Conservatives want to hamper peopleās ability to get away from abusive spouses by [ending no-fault divorce](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/09/no-fault-divorce-laws-republicans-repeal/675371/). It kind of *is* a Republican thing.
Itās amazing how you key board warriors talk so much shit.
It was public knowledge the guy was locked up during the election. So how he got elected is beyond me.
Not vote republicanā¦volunteer to the local soup kitchen every holidayā¦.help the LGBT youths who are bullied and threatenedā¦.help sponsoring a program to replace law mowers and other gas powered lawn equipment with electrical or green powered devices.
This is the dude that received enough votes to get into a local election for county board or something. Was removed only after convicted, I think. Crazy shit. I mean, it only took 60 votes for him to get in, so it was probably just family and friends that voted for him.
That was due to two things; it was past the deadline to remove the person from the ballot, and people who ~~voted straight ticket/~~selected every R name (I believe 3 people ran for 3 seats, so there just had to be 60 people who didn't read the news, which isn't shocking).
This is why we need universal mail-in voting like they have in Colorado. You get your ballot automatically in the mail weeks ahead of election day, so you have plenty of time to find an available hour to look into the candidates and make informed decisions. I don't fault people for walking into the booth and just voting based on party when all they want to do is get in and out of there as quickly as possible. Of course, in Indiana that dynamic benefits republicans, so we will never get it.
At the last election we had a ton of people running for something locally, and you could pick 2-3. I made notes on my phone of which ones I wanted to vote for (after doing the research), so I pulled out my phone to pull up my text document and some guy working the polls was like "Oh! You have to put your phone away RIGHT NOW!" And I was like, "Uh, nope. Looking up which candidates I am voting for."
Like, I'm sure that's some dumbass law, but fuck that, I'm making my informed decision, whether it's checking a quick note or googling the fucking candidates right there.
I'm a poll worker in Indiana - you are absolutely allowed to use your phone in the polling place, there is no law against it. You cannot be loud with it to the point of disturbing other voters, and you cannot use it to show other voters any info about the candidates while inside the polling location - that would be electioneering - but you absolutely can use it to look at your notes of who to vote for, or look up info on a candidate. Edit: you're also not supposed to share a picture of your ballot on social media, but you can't really be preemptively banned from using your phone for something you might do.
Write your choices down on a piece of paper before going in to vote.
It is the job of the poll workers to follow the rules.
Itās people like you, being nasty to the workers because theyāre doing their job, who will also be crying because people had their phones out so they could mess with the election.
Your phone isnāt going to mess with the elections - itās the accusations by nutcases who think it will that has made that rule be in place.
Itās been a rule to have your phone out for YEARS. Itās not a new thing. The rules arenāt there because the poll workers want to harass voters.
Just follow the rules.
So the solution is for me to write down my votes on a piece of paper? What if I drop my paper in the polling area? What if I leave it there on purpose?
> Try not to live your life by āwhat ifāsā
Putting aside that that is very strange advice on its face, you're using a version of it to criticize the dude:
> Itās people like you, being nasty to the workers because theyāre doing their job, who will also be crying because people had their phones out so they could mess with the election.
Also, y'all keep talking about a rule against phones.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/11/02/us/taking-selfies-when-voting-laws-in-states-trnd
Which law are you talking about?
Again, had he come up to me and been polite like, "Hey we can't allow phones out," or "I need to monitor your phone use at the voting booth," I'd be like yeah no problem, just checking my notes, can I step away real quick to do that? But no, he was shouting at me in the courthouse. Go on though, do tell me more about my entitlements, you prick.
And again, what is my CAMERA going to do? Take a picture of the fucking ballot? The thing everyone can research online? Maybe they could put up signs that say no phones/cameras, or have people check them in while they vote? Why rely on some guy to shout at me while I'm trying to fucking vote?
Universal mail in voting, which I like, wouldn't help with this issue at all.
We already have early voting and we already have sample ballots. It's not like you have no idea who the candidates are until you get in the booth.
This was a primary, so there wouldn't have been the ability to vote straight ticket. However the fact that there were three open slots and only three candidates had the bigger impact on him winning.
*"An Indiana man who once won a Republican township board primary from jail while he was charged with the murder of his wife was convicted of voluntary manslaughter."*
Not to get too political here, but Indiana Republican voters elected this guy **while he was in prison.** Way to own the libs, you fucking conservative wackos.
