User talk:VoteEducated2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "VoteEducated2020", may not comply with our username policy. Please note that you may not use a username that represents the name of a company, group, organization, product, service, or website. Examples of usernames that are not allowed include "XYZ Company", "MyWidgetsUSA.com", and "Foobar Museum of Art". However, you are permitted to use a username that contains such a name if it identifies you individually, such as "Sara Smith at XYZ Company", "Mark at WidgetsUSA", or "FoobarFan87".

Please also note that Wikipedia does not allow accounts to be shared by multiple people and that you may not advocate for or promote any company, group, organization, product, service, or website, regardless of your username. Please also read our paid editing policy and our conflict of interest guideline. If you are a single individual and are willing to contribute to Wikipedia in an unbiased manner, please request a change of username by completing the form at Special:GlobalRenameRequest, choosing a username that complies with our username policy. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. Thank you. Rodney Araujo Tell me - My contributions  18:37, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

September 2020
Hello, I'm CogitoErgoSum14. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Mike DeWine seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. CogitoErgoSum14 (talk) 18:40, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I do agree and disagree with your perspective here. It's appreciated that we want it neutral. I disagree this insert was not neutral. Though DeWine identifies with the Republican party, his characteristics and vocalizions indicate he is veering from his party. He's vocalized anti-trump, backhandedly smacked the police on "brutality," and never ever addressed the violent protests in Columbus OH, as he indicated it as a peaceful protest. It was not. As chaos was in the streets, he patted himself on the back rather than assert authority to protect Ohioans and their business' during the violent riots that have occurred.

In addition, he's going after gun control on a personal opinion rather than remaining educated on this matter. He is citing the murder of a child who was executed point blank in the middle of a street, riding his bicycle, under a neighbor-like dispute. Yes, the young child was wrong for going into his yard. No, this doesn't place the need to execute a child. DeWine didn't take into account the gentleman who executed the child was under the influence and out of his mind. DeWine's swing of the gun control is people who are mentally unstable. This is not the case here.

DeWine lacks ethical, constitutional justices. Thus, my insert to update this informal remains neutral as it leaves interpertation on his characteristics that he's not "completely right-winged." In fact, he's essentially on the fence.

With consideration of this, it's requested we work together to ensure this profile of Michael DeWine projects him accurately as we possibly can VoteEducated2020 (talk) 18:54, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * You clearly have a strong anti-DeWine point of view. However, policy requires that Wikipedia biographies be written from the neutral point of view. Wikipedia editors cannot insert their own personal political analysis into articles. We call that original research and it is forbidden. Instead, editors must summarize what published, reliable sources say about the topic. Cullen328   Let's discuss it  20:19, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

I am against DeWine. But he is not holding up to the politics and belief as a Reublican. I'm not condemning him on Wikipedia, however, he is positioned himself as a neutral party in this entire circumstance. This needs to be acknowledged. VoteEducated2020 (talk) 20:51, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Are you there? VoteEducated2020 (talk) 18:28, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Impeachment
On the Help desk, in January, you said


 * President Trump is undergoing a second impeachment. He is NOT, and I repeatedly stress, NOT impeached for a second time. Senate has to vote then VP Michael Pence finalizes this. That is the American process.

Actually, President Trump WAS impeached for a second time. He has not been convicted. That is the process -- impeachment, followed by a trial, then a vote. That vote might, or might not, lead to conviction.

Many people think that "impeachment" means "impeachment and conviction". It does not.

Cheers! 73.127.147.187 (talk) 03:20, 9 February 2021 (UTC)