aggiehawg said:

---

I was trying to withhold judgment about Crenshaw but that takes the cake. I'm done with him now.

---

Yep. I'm out.

Didn't realize a career in public service meant you should get rich.

tbirdspur2010 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

I was trying to withhold judgment about Crenshaw but that takes the cake. I'm done with him now.

---

Yep. I'm out.

---

Hey, tbird, how y'all doing?

Quote:

---

Didn't realize a career in public service meant you should get rich.

---

Coach Jimbo it the highest paid state employee.
Public service?

Who is/are his primary opponent(s)?

Tramp96 said:

---

Who is/are his primary opponent(s)?

---

https://ballotpedia.org/Texas'_2nd_Congressional_District_election,_2022

I hope that's the end of Dan Cringeshaw's support on this forum.

lb3 said:

---

I hope that's the end of Dan Cringeshaw's support on this forum.

---

In light of this momentous occasion, how about a few blue stars for the OP?

I only need 400,000 to catch aggiehawg

I hope he loses the primary. I think the biggest reason I was a big fan of him was Kathleen Wall was trying to buy a seat. She tried again in my district but our Sheriff beat her out.

Congress is over paid. They shouldn't be afforded another raise until the average family exceeds what they're being paid now.

It's the same debate that will always afflict elected office, and there's not an easy answer.

If it pays "too little" (relative term), you cannot attract any middle class candidates. You will end up with only independently wealthy candidates who have no need for a salary (or elected office), or you end up with AOC/Lina Hidalgo types who have no private sector success/experience. See the Harris County judiciary.

It should be a sacrifice, public office should not make you wealthy, but not so large a sacrifice that we only get 3rd rate candidates.

Tramp96 said:

---

Who is/are his primary opponent(s)?

---

Doesn't matter. Incumbents win about 95% of the time anyway, and he'll run on veteran status and people will vote for him no matter what. He has it made.

I see some gotcha games in the video. The first answer he gave was ... I would be fine eliminating individual stock trading. Then the clip cuts short when he starts going into detail.

Before I get my panties in a wad, I have to sit back and think ... I imagine it's fairly difficult to rent a house/apt in both Houston & DC at the same time (even at $174k annual), unless you are independently wealthy or have a ton of roommates in one or both locations. He's not a rich dude as far as I know. I see a 37 yr old retired military officer with a wife, 2 mortgages, probably some grad school loans left from his masters. So I get it.

If he wants to day trade, I'm not opposed. The answer here - as with most stinky things in politics - is transparency. If they do it, make sure it's done in the open with is some sunlight shined on it so voters can decide for themselves.

Thought I liked Crenshaw, but now he must be offered up to the slaughter.

**** him.

that is all

Mr. AGSPRT04 said:

---

It's the same debate that will always afflict elected office, and there's not an easy answer.

If it pays "too little" (relative term), you cannot attract any middle class candidates. You will end up with only independently wealthy candidates who have no need for a salary (or elected office), or you end up with AOC/Lina Hidalgo types who have no private sector success/experience. See the Harris County judiciary.

It should be a sacrifice, public office should not make you wealthy, but not so large a sacrifice that we only get 3rd rate candidates.

---

In the video it's discussed the most staffers only make $30k and expected to live in DC. Again, $200,000 is enough salary to live comfortably, not enough to party with the elites.

Well, if you want to raise a family and have a stay at home wife, and live in an expensive district, then $174,000 might not go very far. But it is enough to meet the basic needs.

suburban cowboy said:

---

Just in recent, off the cuff memory, DC Dan Cringeshaw has done the following:
- Vote for a federal vaccine database that costs $400MM
- out perform Pelosi in 2021 stock market gains
- call Jesus a hero archetype like Superman & be a complete dick to the young lady asking him about that statement
- claim congressmen as victims that are underpaid poors

what am I missing?

---

Proponent of red flag laws, flown on a private jet to Stockholm to speak at a global warming conference, more or less be against us serfs owning AR's and probably a few other things.

Michael Berry told a story the other day about how at a fundraiser of some sort where 8-10 speakers were lined up and Crenshaw was something like #6 or #7 in line, he promptly informed the organizers of the fundraiser that he needed to go first because he had somewhere else to be, jumped in line and spoke first - spoke for about 5 minutes, and then promptly left.

His head can barely fit through a doorway these days.

Just curious, but has anyone actually looked at the data that is being referenced? What trades did he make in 2021 that were so good and the rest of missed out on?