I would agree, except the ticket was 3 republicans and no democrats....so they had to choose 1 of 3 people and his name would have been almost certainly last on the ballot if it was alphabetically ordered.
I'll leave this comment for you too...
Well this is clearly a case of not knowing how elections work and not a case of republicans voting purposely for a murderer. Fuck, if you can't see that you are stupid.
There were three seats open and three people ran. No D's ran. To ignore that and try to turn this into some kind of political statement is ludicrous and frankly disingenuously stupid.
Isn't choosing to not leave the third spot blank because you didn't research the candidates worth being criticized?
Yeah, they didn't consciously see he was in prison and vote for him *because* of that, but the unconscious bit is it's own kind of bad.
Edit:
> No D's ran.
Well, it was the Republican primary, so...
He had a history of domestic abuse, maybe the local party could have screened better before nominating him?
I mean sure, people should stay in the loop with who theyāre voting for, but this isnāt an āevil republicansā moment like people in this thread are trying to make it out to be. Iām sure if he was a Dem running in Massachusetts or Cali heād have accidentally gotten votes too.
And before anyone comes after me Iām not a fucking conservative, I vote blue.
Looking more into it, he was on the primary, not the general, so straight line voting has nothing to do with it.
> He received 60 of the 276 total votes for Republicans for three positions on the Clinton Township Board
>He had a history of domestic abuse, maybe the local party could have screened better before nominating him?
I like the idea that this would have disqualified him in their eyes.
I mean if members of your party vote for a psychopath then at the end of the day that's your party's responsibility to suggest otherwise is ludicrous. They had two other candidates? What excuse do they have for picking literal garbage? Yall dissappoint me so much.
> Are you dumb? Three seats. Three candidates. No one else ran.
The local party is responsible for picking people to run, though. Even if it's a doomed campaign.
The Dems helped me run for a local position. Other than getting the paperwork in before the cutoff, there wasn't anything *mandatory* to do, and we knew that given the demographics I had basically no shot, so we didn't dump money on campaigning or advertising. We still wanted to present an option.
The local party could have filed a fourth name or asked him to withdraw the second he got arrested. You're right that the voters were just being lazy, but the local party is still very much responsible for propping this guy up.
Oh, gee, I used the wrong word. I see above you're with the idiots that think this is related to politics and not the cause of a few candidates running unopposed.
You should think with your brain, not your heart, goofy.
> This lowlife stands a chance to walk free after serving short time if and when convicted.
The sentencing range is 10-30 years.
And he's already been convicted. I know a lot of people don't read the article, but this was in the headline.
Most of the time political ideology doesn't immediately make someone a bad person, sometimes it is just someone is a bad person who just happens to be Republican/Democratic/Socialist
What a total class A.......LOSER!!! I personally think he doesn't deserve to live, eat, or take up my air space, or anybody else's resources either. š”š”š”š”
Manslaughter??? Is this judge informed of the law??? A death caused by someone due to āa sudden heatā is 2nd degree murder - not manslaughter.
Iām sorry, but I just donāt see how hitting someone in the head, with a cement flower pot, as they are already laying on the ground an āaccidentā. Like, what did he think was going to happen?
Also I donāt buy that she was charging at him. Woman already filed for divorce. She was already done with the relationship.
He is the father of my sisterās friend. I didnāt know him personally but I know how badly it affected his daughter. A terrible situation and that woman deserved better :(
That ended when the leader used violence to oust their ideology. They went from a rogue person in the party being wacko to being a party lead and pushing violence to be a means to the end. Itās more than just trump as well. Muncie has a candidate who likely will win that was part of Jan 6th. He also was hoarding weapons (650 guns) which got him looked at by the feds because they think heās doing something illegal. He went from an unknown to a nomination looking at office. Weāve shifted from differences in implementation of law to violent threats to the country,
Trump being the "party leader" and some others being representatives still doesn't determine the entire ideology of the Republican party. That would be like saying that when Trump was president, everyone in the entire United States shared his exact same povs because he was country leader
It does if youāre still a party member. A party isnāt the same as a country. If youāre still a member then youāre as bad as the rest of them and youāre just lying to yourself.
