downvoting is for, this is my point. If you believe the things mentioned about Rep. Hayes (or just about any other politician) in a 30 second hit add, than you shouldn't be voting in an election as you're likely clueless.


solomons-marbles t1_iua77r1 wrote

If you’re left leaning in District 5 and thinking your vote doesn’t matter, the rest of country is begging you to vote. The conservatives will exercise their right to vote. Get out and vote!


AsaKurai t1_iub84jk wrote

Just submitted my absentee the other day, took 5 minutes!


AvogadrosMoleSauce t1_iub0w6i wrote

It would be embarrassing for this state to send someone to congress who can’t even say that Biden fairly won the presidency.


AGBULLBEAR t1_iubq1tk wrote

Why so insecure about a past election?



I am quite concerned about fascists running our government who won't recognize election results. If they won't recognize past elections there is no reason to trust that they will recognize future elections.

These people want to end democracy in America. They want to destroy our country, our way of life, our right to vote. They are traitors to America and want to replace it with a dictatorship where our votes aren't counted.

We know that this is what they want, because it is what they tried to do in 2020 and what any election denier is implicitly promising to do in the future.


AGBULLBEAR t1_iucvzrh wrote

It just seems to happen every election, usually democrats are questioning results though. Like Russia stole it from Hillary or Bush didnt win FL. Also the GA governor race results were also denied by Dems. Guess you just need to live a little longer, but it doesn’t seems like a big deal.


Hendrix811 t1_iuc1mdh wrote

Are you also concerned about Hillary Clinton’s Election denials and subsequent collusion with the FBI to wire tap and attempt to overthrow a sitting president?



Hillary Clinton never denied that Trump won the electoral college. She never tried to overthrow the results and install herself as the unelected dictator, which is precisely what Trump did try to do.

There was an attempt to legally impeach Trump. That is within our constituent. But facts don't matter to fascists like you. Go to China or Russia you bootlicking, dictator worshipping, fascist. You clearly despise America and everything that we stand for.


Hendrix811 t1_iudggjz wrote

I simply asked if you hold your party to the same standards as the party you oppose. You clearly don’t.


AGBULLBEAR t1_iucw5zh wrote

She called it a stolen election 100x times. Still feels that way also.



Cite an example of her saying the 2016 election was stolen.


AGBULLBEAR t1_iudbqyj wrote

"You can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you," she said to cheers on the Los Angeles stop of her "Evening with the Clintons" tour with her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

Not hard to google this example and others



At no point did she say that the vote tallies were really in her favor. She said that unfair election meddling by the FBI and the Russians harmed her campaign and caused to vote to go against her. At no point did she suggest that she should have been installed as President even though the electoral college voted against her.

In no way was that an attempt to overthrow a sitting president and end democracy. Which is exactly what Trump tried.


happyjammy123 t1_iub6r80 wrote

I find it hard to believe that all Republicans think Biden stole the election


SomaCityWard t1_iubj7dw wrote


happyjammy123 t1_iubl9bl wrote

Well I can only speak for myself. I accepted the results then and still do. I just don't believe all Republicans are election deniers. I'm not saying there isn't any but I also recognize that there are election deniers from 2016, but I don't believe all Democrats are election deniers either


SomaCityWard t1_iuf6o0j wrote

Who claimed that all republicans are election deniers?

You were responding to somebody who simply said it would be a shame if we sent one to congress.

Who are the election deniers from 2016? Clinton conceded.


AGBULLBEAR t1_iubq51y wrote

I remember more dems denying bush won in FL


SamuraiPanda19 t1_iudxk20 wrote

Are you retarded? is the Florida’s Supreme Court making the counters stop counting the votes the same thing as saying the ghost of Hugo Chavez and other dead communists are switching the votes inside the voting machine?


AGBULLBEAR t1_iue83k3 wrote

If you don’t understand the example try the 2016 russia stole the election narrative


SamuraiPanda19 t1_iue8opn wrote

Yes that’s literally what I’m commenting about. The dems thing was Russia made memes on Facebook and it’s impossible to know how much that actually influenced people. A lot different than saying communists ghosts went into voting machines and changed the votes


FatherofZeus t1_iubxs60 wrote

Did you even read this garbage? Lmfao

>Democrats have undercut the strengthening of election laws designed to safeguard against corruption by claiming voter suppression. Usually this is done by falsely claiming Republicans are trying to disenfranchise Black voters.

