The Briefing Room
General Category => Elections 2024 => Topic started by: libertybele on May 09, 2023, 01:25:42 am
-
Didn't quite know where to post this as DeSantis hasn't announced he's running yet.
DeSantis says Trump deploying ‘Democrat attacks’ on Social Security, Medicare
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) accused former President Trump of deploying “Democrat attacks” against him over his past support for changes to entitlement programs as the governor considers joining Trump in the 2024 primary.
“Those are Democrat attacks, I don’t think anyone really buys that,” DeSantis said Friday in an interview with Newsmax. “Donald Trump himself wrote a book where he was talking about the need to increase the age of eligibility for Social Security to 70.”
Trump’s campaign has dinged DeSantis for supporting a GOP budget proposal while he was in Congress that would have raised the retirement age to 70 to receive Social Security benefits. As the debate over the future of entitlement programs including Social Security and Medicare has reignited with the fight over the debt ceiling in Washington, Trump has said that Republicans should not touch the programs.
A federal report this year showed the trust funds that back Social Security will be depleted by 2034, implementing an automatic reduction in the level of benefits that are paid out.
DeSantis said in the interview that Republicans needed to be able to discuss changes to the programs, but he blasted Trump for resorting to “Democrat tactics.”
“Clearly, nobody has ever proposed to do anything to affect the current senior citizens,” he said.
A pro-DeSantis super PAC last month launched a TV ad defending him on Social Security and going after Trump for his attacks. The interview from DeSantis echoed some of the same framing from the ad......................
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3994596-desantis-says-trump-deploying-democrat-attacks-on-social-security-medicare/
-
Well, he is.
-
It's true
-
I'm beginning to think should DeSantis run and actually get a chance to debate Trump, he'd win overwhelmingly.
-
I'm beginning to think should DeSantis run and actually get a chance to debate Trump, he'd win overwhelmingly.
:thumbsup:
-
:thumbsup:
It would be quite a debate; both running on their records. However, I think DeSantis would be able to bring out the bully in Trump and get him to run his mouth and it would turn off conservatives and possibly independents.
-
Changes are coming to Social Security and Medicare whether Trump and his Democrat buddies like it or not
You can’t defeat the law of economics or mathematics. I can very much see where the age of eligibility is raised. I can also see where, maybe to some small degree, some privatization
But I do agree that current retirees should not be affected. But we need changed in these programs for the future.
-
Changes are coming to Social Security and Medicare whether Trump and his Democrat buddies like it or not
You can’t defeat the law of economics or mathematics. I can very much see where the age of eligibility is raised. I can also see where, maybe to some small degree, some privatization
But I do agree that current retirees should not be affected. But we need changed in these programs for the future.
A President (Guess Who) tried to do it but got raked over the coals for coming up with that proposal.
-
Changes are coming to Social Security and Medicare whether Trump and his Democrat buddies like it or not
You can’t defeat the law of economics or mathematics. I can very much see where the age of eligibility is raised. I can also see where, maybe to some small degree, some privatization
But I do agree that current retirees should not be affected. But we need changed in these programs for the future.
It absolutely needs to get out of federal hands and be returned to the states.
-
It absolutely needs to get out of federal hands and be returned to the states.
Exactly. That's what I thought was so brilliant about Ryan's plan to kill Obamacare, even though some conservatives grumbled because it wasn't a "full repeal". He didn't have the votes for a full repeal, but he zeroed in on the federal entitlement as the key element. His plan was to eliminate the entitlement aspect of it, and turn all funding responsibility back over to the states. There would then be federal subsidies that would phase out in a few years. Great way to kill it while giving nervous RINOs political cover for their vote.
Turning programs over to the states is the best way out of this mess because unlike the federal government, they cannot deficit spend for years on end.
-
LMAO wrote:
"You can’t defeat the law of economics or mathematics. I can very much see where the age of eligibility is raised. I can also see where, maybe to some small degree, some privatization
But I do agree that current retirees should not be affected. But we need changed in these programs for the future."
So... you only want to see today's young-uns workin' til they're 70, and not yourself?
That plane is gettin' as far into the air as did Howard Hughes' Spruce Goose.