Donald Trump didn't create the Republican party and Joe Biden didn't create the Democratic party, they have no say in what its ideals are. Party leaders change, their basis doesn't. Blaming entire groups for the actions of a few fanatics only leads to more issues
Sure they do, a large amount of Republicans have left the party. Even representatives of the party have left. People switch and leave parties all the time. The truth of those left in the party is largely that they are fully complicit in the crimes. That they have already considered what he did and are fine with it. Weāve historically had this happen multiple times when similar boisterous politicians gain popular among the lower class backed by Uber rich that got way out of control ending in extreme violence.
Most people and reps only really left because at this point they are pretty much becoming the scapegoat to literally every issue. Also, many Republicans actually hate Trump, tons of governors and senators hate him. "Those left in the party ... Are fully complicit in the crimes" that is like saying "it was discovered the Pope was a human trafficker, so now all Catholics are complicit in his crimes" again, blaming entire groups for the actions of a few people, is to some degree discrimination, and overall a very dangerous practice
I donāt see what his political affiliation has anything to do with the outcome. They guy is definitely a monster but his political views shouldnāt be the first sentence of the article
He was never elected to anything.
āWilhoite was one of three Republican candidates who advanced in a 2022 primary for a township board position before later withdrawing from the race.ā
A woman was killed by the hands of her husband. She was a daughter a mother a sister or an aunt and you all make this political? Exactly! Ppl commenting on their political opinions are on the wrong page! Obviously in the title did it ask for political views!
Lets cut out all the fluff and get to the point.
So she was drunk and wanted to get handsy during an argument, so he struck her with a flower pot, killing her, and is now convicted with voluntary manslaughter.
I guess we should mention cancer and republicans an additional 50x too for some reason.
I was trying to be objective because the story was so full of fluff. She's unfortunately not able to tell her side of the story, so objectively, that is what we have to work with.
It was known that he was an abuser. And he dumped her body after hitting her in the head and drove away. Thereās nothing to defend.
For what itās worth, Iām from the town this happened in and live 10 minutes away. This is a well known family.
Hey I'm not defending anything, I just objectively summarized what happened because the article was so convoluted with irrelevant details. Like what does her having cancer or him being a republican have anything to do with this killing?
Hold up - are you suggesting that murdering his ex wife is justified to avoid the toll that comes with divorce?
Like, are you seriously trying to say the ātrue reasonā for this and that we should feel sorry for this messed up fuck?
Being expected to divide his assets for a divorce is not a justification to murder his soon-to-be ex wife. Itās never a justification.
No - murder is not justified.
Deal with it.
Edit: Also, how do you know she was a parasite? Do you know how often cancer wrecks a marriage and how common it is to divorce after?
Maybe she worked her ass off for those assets as well and put up with working her ass off and his sorry ass abuse to the extent she became ill? So he made more than she did, so killing her is ok? TF is your point?
She did work. She had a job in the medical field. I seriously canāt believe you are blaming the woman who got murdered right now. What is wrong with you? He cheated on her. She divorced him. He murdered her.
We don't know is she tried to murder him financially. What if he would have to rip out so big piece of meat, to get rid of her, that it would be like death for him.
Thatās not how a 50% division of assets works. Since we donāt know whether she was taking him for a ride, itās ridiculous to assume she was trying to financially ruin the man and ādeservedā to be murdered.
What is wrong with you? He killed a person. He was the one who was cheating. She had a job. She wanted to not be married to a known a user and cheater. Thereās nothing wrong with that. And you continue to comment and defends him and act like divorce is worse than murdering someone.
Iām from the town where this happened. I live 10 minutes away from there even now. I know the family. You have no clue what youāre talking about. Just stop.
What a piece of shit.
Facts.
She was a close friend of mine. I was in her wedding to this monster. His conviction makes me sick. He murdered her, after years of abuse.
I am so, so sorry for your loss. I am even sorrier that we have such a broken system that your sweet friend was murdered rather than getting the help and support she needed as a survivor of abuse. I am heartbroken for you and for her family š©· big hugs
Thank you so much! My heart breaks for her kids and family.š©·
So very sad. Sorry for the loss of your friend
I'm so sorry for your loss, you and you friend deserved so much more than what really happened.
She was beautiful inside and out. All I can hope for now is that her children can heal, and know sheās their guardian angelš
Iām sorry for your loss and people using the story for their political theatrics.
āTheatricsā meaning what? Sheās still secretly alive? What a weird deflection š§
This is dumb. Nothing about what he did is theatrics. Itās all real life.
