Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

SuddenlySimple t1_iyhmuf9 wrote

Why is this "representation" necessary? No-one ADVOCATES for my relationship..LOL

−33

jdylopa2 t1_iyhnae3 wrote

If you’re talking about heterosexual relationships, then no duh no one advocates for them. They have been the norm for civilization since it began. It’s the people who are in non-heterosexual relationships that need people to advocate for them because they are minorities in a nation in which many people are attacking their basic freedoms of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.

22

deadl0ckx2 t1_iyhvl8s wrote

Only Cicilline could have such an inflated ego that he think’s it would be a good idea to challenge Clyburn. This is how you lose and get put on the “none of my bills ever see the light of day” list.

−2

Keelija9000 t1_iyhwdcd wrote

LGBTQ relationships are still 100% a minority. You should be asking yourself why a loving marriage between 2 consenting adults of similar legal age would be made illegal to begin with.

12

chaoticnormal t1_iyhy2oy wrote

I don't know why you guys hate him so much. This guy puts in the work. Need to talk to him? He's there. He visits my town what seems like monthly to talk to the voters. He's standing up for us, with us, as it should be.

8

jdylopa2 t1_iyi90kh wrote

What does legal status have to do with the relative quantity of heterosexual relationships to non-heterosexual relationships. Look up the words “minority” and “majority” to understand my meaning clearer.

5

SuddenlySimple t1_iyj1rxh wrote

I dont understand im sorry. Maybe its my screen name. Lol

Who cares how many any kinds of legal couple identify themselves as? Just weird maybe because im not LGB..i give up i dont even know the initials. Lol

Seems unnecessary to me. Taxpayers money should go to things for the State for everyone not just certain groups of people that label themselves.

−2

Proof-Variation7005 t1_iyjaupy wrote

I have zero qualms about his record as a rep. He advocates for and represents for the views of his district and the state perfectly fine. When we were looking like it was going to be a loss of a Congressional district, there was zero doubt in my mind that Langevin should have been retiring and not even wasting anyone's time running.

I think even Langevin assumed as much and that probably factored into his retirement.

0

bambooboi t1_iyjted7 wrote

Because he is a horrendous congressman. I've worked personally with him in DC. I have also worked with his congressional staff. I have not enjoyed my interactions with his team. They are dismissive of constituency visiting DC for appointments and will not give you the time of day. This has been across two trips while lobbying for underserved patient populations from south Providence.

His representation during hearings is passable, but he has for too long been the pet project of Namcy Pelosi and doesnt have much to say for himself.

3

BMorris2526 t1_iyk474a wrote

Cicillini is a loathsome human being.

1

theovertalker t1_iykima1 wrote

Never met a camera he didn’t like. Some lawmakers toil in obscurity. Others seek the spotlight to feed their voracious egos. I like Cicilline and vote for him, but he left Providence finances a shambles when he was mayor.. Both his father and brother represented plaintiffs affiliated with in organized crime.

I also think it’s a bit crass for him to have started a restaurant in Providence. Really David, there’s nothing else pressing in Rhode Island that demands your time and attention?

2

uwuwotsdps42069 t1_iymey9q wrote

Because you don’t talk with him you talk at him. I’ve seen first hand him listening to constituents and then doing whatever tf he wants anyway. He wastes time money and effort on idpol trash meanwhile the state and country is floundering.

1

therealDrA t1_iyn3lm3 wrote

There are many issues voted upon and advocated for in the house from both sides that don't benefit states individually. You are either arguing in bad faith or ignorant about how the house of representatives works.

2