-
LMAO wrote:
"You can’t defeat the law of economics or mathematics. I can very much see where the age of eligibility is raised. I can also see where, maybe to some small degree, some privatization
But I do agree that current retirees should not be affected. But we need changed in these programs for the future."
So... you only want to see today's young-uns workin' til they're 70, and not yourself?
That plane is gettin' as far into the air as did Howard Hughes' Spruce Goose.
Actually, I am still working. Probably for a few more years. I would expect any changes to Social Security to affect me.
The average lifespan in this country is somewhere in the late 70s. Is it sustainable to have people that are in their 90s on Social Security while their kids also may be old enough to qualify?
The reality is that Social Security and Medicare are simply not sustainable in their present form. Ignoring the issue isn’t an option.
-
It would be quite a debate; both running on their records. However, I think DeSantis would be able to bring out the bully in Trump and get him to run his mouth and it would turn off conservatives and possibly independents.
Don't bet the farm on this :laugh:
-
Don't bet the farm on this :laugh:
I know Trump already said he wasn't going to debate.
-
I know Trump already said he wasn't going to debate.
No, he did not.
-
I could see Trump "beating" DeSantis in a debate. Not in the sense of who makes the best arguments, but in terms of perceptions. The reality is that Trump is a more charismatic speaker than is DeSantis, and that's enough for a lot of people.
-
No, he did not.
In a round about way, yes he did.
https://nypost.com/2023/04/27/trump-suggests-he-wont-participate-in-2024-gop-debates/
-
In a round about way, yes he did.
No, he did not. If you know anything --- anything at all --- about Donald Trump, you'd know he doesn't do "round about".
As with all things, Trump is negotiating.
-
johnny maga
@_johnnymaga
Trump is leading the GOP field by 41 points and he’s beating Biden handily in a rematch
They’re trying to put him in federal prison while a million man invasion in happening in Texas
Anybody who’s still pushing for a divisive primary does not have our best interest in mind
11:19 AM · May 9, 2023
-
No, he did not. If you know anything --- anything at all --- about Donald Trump, you'd know he doesn't do "round about".
As with all things, Trump is negotiating.
No he just does backpedaling and I can't count the times that people interpret what he meant to say.
Negotiate a debate against another Republican? Ok. Good to know.
-
johnny maga
@_johnnymaga
Trump is leading the GOP field by 41 points and he’s beating Biden handily in a rematch
They’re trying to put him in federal prison while a million man invasion in happening in Texas
Anybody who’s still pushing for a divisive primary does not have our best interest in mind
11:19 AM · May 9, 2023
Election integrity is everything regardless of how "handily" Trump is beating Biden!
-
No, he did not. If you know anything --- anything at all --- about Donald Trump, you'd know he doesn't do "round about".
As with all things, Trump is negotiating.
So, he skipped the second GOP debate because of 'unsanitary conditions', Blood Everywhere? @Right_in_Virginia
-
Exactly. That's what I thought was so brilliant about Ryan's plan to kill Obamacare, even though some conservatives grumbled because it wasn't a "full repeal". He didn't have the votes for a full repeal, but he zeroed in on the federal entitlement as the key element. His plan was to eliminate the entitlement aspect of it, and turn all funding responsibility back over to the states. There would then be federal subsidies that would phase out in a few years. Great way to kill it while giving nervous RINOs political cover for their vote.
Turning programs over to the states is the best way out of this mess because unlike the federal government, they cannot deficit spend for years on end.
Dunno...California has been doing a bang-up job.
-
So, he skipped the second GOP debate because of 'unsanitary conditions', Blood Everywhere? @Right_in_Virginia
Never said Trump wouldn't do it @corbe He's not near a decision.
Do at least try and pull yourself out of 2016 ----- just once. :laugh:
-
Election integrity is everything regardless of how "handily" Trump is beating Biden!
Divert, divert, divert from the message in the tweet. I guess it's the best you have. :shrug:
-
Dunno...California has been doing a bang-up job.
California's malfeasance only hurts California. Federal malfeasance effects everyone.
Send it back to the states.
-
California's malfeasance only hurts California. Federal malfeasance affects everyone.
Until the other states are forced to bail them out. I believe that’s what California is banking on with this reparations proposal
-
Until the other states are forced to bail them out. I believe that’s what California is banking on with this reparations proposal
Sure. The device to do that with will be federal. States have no obligation to other states.