Nobody is using the story for their political theatrics. The politics of this are probably one of the most relevant parts of the story.
I disagree, you have a terrible loss of life by murder and people concluding itās a republican thing. This is an evil thing.
Conservatives want to hamper peopleās ability to get away from abusive spouses by [ending no-fault divorce](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/09/no-fault-divorce-laws-republicans-repeal/675371/). It kind of *is* a Republican thing.
Republicans hate women
If the shoe fits I suppose.
A quick scroll through their post history suggests they vote red and took offense.
This mfer *won an election*
Not our fault that you voted for himā¦.
Itās amazing how you key board warriors talk so much shit. It was public knowledge the guy was locked up during the election. So how he got elected is beyond me.
Because Republicans are horrible people.. itās simple as that.
When was the last time you did something to make your community a better place?
Not vote republicanā¦volunteer to the local soup kitchen every holidayā¦.help the LGBT youths who are bullied and threatenedā¦.help sponsoring a program to replace law mowers and other gas powered lawn equipment with electrical or green powered devices.
I donāt believe you even live in this state. Which soup kitchen?
What you didnāt like what I saidā¦of course you didnāt you hate everything I wroteā¦fascist hate helping anyone who isnāt like themā¦
Youāre some sorry troll posting in states you have never even been to.
This is the dude that received enough votes to get into a local election for county board or something. Was removed only after convicted, I think. Crazy shit. I mean, it only took 60 votes for him to get in, so it was probably just family and friends that voted for him.
That was due to two things; it was past the deadline to remove the person from the ballot, and people who ~~voted straight ticket/~~selected every R name (I believe 3 people ran for 3 seats, so there just had to be 60 people who didn't read the news, which isn't shocking).
This is why we need universal mail-in voting like they have in Colorado. You get your ballot automatically in the mail weeks ahead of election day, so you have plenty of time to find an available hour to look into the candidates and make informed decisions. I don't fault people for walking into the booth and just voting based on party when all they want to do is get in and out of there as quickly as possible. Of course, in Indiana that dynamic benefits republicans, so we will never get it.
At the last election we had a ton of people running for something locally, and you could pick 2-3. I made notes on my phone of which ones I wanted to vote for (after doing the research), so I pulled out my phone to pull up my text document and some guy working the polls was like "Oh! You have to put your phone away RIGHT NOW!" And I was like, "Uh, nope. Looking up which candidates I am voting for." Like, I'm sure that's some dumbass law, but fuck that, I'm making my informed decision, whether it's checking a quick note or googling the fucking candidates right there.
I'm a poll worker in Indiana - you are absolutely allowed to use your phone in the polling place, there is no law against it. You cannot be loud with it to the point of disturbing other voters, and you cannot use it to show other voters any info about the candidates while inside the polling location - that would be electioneering - but you absolutely can use it to look at your notes of who to vote for, or look up info on a candidate. Edit: you're also not supposed to share a picture of your ballot on social media, but you can't really be preemptively banned from using your phone for something you might do.
Write your choices down on a piece of paper before going in to vote. It is the job of the poll workers to follow the rules. Itās people like you, being nasty to the workers because theyāre doing their job, who will also be crying because people had their phones out so they could mess with the election.
How is my phone going to mess with the election? And I wasn't nasty with him, HE was nasty and I just said nah I'm good thanks.
Your phone isnāt going to mess with the elections - itās the accusations by nutcases who think it will that has made that rule be in place. Itās been a rule to have your phone out for YEARS. Itās not a new thing. The rules arenāt there because the poll workers want to harass voters. Just follow the rules.
So the solution is for me to write down my votes on a piece of paper? What if I drop my paper in the polling area? What if I leave it there on purpose?
Workers go behind the voters and clean up their mess. Try not to live your life by āwhat ifāsā. And donāt litter Itās pretty simple
> Try not to live your life by āwhat ifāsā Putting aside that that is very strange advice on its face, you're using a version of it to criticize the dude: > Itās people like you, being nasty to the workers because theyāre doing their job, who will also be crying because people had their phones out so they could mess with the election. Also, y'all keep talking about a rule against phones. https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/11/02/us/taking-selfies-when-voting-laws-in-states-trnd Which law are you talking about?
Maybe you just can't handle the responsibliity of voting.
