It’s not a British/American issue.
True- but I think she made mincemeat of him in the debates (though that won’t matter, since I was one of the only people who watched them, and I’m voting for Abbot anyway).
It’s usually only Brits that I see doing the -s’s configuration. Both instances are correct though.
Only the s’ form is correct according to Strunk and White.
Because?
I’ve seen both listed as correct in multiple sources. And my experience is one is more American style and the other more Brit. Ever hear of St. James’s Place?
But the Chicago Manual of Style says:
The general rule covers proper names as well as common, including most names of any length ending in sibilants - Burns’s poems. Traditional exceptions to the general rule for forming the possessive are the names Jesus and Moses - in Jesus’ name or Moses’ leadership (paragraph 6.19).
Sure, over by Baltic Avenue, yes? The infirmary is there, IIRC.
Because I’m a Republican, and there’s nothing Wendy Davis could say to make me vote for her. Hey, I thought Mondale creamed Reagan in the 1984 debates, but there was still no way I’d vote for Mondale. I just try to be an objective observer and give credit where credit is due.
Or, to put it another way, I think Mitt ROmney destroyed Obama in the debates in 2012… but I didn’t think for a second that any liberal Democrat would be swayed to vote for him.
Wendy Davis has no chance of being governor. But a liberal watching the debates would definitely come away thinking, “She’s good- too bad she lives in such a solidly red state.”
This thread has gone rather quiet. With recent developments I would have thought there was much to discuss. Nevermind, im sure had a Republican made the same recent ad as Davis this thread would be red hot.
Why? Seems like a fair shot to me.
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Or the other way around, in this case.
She probably could’ve made the same relevant point against Abbott WITHOUT showing the empty wheelchair.
I’m a Wendy Davis supporter. I identify more strongly with her platform and issues than I do with Abbott’s. However, I am appalled at this commercial. I know she’s had to deal with personal attacks made by the Republican’s, but I thought she was somewhat graciously rising above them. With this ad, she’s sunk to Abbott’s level. I will probably still vote for her, as, like I said, I agree more strongly with her stance on key issues, but I believe she’s just lost herself a fair chunk of the undecided vote.
I’m not from Texas. I heard of Wendy Davis last year when she filibustered like a boss. I don’t understand the furor over the ad. I get that it has something to do with the wheelchair, but what exactly?
John Abott is wheelchair bound. So it’s like she’s poking at his disability.
How is she poking at his disability? I’m not seeing it.
Correction: her opponent’s name is GREG Abbot. Not John
The man is in a wheelchair and she features an ad showing an empty wheelchair.
That sucks but it’s not like she had a chance anyways.
The only chance Wendy Davis had was if Greg Abott had made the same kind of mistakes and gaffs that Ann Richards opponent, Clayton Williams, did back in 1990. But Abbott is smart enough to know if he basically keeps his mouth shut, just being republican is enough to win Texas.
Yeah, I saw the ad. Not sure how it’s poking at Abbott that’s pissing people anyone off or that’s “disgusting”, etc. Amberlei wrote that the ad meant that Davis had “sunk to his level”, of being “appalled” and that the ad was so egregious that it might lose a substantial portion of the independent vote. But I’m not seeing anything in the ad that seems to warrant such a reaction, so I’m trying to see what others may see.
It’s the usual liberal squeamishness about politics. I love my people, but man, we’re lousy campaigners, usually. We’re too fair-minded. It’s really difficult to find liberals who will whole-heartedly condone dirty hand-to-hand political fighting. We’re all “Oh, that’s so unfair on our part! That looks bad! Don’t hit too hard! That’s off-limits!”