Lindsay James Runs From Questions Over 177 Missed Votes As She
Progressive policy ambitions meet practical realities as Americans weigh costs and consequences.
177 missed votes. That’s not a typo, and it’s not a rounding error. Lindsay James wants to leave the Iowa House for Congress, but she can’t explain why she skipped nearly one out of every five votes while she was there.
New Republican Times Editorial Board
Democrat congressional candidate Lindsay James is facing fierce scrutiny over her attendance in the Iowa House as she campaigns for a promotion to the U.S. Congress. During a Thursday night debate between James and her Republican opponent Joe Mitchell, the moderator repeatedly pressed James for an answer as to why she missed 177 of 342 votes since launching her campaign, more than half of all votes so far this year.
James, evidently unwilling to speak about her record on fighting for her constituents’ priorities, dodged the questions. Democrat Lindsay James, who is running in Iowa's 2nd District, was captured ignoring questions as to why she missed 177 of 342 votes in the Iowa House since launching her campaign.
This follows from Thursday's debate, where she dodged a moderator's questions over the same issue. pic.twitter.com/vBPSuRNlgp James continued the practice of running from her record when confronted by an Iowan who likewise demanded answers as to why she refuses to represent her district.
The Iowan’s question was only met with silence. Votes that James missed in April and May included property tax reductions, strengthening of criminal penalties for animal torture, and screen time limitations in public schools.
All were missed while James hosted campaign events around the 2nd District. “Iowans show up to work every day, but Lindsay James couldn’t be bothered to show up for them,” NRCC spokeswoman Emily Tuttle told Townhall. “There’s no excuse for missing more than half of her votes and leaving Iowans without a voice in the State House while she campaigned for a promotion to Congress.
That’s why James keeps dodging the question, she knows Iowans can’t trust her to show up for them.” The debate over whether or not James would continue the practice of missing vast swaths of votes in the U.S.
House will likely continue over the next 31 days before Election Day. Editor's Note: Do you enjoy Townhall's conservative reporting exposing the radical left and woke media? Support our work so we can keep bringing you the truth.
Original source:
Read at TownhallHow We See It
New Republican Times Editorial Board
177 missed votes. That’s not a typo, and it’s not a rounding error. Lindsay James wants to leave the Iowa House for Congress, but she can’t explain why she skipped nearly one out of every five votes while she was there. Instead of offering a plain answer, she’s running from questions, which tells you everything about how she’d handle the job in Washington. Voting is the job. Everything else is excuses.
You’d think someone asking for a promotion might have a simple reason. Maybe she was sick. Maybe she had a family emergency. Maybe she was doing constituent work. But the silence from her campaign says none of those are good enough to say out loud. And Iowans have heard this song before: a Democrat who treats legislative duty as optional, then wants a bigger stage to do even less. Absenteeism isn't a talking point, it's a track record. If she can’t make the votes in Des Moines, why would anyone trust her to show up on the big votes that decide national policy?
The local coverage has been digging into this for a reason. Missed votes aren’t trivia. They’re the public record of how seriously a candidate takes the people who sent her there. When she dodges reporters on the subject, she’s not being cautious; she’s being disrespectful to every voter who expects an answer. Her campaign would rather hide than explain. That’s a choice, and it's a revealing one.
A Republican challenger could just point to the number and stop. But the real issue is bigger: if this is how she treats the role she already has, imagine the role she’s asking for. James owes Iowans a direct response. Until she gives one, the only honest takeaway is that she wants a promotion she hasn’t earned and a job she hasn’t shown up for. Trust is built on showing up. She hasn’t.
Commentary written with AI assistance by the New Republican Times Editorial Board.