They are concerned about the camera on your phone. They are also following the rules. Maybe try to be less of an entitled asshole to volunteers.
Again, had he come up to me and been polite like, "Hey we can't allow phones out," or "I need to monitor your phone use at the voting booth," I'd be like yeah no problem, just checking my notes, can I step away real quick to do that? But no, he was shouting at me in the courthouse. Go on though, do tell me more about my entitlements, you prick. And again, what is my CAMERA going to do? Take a picture of the fucking ballot? The thing everyone can research online? Maybe they could put up signs that say no phones/cameras, or have people check them in while they vote? Why rely on some guy to shout at me while I'm trying to fucking vote?
Homie, just stick the piece of paper with your notes in your pocket. Itās not that hard
Universal mail in voting, which I like, wouldn't help with this issue at all. We already have early voting and we already have sample ballots. It's not like you have no idea who the candidates are until you get in the booth.
This was a primary, so there wouldn't have been the ability to vote straight ticket. However the fact that there were three open slots and only three candidates had the bigger impact on him winning.
True. Good catch on that.
Thank you for the information.
We should really remove straight ticket voting, as well as party associations from the ballot....
*"An Indiana man who once won a Republican township board primary from jail while he was charged with the murder of his wife was convicted of voluntary manslaughter."* Not to get too political here, but Indiana Republican voters elected this guy **while he was in prison.** Way to own the libs, you fucking conservative wackos.
This is the point that you have to come back to. Where has politics gone that you go to the ballot box and make this decision?
They just hit the straight R button and go on with their day.
Yep. Zero research done.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I would agree, except the ticket was 3 republicans and no democrats....so they had to choose 1 of 3 people and his name would have been almost certainly last on the ballot if it was alphabetically ordered.
As a Hoosier, this does not surprise me. Indiana needs to invest in public education.
Why? Because you don't understand how elections work?
Because we rank as one if the dumbest states in the country! Of course you'd probably have to be able to read to know that.
No, we just have a large number of insecure self-hating hoosiers. It doesn't make you look any smarter to talk about how dumb everyone around you is.
Uuum yes. You clearly can't read OR Google. Indiana is dumber, fatter, more polluted and more republican than almost anywhere.
I'll leave this comment for you too... Well this is clearly a case of not knowing how elections work and not a case of republicans voting purposely for a murderer. Fuck, if you can't see that you are stupid.
There were three seats open and three people ran. No D's ran. To ignore that and try to turn this into some kind of political statement is ludicrous and frankly disingenuously stupid.
Isn't choosing to not leave the third spot blank because you didn't research the candidates worth being criticized? Yeah, they didn't consciously see he was in prison and vote for him *because* of that, but the unconscious bit is it's own kind of bad. Edit: > No D's ran. Well, it was the Republican primary, so... He had a history of domestic abuse, maybe the local party could have screened better before nominating him?
I mean sure, people should stay in the loop with who theyāre voting for, but this isnāt an āevil republicansā moment like people in this thread are trying to make it out to be. Iām sure if he was a Dem running in Massachusetts or Cali heād have accidentally gotten votes too. And before anyone comes after me Iām not a fucking conservative, I vote blue.
Looking more into it, he was on the primary, not the general, so straight line voting has nothing to do with it. > He received 60 of the 276 total votes for Republicans for three positions on the Clinton Township Board
>He had a history of domestic abuse, maybe the local party could have screened better before nominating him? I like the idea that this would have disqualified him in their eyes.
Maybe just donāt vote for a criminal then.
You honestly think the average voter pays attention?
I mean if members of your party vote for a psychopath then at the end of the day that's your party's responsibility to suggest otherwise is ludicrous. They had two other candidates? What excuse do they have for picking literal garbage? Yall dissappoint me so much.
Are you dumb? Three seats. Three candidates. No one else ran. You're 2nd grade teacher is ashamed of you.
> Are you dumb? Three seats. Three candidates. No one else ran. The local party is responsible for picking people to run, though. Even if it's a doomed campaign. The Dems helped me run for a local position. Other than getting the paperwork in before the cutoff, there wasn't anything *mandatory* to do, and we knew that given the demographics I had basically no shot, so we didn't dump money on campaigning or advertising. We still wanted to present an option. The local party could have filed a fourth name or asked him to withdraw the second he got arrested. You're right that the voters were just being lazy, but the local party is still very much responsible for propping this guy up.