-
johnny maga
@_johnnymaga
Trump is leading the GOP field by 41 points and he’s beating Biden handily in a rematch
They’re trying to put him in federal prison while a million man invasion in happening in Texas
Anybody who’s still pushing for a divisive primary does not have our best interest in mind
11:19 AM · May 9, 2023
Again, at this stage of the game, who cares.
-
johnny maga
@_johnnymaga
Trump is leading the GOP field by 41 points and he’s beating Biden handily in a rematch
They’re trying to put him in federal prison while a million man invasion in happening in Texas
Anybody who’s still pushing for a divisive primary does not have our best interest in mind
11:19 AM · May 9, 2023
Neither does anyone who is pushing Trump. A second Trump term will be an unmitigated disaster; far worse than his parlous first term.
-
johnny maga
@_johnnymaga
Trump is leading the GOP field by 41 points and he’s beating Biden handily in a rematch
They’re trying to put him in federal prison while a million man invasion in happening in Texas
Anybody who’s still pushing for a divisive primary does not have our best interest in mind
11:19 AM · May 9, 2023
Couldn't agree more. And the one who is determined to make the primaries divisive is Trump himself.
The GOP has never had a problem in the past rallying around the winner of the primary. And that's because Republican contenders for the nomination generally went scorched earth only against Democrats, not against fellow Republicans. Against other Republicans, they'd simply state their policy differences and argue why they were the best alternative, not why everyone else would be such a horrible alternative.
Trump has deliberately chosen to go scorched earth against anyone who dares to challenge him in the primaries. And in fact, most of his supporters cheer him on when he does that. They celebrate his attacks on other Republicans as evidence that he is a take no prisoners, tough guy. So it is Trump, and Trump alone, who would be responsible for a divisive primary. And it is his supporters who actuallly cheer on his divisiveness.
Of course, Trump doesn't care if the primaries are divisive as long as he is the nominee. And that's a perfect example of why it is Trump who "does not have our best interests at heart."
-
It is utterly remarkable how Trump supporters who are so quick to label other people as snowflakes, and so quick to celebrate Trump as a "fighter", are so outraged that anyone in the GOP uses his own tactics against him.
Trump is the ultimate snowflake. I don't think I've ever heard any politician, Republican or Democrat, whine as much when he is criticized as does Trump.
-
A second Trump term will be an unmitigated disaster
Only for those who object to peace, prosperity, security, freedom and strength.
-
I don't think ....
This pointing-up is the essence of your post, minus the usual spam.
-
Cutting Social Security and Medicare sounds like a great idea when a conservative is a member of the House of Reps, but not so much when running for President.
////00000////
[insert name here] for President 2024
"No free-loading grandmas and grandpas on my watch."
-
Couldn't agree more. And the one who is determined to make the primaries divisive is Trump himself.
The GOP has never had a problem in the past rallying around the winner of the primary. And that's because Republican contenders for the nomination generally went scorched earth only against Democrats, not against fellow Republicans. Against other Republicans, they'd simply state their policy differences and argue why they were the best alternative, not why everyone else would be such a horrible alternative.
Trump has deliberately chosen to go scorched earth against anyone who dares to challenge him in the primaries. And in fact, most of his supporters cheer him on when he does that. They celebrate his attacks on other Republicans as evidence that he is a take no prisoners, tough guy. So it is Trump, and Trump alone, who would be responsible for a divisive primary. And it is his supporters who actuallly cheer on his divisiveness.
Of course, Trump doesn't care if the primaries are divisive as long as he is the ninee And that's a perfect example of why it is Trump who "does not have our best interests at heart."
:thumbsup:
-
Cutting Social Security and Medicare sounds like a great idea when a conservative is a member of the House of Reps, but not so much when running for President.
////00000////
[insert name here] for President 2024
"No free-loading grandmas and grandpas on my watch."
Guess that makes Trump one of those go along to get along kind of guys, right? Afraid to say or do what's right because of the political reaction.
-
This pointing-up is the essence of your post, minus the usual spam.
And the essence of your post once again avoids addressing the substance of the post you are attacking.
