Childless Republican Candidate BUSTED Using Fake Family In Ad

>> YOUR LINK HERE: ___ http://youtube.com/watch?v=yDteUITQ4wQ

A Republican candidate for the Virginia House made a complete fool of himself by “pretending” to have a family in a recent ad. The single male candidate posed with a friend’s wife and children in the ad, giving the appearance that they were actually his family. When the charade was revealed, the candidate’s campaign said that he was simply posing with women and children who support him. Ring of Fire’s Farron Cousins explains what happened. • • Link – https://www.huffpost.com/entry/childl... • Subscribe to stay connected to our stories: / theringoffire • Support us by becoming a member on YouTube: / @theringoffire • Or Support us on Patreon: / theringoffire • Buy Ring of Fire merch: https://www.buyrof.com/ • Find us on social media! • Facebook: / ringoffireradio • Twitter: / ringoffiremedia • Instagram: / ringoffirenetwork • TikTok: / ringoffiremedia • *This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos. • Republicans are now so desperate to paint themselves as the party of the American family, that even when they don't have a family, they're just borrowing other people's families so that it looks like, you know, they've got a wife and, and kids, even when they don't. And they admittedly live alone with their dog. That is the case of a Republican candidate by the name of Derek Anderson. Now, Mr. Anderson, a former Green Beret, is running for a house seat in the state of Virginia, but Mr. Anderson only has a fiance. He doesn't have a wife, he doesn't have any kids. The New York Times, as I said, reported that he lives alone with his dog, which by the way, there's nothing wrong with that. But to be a Republican in this day and age, right, you gotta have a wife, or if you're a woman, you gotta have a husband. • You definitely gotta have kids. So, Mr. Anderson decided, you know what? Since I don't have these things on my own, all I have is a fiance. I don't wanna put her in the campaign ads for some reason. So he actually borrowed his friend's, wife and children for a new ad. And in the ad, Mr. Anderson is there smiling, a big smile. His friend's wife is right next to him, and the three kids are in front. And you would think from looking at this, oh, obviously that's his wife and kids, because of the way they were posed, that is what politicians do. You pose with your wife, your kids, your husband, your kids, whatever it is. But they did the typical, I'm a politician of these. This is my family pose. He wasn't chitchatting with them. It didn't show them in the ad as like, oh, we met them somewhere. • Nope. Straight up posing for the camera and for the record, they didn't do that with any of the other people in the ad. And in fact, there's another point in the ad where Mr. Anderson is sitting around a kitchen table with the same woman and the three kids making it look like they're all enjoying a nice dinner or breakfast, whatever together because they're a family. Except they're not. And the funniest thing about this is that after the New York Times busted him, busted him on it, his campaign responded to the New York Times in the dumbest way imaginable. Here's what the campaign says. Um, the video simply shows him posing with female supporters and their kids Derek's opponent, and every other candidate in America are in similar pictures and video with supporters of all kinds. Yeah, not sitting around a kitchen table, not having a meal with them, not posing like they're getting their fall family portraits done, you idiot. But they continued. He called it a normal campaign video. The false politically motivating report on Derek, who is happily engaged and very proud of vocal about his family appearing • In a normal campaign video with female supporters and their kids is both hilarious and sad. The spokesperson said in an email, oh, it's hilarious and sad. All right? But not that the media's reporting on it, it's hilarious and sad that Mr. Anderson did it in the first place. And why be because you, you don't think Republicans will vote for somebody who's just engaged and has a dog? And is that because your party has spent so much time telling us that if you're a man and you're not married, or you're a woman and you're not married with kids, then you're worthless. Maybe you should take your fight instead of to the New York Times, take it to the Republican Party that made it to where a single guy with a dog can't run for office. The problem is not the media. The problem is not the people laughing at you. The problem is that your party has become so dumb that your candidate thought the only way he could win was to fake an entire family.

#############################

New on site