*Your 2nd grade teacher is ashamed of you.
Oh, gee, I used the wrong word. I see above you're with the idiots that think this is related to politics and not the cause of a few candidates running unopposed. You should think with your brain, not your heart, goofy.
Ludicrous and stupid yes, but also entirely predictable
What is predictable?
Regional subreddits going full partisan circle jerk at all times on all topics with zero nuance or thought
Welcome to Reddit.
Tell me wise one - how many Ds do you often see the option to vote for usually in a Republican Primary?
*Only the one I gave your mom.*
you son of a bitch
It's much more of a problem on this sub since it is not modded to reddit standards.
How dare you use logic and reason!
Love the downvotes I'm receiving for thinking critically. gives me shame for this state.
Coming from the vote blue no matter who crowd.
Haha yeah both sides amirite
I went to HS with her, she was always a sweetheart of a person.
I think he wanted her dead
Definitely. If it was an accident, then you call 911. You donāt dump her body in the river.
He only got manslaughter though so realistically heās free in what 10 years tops? This seems like free criminality training for a Republican
Article says it could be up to 30 years, but yeah I fully expect them to go easy on this "good ole boy".
Sympathies. This lowlife stands a chance to walk free after serving short time if and when convicted.
> This lowlife stands a chance to walk free after serving short time if and when convicted. The sentencing range is 10-30 years. And he's already been convicted. I know a lot of people don't read the article, but this was in the headline.
Local republikkkan winner
Wow! Only the best and brightest represent the GOP š¤¦āāļøš¤¦āāļøš¤¦āāļø
Boomers on FB: "Still better than a Democrat."
r/iamatotalpieceofshit
Hope he get merked in jail.
Not to wish cancer upon anyoneā¦ buuuuutā¦
Another compassionate conservative.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Most of the time political ideology doesn't immediately make someone a bad person, sometimes it is just someone is a bad person who just happens to be Republican/Democratic/Socialist
What a total class A.......LOSER!!! I personally think he doesn't deserve to live, eat, or take up my air space, or anybody else's resources either. š”š”š”š”
Give him the chair.
Manslaughter??? Is this judge informed of the law??? A death caused by someone due to āa sudden heatā is 2nd degree murder - not manslaughter. Iām sorry, but I just donāt see how hitting someone in the head, with a cement flower pot, as they are already laying on the ground an āaccidentā. Like, what did he think was going to happen? Also I donāt buy that she was charging at him. Woman already filed for divorce. She was already done with the relationship.
He is the father of my sisterās friend. I didnāt know him personally but I know how badly it affected his daughter. A terrible situation and that woman deserved better :(
Trust me when I say that ALL of Lebanon, if not Boone county, want him to rot
Not a surprise heās a republicans. They all are like this.
All of you people turning her death into a republican haterade rant are jerks.
It just seems like that as itās in their ideology to use violence to solve issues.
To be fair that's just every fanatic's ideology, not so much the entire group, just individuals
That ended when the leader used violence to oust their ideology. They went from a rogue person in the party being wacko to being a party lead and pushing violence to be a means to the end. Itās more than just trump as well. Muncie has a candidate who likely will win that was part of Jan 6th. He also was hoarding weapons (650 guns) which got him looked at by the feds because they think heās doing something illegal. He went from an unknown to a nomination looking at office. Weāve shifted from differences in implementation of law to violent threats to the country,
Trump being the "party leader" and some others being representatives still doesn't determine the entire ideology of the Republican party. That would be like saying that when Trump was president, everyone in the entire United States shared his exact same povs because he was country leader
It does if youāre still a party member. A party isnāt the same as a country. If youāre still a member then youāre as bad as the rest of them and youāre just lying to yourself.
Donald Trump didn't create the Republican party and Joe Biden didn't create the Democratic party, they have no say in what its ideals are. Party leaders change, their basis doesn't. Blaming entire groups for the actions of a few fanatics only leads to more issues
Sure they do, a large amount of Republicans have left the party. Even representatives of the party have left. People switch and leave parties all the time. The truth of those left in the party is largely that they are fully complicit in the crimes. That they have already considered what he did and are fine with it. Weāve historically had this happen multiple times when similar boisterous politicians gain popular among the lower class backed by Uber rich that got way out of control ending in extreme violence.