>Democrats also damage the election process each time they suggest the Electoral College is unfair.

How are either of those remotely similar to what the MAGAs are doing? JFC


SamuraiPanda19 t1_iudxtn5 wrote

They genuinely don’t understand asking if Russia made Facebook memes that may have influenced votes is the same thing as saying the votes in the voting machine were just overturned, even in the races where republicans won and Biden lost. Imagine how much of a loser you’d have to be as an elected official to actually go along with that


happyjammy123 t1_iubz6rw wrote

I was just pointing out that election denying has been going on by both parties long before 2020 that's all I was looking to point out. I honestly can't answer the question you posed about MAGA weirdoes I don't associate with those criminals


FatherofZeus t1_iuc0csz wrote

That article cites that Democrat’s deny elections because Democrats fight against disenfranchising black voters and correctly say that the electoral college system is inherently unfair.

That is not election denying and you need to pull your head out.

The BoTh SiDeS anti-intellectualism is taking us straight to hell


happyjammy123 t1_iuc0ux1 wrote

It's in the title, that Dems have a long history of election denialism


SomaCityWard t1_iuf74du wrote

Something being claimed in a title does not make it true.


ImNotAnybodyShhhhhhh t1_iud4xkq wrote

There’s a difference between a baseline grasp of arithmetic, and doing a tantrum so hard it makes you a literal terrorist. Sure, they’re both technically demonstrations of the same vague thing, but to conflate them is just… why have you hit send on so many replies like this is okay of you?


gatogrande t1_iubn4m9 wrote

So is Hilly…so is Stacy Abraham’s…not invented by republicans. Hanging chad anyone?


SomaCityWard t1_iuf7l5p wrote

Hillary conceded the election THE NEXT DAY.

Stacy Abrahm's opponent was also overseeing the election he was running in. The conflict of interest was as plain as day. And she also conceded. Why are you lying?

Why did the GOP court stop the recount if they had nothing to hide? Hanging chad, indeed.


gatogrande t1_iuia0rn wrote

Here's some lies - and Hilly and her 4 year baseless Russian probe - - TLDR : Trump "knows he’s an illegitimate president," Clinton said. "I believe he understands that the many varying tactics they used, from voter suppression and voter purging to hacking to the false stories — he knows that — there were just a bunch of different reasons why the election turned out like it did … I know he knows this wasn’t on the level."


happyjammy123 t1_iubptzg wrote

Oh yes I forgot about those hanging Chad's, bothersome little buggers


AvogadrosMoleSauce t1_iub912i wrote

I would too but, when asked whether he believes Biden fairly won, Logan refused to give a straight answer.


coolducklingcool t1_iuao6dw wrote

Number 3. Third time these poll results have been posted.


HeyFrogMan t1_iubhvke wrote

yeah, it’s the same poll over and over again. It’s not like a bunch of independent polls coming to this result.


coolducklingcool t1_iubih0f wrote

I know, it’s annoying people just post this shit on repeat without a simple check to see if it’s already been posted.


happyjammy123 t1_iubjiuo wrote

They gotta be working around it somehow, Reddit won't post a link more than once, but I have no idea how they are doing this. It's been going on for a couple weeks now


coolducklingcool t1_iubjkvr wrote

It’s not the same link. It’s different articles all reporting the exact same poll.


happyjammy123 t1_iubkepp wrote

Oh, these people need to get a life, at least wait until a new poll comes out


daveashaw t1_iuahg1o wrote

This district is not blue like the rest of state.


Swimming_Area6016 t1_iuacgnj wrote

People like George Logan


btmc t1_iub3x0o wrote

Because he’s pretending to be a Democrat.


happyjammy123 t1_iub5j1c wrote

I believe he's running as a Republican


btmc t1_iuba1gn wrote

Yeah, obviously, but all his iconography is blue and his ads and campaign materials scrupulously avoid saying that he’s a Republican.


MCFRESH01 t1_iudygsi wrote

Republicans everywhere are removing their party from their advertising materials.