You can look yourself here: https://unusualwhales.com/i_am_the_senate_member/Daniel%20Crenshaw

The first time he purchased in 2021 was in November...and it was Tesla, like 90% of /r/WallStreetBets. The "oustanding performance" they keep referencing is because the stocks (ETF actually) he purchased in 2020 finally started performing in 2021. So he did better than the S&P 500 in 2021 which is what the original article is about.

So while his comments were dumb and I do think he's become too comfortable in DC, I think this is a pretty poor example of it.

Ask him if he would describe our elected federal officials as public servants. I really appreciate his service to and sacrifice for this country; however, he has zero respect from me now as he is compromised and part of the D.C. swamp as he is in it for his own personal gain. At this point he is just another worthless politician.

Aren't they pretty much making solid "doctor money" once you factor all of the crap they get comped and do not have to pay for?

Remember not to question his Christianity

JSKolache said:

---

I see some gotcha games in the video. The first answer he gave was ... I would be fine eliminating individual stock trading. Then the clip cuts short when he starts going into detail.

Before I get my panties in a wad, I have to sit back and think ... I imagine it's fairly difficult to rent a house/apt in both Houston & DC at the same time (even at $174k annual), unless you are independently wealthy or have a ton of roommates in one or both locations. He's not a rich dude as far as I know. I see a 37 yr old retired military officer with a wife, 2 mortgages, probably some grad school loans left from his masters. So I get it.

If he wants to day trade, I'm not opposed. The answer here - as with most stinky things in politics - is transparency. If they do it, make sure it's done in the open with is some sunlight shined on it so voters can decide for themselves.

---

Exactly. Assuming no one on here actually listened to the interview but literally says he'd be fine with eliminating individual stock trading. And I don't really agree with his second point but the broader argument that it's way too expensive to get into politics is 100% correct. That's why we end up with so many grifters like MTG and Boebert who have no interest in passing any actual legislation.

This is the same clickbait garbage the left does.

"Don't question my faith!!!!"

-Dan Crenshaw to 12 year old girl.

Dan is a globalist shill, seemingly willing to lash out at children but won't hold left/progressives to task.

So brave, Dan, so brave.

Anyone looking to make politics a career is inherently the wrong person for the job.

Insider trading is ok as long as you think you are underpaid at your job . Got it.

Dan's returns rival Pelosi's. How could that possibly be?

**** you, Dan.

"You want to keep congress from trading stock? Fine. But nobody is going to want to go to work for you if they can't steal from you."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacheverson/2021/08/25/dan-crenshaw-made-100000-in-book-royalties-last-year-aidedbygop-groups-big-purchase/?sh=c6b1f78a06fc


He should write a book about it.

End Of Message said:

---

"Don't question my faith!!!!"

-Dan Crenshaw to 12 year old girl.

Dan is a globalist shill, seemingly willing to lash out at children but won't hold left/progressives to task.

So brave, Dan, so brave.

---

Fyi that was an 18 year old campaign rep from the opposing campaign. He handled it badly but let's not pretend it was some innocent kid.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

End Of Message said:

---

"Don't question my faith!!!!"

-Dan Crenshaw to 12 year old girl.

Dan is a globalist shill, seemingly willing to lash out at children but won't hold left/progressives to task.

So brave, Dan, so brave.

---

Fyi that was an 18 year old campaign rep from the opposing campaign. He handled it badly but let's not pretend it was some innocent kid.

---

I thought if you were from the opposing campaign the rule was that you had to carry a tiki torch.

Squadron7 said:

---

Anyone looking to make politics a career is inherently the wrong person for the job.

---

#termlimits

Muy said:

---

Martha Stewart went to prison for far far less than what our politicians are getting away with.

---

174k is a really good salary for a lot of Americans. They aren't going broke in DC. But, they see themselves as the gatekeepers to this country. Sitting on top of the hill. But they look around DC and realize their pay isn't matching the life they think they're deserved for being at the top. Congress views themselves on top of the world, while also simultaneously being dictated by multi millionaires and billionaires about how they're going to vote and what legislation they're going to write.

So 174k is not nearly enough when they see just how much money they are in charge of and how much gets thrown around. It quickly becomes an 'I'm going to get mine' mentality.

Its also hard to not make a career out of it. Campaigning, writing laws, and being a good representative are all skills that are honed. Why should you have to go back to being a dentist or lawyer or engineer or middle manager?

Its just another disappointment in the forever long struggle between humans and the quest for more money and power.