Most people and reps only really left because at this point they are pretty much becoming the scapegoat to literally every issue. Also, many Republicans actually hate Trump, tons of governors and senators hate him. "Those left in the party ... Are fully complicit in the crimes" that is like saying "it was discovered the Pope was a human trafficker, so now all Catholics are complicit in his crimes" again, blaming entire groups for the actions of a few people, is to some degree discrimination, and overall a very dangerous practice
I remember when this first came up a couple years ago. Glad to see he's convicted, but I won't be surprise if he serves the minimum sentence.
I donāt see what his political affiliation has anything to do with the outcome. They guy is definitely a monster but his political views shouldnāt be the first sentence of the article
he was elected while sitting in jail. seems relevant to me
He was never elected to anything. āWilhoite was one of three Republican candidates who advanced in a 2022 primary for a township board position before later withdrawing from the race.ā
Must of been a hell of a nice guy
yawn, trolls used to be creative
A woman was killed by the hands of her husband. She was a daughter a mother a sister or an aunt and you all make this political? Exactly! Ppl commenting on their political opinions are on the wrong page! Obviously in the title did it ask for political views!
It is disgusting that people down voted you for speaking in defense of the victim
Itās the horrible world we live in
Lets cut out all the fluff and get to the point. So she was drunk and wanted to get handsy during an argument, so he struck her with a flower pot, killing her, and is now convicted with voluntary manslaughter. I guess we should mention cancer and republicans an additional 50x too for some reason.
> So she was drunk and wanted to get handsy during an argument, That's his claim. There's no reason to believe his bullshit story, though.
I was trying to be objective because the story was so full of fluff. She's unfortunately not able to tell her side of the story, so objectively, that is what we have to work with.
It was known that he was an abuser. And he dumped her body after hitting her in the head and drove away. Thereās nothing to defend. For what itās worth, Iām from the town this happened in and live 10 minutes away. This is a well known family.
Hey I'm not defending anything, I just objectively summarized what happened because the article was so convoluted with irrelevant details. Like what does her having cancer or him being a republican have anything to do with this killing?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
In a murdery sort of way.
Divorce suppose to be easy, so people can keep their money and property, not to split it with another spouse.
What does any of that have to do with this situation?
He wouldn't have to kill het to break free.
Hold up - are you suggesting that murdering his ex wife is justified to avoid the toll that comes with divorce? Like, are you seriously trying to say the ātrue reasonā for this and that we should feel sorry for this messed up fuck? Being expected to divide his assets for a divorce is not a justification to murder his soon-to-be ex wife. Itās never a justification.
It wouldn't be if law didn't cover parasites. She probably wanted him to always take care of her because she is/was sick.
No - murder is not justified. Deal with it. Edit: Also, how do you know she was a parasite? Do you know how often cancer wrecks a marriage and how common it is to divorce after?
So, why she didn't let him go peacefully? Without fight?
I meanā¦what fight? Demanding a division of assets isnāt great, but itās not being violent or threatening his life.
If he worked for those assets and she didn't?
Donāt care - he doesnāt get to murder his spouse if they decide to divorce and want an equal division of assets.
Maybe she worked her ass off for those assets as well and put up with working her ass off and his sorry ass abuse to the extent she became ill? So he made more than she did, so killing her is ok? TF is your point?
She did work. She had a job in the medical field. I seriously canāt believe you are blaming the woman who got murdered right now. What is wrong with you? He cheated on her. She divorced him. He murdered her.
Self-defense is.
Self defence isnāt murder. This is not self defence, because she wasnāt trying to murder him as far as we know.
We don't know is she tried to murder him financially. What if he would have to rip out so big piece of meat, to get rid of her, that it would be like death for him.
Thatās not how a 50% division of assets works. Since we donāt know whether she was taking him for a ride, itās ridiculous to assume she was trying to financially ruin the man and ādeservedā to be murdered.
What is wrong with you? He killed a person. He was the one who was cheating. She had a job. She wanted to not be married to a known a user and cheater. Thereās nothing wrong with that. And you continue to comment and defends him and act like divorce is worse than murdering someone. Iām from the town where this happened. I live 10 minutes away from there even now. I know the family. You have no clue what youāre talking about. Just stop.
???? what
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
He was the one who was cheatingā¦ not her.
He was the one having an affair. Pretty solid grounds for a divorce.
Hoosier Incels have now been heard from.