Flat-Discussion-314 t1_iue92cw wrote

I think it is a good idea to choose a candidate based on their expressed stances on issues rather than the R or D next to their name.


MCFRESH01 t1_iueatiu wrote

Normally I would agree, but unfortunately giving the Rs a majority in either chamber is not something I would like to see happen right now


FarcicalArse t1_iuc558f wrote

Crazy how everyone is downvoting you for whatever you say just because you don’t fully agree with one side 😂


Strat7855 t1_iud4bx5 wrote

George was going to run for state Senate as a Democrat before Crisco decided to run again.

Nice dude. Zero principles. 0/10 would not recommend for Congress.


Acheron13 t1_iua8fgy wrote

How incompetent do you have to be to lose as a Democrat in CT?


beanie0911 t1_iuaz1v9 wrote

Her district only very slightly leans democratic. This isn’t that shocking.


hymen_destroyer t1_iuaibko wrote

She had a tumultuous freshmen term, got her name put on some unpopular proposals, and was seen as a weak link in the democratic stranglehold on the state so they went after her pretty hard.

I've actually met her, she's a pretty cool person and very much pro-labor. Unfortunately she doesn't represent my district so I can't vote for her


btmc t1_iub3m1e wrote

Her main weakness is simply that she has the most Republican district in the state. Very few voters know anything about the record of their member of Congress.

The GOP also somehow managed to not shoot themselves in the foot and nominated a superficially moderate Black man with a Latina mother. He is also carefully avoiding any mention of his political affiliation in his ads and campaign materials. I have to imagine the vast majority of other Republican candidates in the district would not do as well against her.


coolducklingcool t1_iuaw5v2 wrote

I think she got linked to AOC and her crew early and that label hasn’t gotten shook. That’s like catnip for even moderate Republicans. I actually really like her and think she’s down to earth. Love that she has a background in education.


jgjgleason t1_iub3yok wrote

You do realize that the 5th is like light blue at best right?


happyjammy123 t1_iua91ui wrote

Apparently very incompetent, this is just embarrassing, however if Obama stumps for her, that should put it on ice, I hope, we need to hold as many seats as possible


Affectionate-Bit-240 t1_iub282h wrote

I contacted her office with respect to lowering 1099 forms from $2000 to $600. She only responded my feedback is essential, etc. The bill of course passed and when I sell my old junk on eBay for +/- $1000, I now have to do a ton of work for the 1099/taxes.


FatherofZeus t1_iubkt4a wrote

A ton of work? Lol, it’s not a ton of work at all. Definitely saves time because I don’t have to track everything like I used to when 20k was the limit


Affectionate-Bit-240 t1_iucxyk2 wrote

I was told I had to itemize 100-150+ items with amounts I paid & what they sold for. Everything I sell are items from many years ago which I bought at retail prices & selling at a loss. I don’t have receipts from 20+ years ago. This is so unnecessary.


FatherofZeus t1_iudbh4h wrote

You would have to do that regardless of the change…


Affectionate-Bit-240 t1_iudga65 wrote

I did not have to do it in previous years. It wasn’t until the Covid Tax Relief Bill was passed, which required any money received over $600 now gets a 1099 form.


FatherofZeus t1_iudlauv wrote

Yes, you still had to track. You just didn’t do it. Luckily the IRS is short staffed and you’ll never get dinged for it

>It is a common misconception that if a taxpayer does not receive a Form 1099-MISC or if the income is under $600 per payer, the income is not taxable. There is no minimum amount that a taxpayer may exclude from gross income


Affectionate-Bit-240 t1_iudtc5b wrote

Thank you for the link, but I’m not selling this for income. I bought a $40 sweatshirt in the 90s & selling it for $10 shipped.


FatherofZeus t1_iudx2ij wrote

You don’t get it. At all.

You need to talk with a tax advisor because you are oblivious


jules13131382 t1_iub4g4h wrote

I'm voting for her over the Republican


happyjammy123 t1_iub6i62 wrote

I won't decide until game time!


FarcicalArse t1_iuc5e9t wrote

Again people literally downvoting you because you aren’t committing to voting for one party over the other before the course of the election is over. The state of political homogeneity in CT is wild 😂


Synapse82 t1_iuczhro wrote

I don’t even know where this district is, but this same damn poll is constantly copy pasted and put on the news.

We get it, go out and vote.


happyjammy123 t1_iuavpfn wrote

I was just doing some research on this race,Hayes definitely has her hands full with Logan, he is pro choice and he keeps using her voting record against her and tying her to the inflation problem every chance he gets. I believe I said this before, she could really use a visit from Obama


Heynony t1_iub2e50 wrote

> Logan is pro choice

... as long as he doesn't have to do anything about it. For example: he would vote against any legislation to codify Roe v Wade.

He has other code-word positions, e.g. he "has no interest" in gutting programs such as Social Security. Yeah, sure.

I think he will be a "moderate" to the extent that if such draconian bills come up and the Republican majority is overwhelming enough to pass without his vote, he may be given dispensation by Republican leadership to abstain. But if his vote is needed, it will be there.


happyjammy123 t1_iub6byt wrote

I just realized the 5th hasn't been represented by a Republican since Nancy Johnson man its been a while


spmahn t1_iubvqos wrote

The district was gerrymandered after the 2010 census to take a slice of the very blue third district and give it to the fifth making it much more difficult for Republicans to win there



Nope, that is a lie.

In 2010 the map was drawn by courts. It was done in a way to make the least possible change to the 2000 map, which was drawn to protect Republican Nancy Johnson.

CT requires a supermajority to draw legislative maps, which either requires bipartisan approved map or it gets drawn by a court which will make the smallest changes possible to balance populations.


spmahn t1_iubzvmx wrote

Yes, it’s the same song and dance every 10 years, there’s a bipartisan commission with an equal number of Democrats and Republicans, the Republicans draw their map, the Democrats draw their map, neither side agrees, it gets sent to be decided on by a court run by judges who were all appointed and approved by Democrats, and coincidentally the map that gets approved always ends up looking exactly like the one Democrats wanted in the first place, funny how that works.



Here is what a real Democratic gerrymander of CT looks like.

That map makes the 5th district 5 points bluer than what it currently is by including Bridgeport in exchange for the rural northwest corner. It also shores up the 2nd district by putting Manchester in it and giving the heavily red northeast part of the state to the 1st. The current 2nd could be competitive if Joe Courtney ever retires, although it is quite safe while he is there.

The current map is not gerrymandered for Democrats. But they also know that the courts won't accept the kind of map I drew, so they just offer the least possible change map that they think courts will accept.



He is not pro-choice. This is a clear lie.

He has said that he will vote against protecting the right for a women to choose. He has said that he will defend states condemning women to die from dangerous pregnancies.

What he is doing is the equivalent of someone saying that they were against slavery, but that they would oppose the federal government banning slavery. That person was never anti-slavery, they were just hiding their evil views behind a rhetorical shield.


happyjammy123 t1_iubzivr wrote

That doesn't sound like the George I know, can you cite you're accusations please?



He refuses to acknowledge that Biden won.

He has invited multiple fascist congressmembers who voted to end democracy in America to fundraise with him. He is aligning himself with the wing of the party that voted to overturn the 2020 election and end America as a country.

I wouldn't have believed this about him a few years ago either, but he has shown who he is and he is siding with the people who tried to destroy this country.


happyjammy123 t1_iuc0j5v wrote

Well I'm not arguing with you I just haven't heard of what you are accusing him of honestly, I will do my own research to find out what is going on with this



On January 6th 2021 something much worse than the riot occurred, 147 Republicans in the House and Senate voted to turn America into a fascistic dictatorship by overturning the clear election results.

These people are traitors to our country. They attempted to treasonously end our system of free and fair elections and replace it with our government with an unelected ruler. These are the people who George Logan is choosing the affiliate and align himself with. I do encourage you to do your own research and I understand that it sounds absurd, because it is absurd that so many of our elected officials would do that. But it is what they did, and it is who George Logan has clearly sided with.


happyjammy123 t1_iuc41vi wrote

Well thank you for you're understanding that I prefer to find evidence of what you are saying and I also appreciate the fact we are able to engage into a civil discussion without name calling, that is much appreciated. I need to go to sleep now, have a goodnight


TrashPandaShire t1_iudhgvg wrote

It is amazing that after Elizabeth Etsy managed to ease into her cushy pension after her #metoo scandal that voters would be dumb enough to elect another from her ilk. And, what a fumble from their local GOP to not call that out.


ChexRibedeaux t1_iuenu0p wrote

The GOP is parody of a parody of the GOP.


cryptocratic7 t1_iuijazn wrote

Good. Lets hope for at least a little red wave in this blue infestation of a state


[deleted] t1_iucbi6q wrote

Did Hayes ever pay off her 6 figure debt? If she can't manage her personal finances she shouldn't be in a position of authority over other people.


SoICanStillGetAJob t1_iud9dv7 wrote

If she didn’t, maybe she can ask the people that paid off Kavanaugh’s debt


[deleted] t1_iuduhrw wrote

They probably won't help her. Lackluster Democrats usually get paid by George Soros and company. Let's see if he wants to pay her way back into office.


mtnScout t1_iucojr7 wrote

The thought of a high school teacher being a politician is quaint and nice, but theres no reason to think it would translate into an effective politician.


Prudent-Ball2698 t1_iucyyf7 wrote

Last thing this state needs is more blue. The dems ruined this once great state and made it nearly unlivable. Vote red if you care for your future


HeyFrogMan t1_iua8pxx wrote

This wouldn’t be happening if we had gerrymandering


throwaway_5863 t1_iuartmf wrote

Do we in CT?


HeyFrogMan t1_iubgf9d wrote

No, and I think that’s bad.



I agree 100%.

Red states gerrymander, while blue states constrain themselves. I would prefer a nationwide ban on gerrymandering so that red state Democrats were represented and blue state republicans were represented. But the only way to get a nationwide ban is for Democrats to get large majorities as Republicans uniformly oppose these reforms.

Blue states constraining themselves while Red states gerrymander is creating a system where Republicans can win the house of representatives while losing the popular vote by millions, as we saw in 2012.

We need to gerrymander to ban gerrymandering nationwide. Without it we condemn ourselves to being ruled by Republicans in perpetuity even if they get millions fewer votes.


[deleted] t1_iud88dz wrote




NY gerrymander was incorrectly thrown out by their supreme court which decided the text of the statute did not matter and that they should be able to draw a Republican favoring map.

Blue states do gerrymander, and should gerrymander to counter Republican gerrymanders. But far fewer blue states gerrymandered compared to red states. If only red states gerrymander then Republicans could win the house even if Dems get 53% of the vote.

The only blue state gerrymanders that are actually the maps this year are in Illinois, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, and Massachusetts (where it is nearly impossible to draw an R district anyway). That accounts for 41 seats in the House. There are 173 seats that are gerrymandered by Republicans.

The big blue states of California, New York, Washington, Oregon, Colorado and New Jersey all were either drawn by independent commissions, both parties, or were drawn by courts.

If New York's gerrymander had gone through, as it should have, there would only be 4 Republican seats, while there will now likely be 7-10 Republican seats. And they didn't even go for a full gerrymander, they could have gone for a fairly absurd looking 2R map.

It would not be difficult to draw a California gerrymander that has 0 Republican seats and is VRA compliant (although most D drawn gerrymanders would likely have 5 Republicans). But because they have an independent commission there will likely be 10-12 Republicans elected in California.


No-Match-4504 t1_iuafewp wrote

It's amazing that the media states the leftist name but not the conservative in their headline 🙄


coolducklingcool t1_iuawcpy wrote

I mean the source is Fox News so I’m not sure you can claim liberal media bias. Her name is recognizable and she is the incumbent. It’s a national news article and no one nationally knows Logan. But of a reach to get annoyed about that…


happyjammy123 t1_iuav4ee wrote

Lmfao I didn't even notice that, how petty


coolducklingcool t1_iubjebg wrote

You realize the source is Fox News, right? And that it’s national media where Hayes’ name is recognizable and Logan’s is not…


No-Match-4504 t1_iuaf4l3 wrote

Go Logan! The wave is coming 😁


CartmansAlterEgo t1_iubreyb wrote

Good for you! Republicans in CT have to hide in the shadows and speak in hushed tones. Lol