At least you're consistent.
-
Trump was never a fiscal conservative. He was always profligate with Other People's Money.
////00000////
Could we at least cut P.B.S., the National Endowment for the Arts, and foreign aid before we start throwing the elderly, the disabled, and veterans out on the street?
-
While I don't expect DeSantis to come out with any national policy statements since he hasn't declared, I can't find any articles on what legislation he has written or proposed for Florida.
All I could find were articles on bills he has signed. That doesn't show me much.
If he declares he will have to do some talking to convince me he would be something more than a DC toady. A rubber stamp man.
Rubberstamp Ron.
-
While I don't expect DeSantis to come out with any national policy statements since he hasn't declared, I can't find any articles on what legislation he has written or proposed for Florida.
All I could find were articles on bills he has signed. That doesn't show me much.
If he declares he will have to do some talking to convince me he would be something more than a DC toady. A rubber stamp man.
Rubberstamp Ron.
DeSantis has a GOP majority in both Houses -- legislation has been proposed, passed and then signed.
https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/immigration/desantis-anti-immigration-bill-florida-senate/
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/ron-desantis-priorities-top-florida-legislative-session-rcna72564
https://www.flgov.com/2023/02/15/governor-ron-desantis-introduces-groundbreaking-legislation-to-protect-the-digital-rights-and-privacy-of-all-floridians/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2023/04/16/ron-desantis-florida-proposals/
https://apnews.com/article/desantis-florida-legislature-government-7c43252dbc4366e6f36d7f1b88d5cec0
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2023/02/27/new-florida-bill-aims-enact-desantiss-higher-ed-reforms
https://www.fldoe.org/newsroom/latest-news/icymi-governor-ron-desantis-announces-unprecedented-legislation-to-empower-educators-protect-teachers-from-overreaching-school-unions-and-raise-teacher-pay.stml
-
Thanks for that @libertybele
-
DeSantis was first elected to the US House as a Tea Party Candidate as opposed to Trump, the Preparation H Candidate.
-
DeSantis was first elected to the US House as a Tea Party Candidate [...]
And a founding member of the House Freedom Caucus...
-
While I don't expect DeSantis to come out with any national policy statements since he hasn't declared, I can't find any articles on what legislation he has written or proposed for Florida.
All I could find were articles on bills he has signed. That doesn't show me much.
If he declares he will have to do some talking to convince me he would be something more than a DC toady. A rubber stamp man.
Rubberstamp Ron.
Ok, so what is Trump's proposal to help Social Security and Medicare?
Why didn't Trump do anything about it the first time he was President?
-
Ok, so what is Trump's proposal to help Social Security and Medicare?
Why didn't Trump do anything about it the first time he was President?
For starters:
Trump payroll plan would deplete Social Security by 2023: Administrator
https://thehill.com/policy/finance/513556-trump-payroll-plan-would-deplete-social-security-by-2023-administrator/
-
Ok, so what is Trump's proposal to help Social Security and Medicare?
Why didn't Trump do anything about it the first time he was President?
I believe Trump's current stance is to not touch SS/Medicare. His first time around was for cuts.
Trump will say whatever he thinks will be politically expedient at the time. And for now, it is no changes.
Ultimately it is up to Congress.
-
I believe Trump's current stance is to not touch SS/Medicare. His first time around was for cuts.
Trump will say whatever he thinks will be politically expedient at the time. And for now, it is no changes.
Ultimately it is up to Congress.
So passing the buck right?
-
So passing the buck right?
Right. Sort of. I found this article from a couple of months ago. It is from Politico.
Trump ties GOP in knots over Medicare and Social Security
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/03/01/trump-gop-medicare-social-security-00084845
-
I believe Trump's current stance is to not touch SS/Medicare. His first time around was for cuts.
Trump will say whatever he thinks will be politically expedient at the time. And for now, it is no changes.
Ultimately it is up to Congress.
Politically expedient or politically convenient? Accusing DeSantis of the wheelchair crappola is deceitful and doesn't accomplish a darn thing.
Trump had his chance as president to address this situation; especially with a full majority his first two years.
-
When DeSantis declares and brings out his plan for saving SS/Medicare AND the electorate is well receptive to it, Trump will steal it and declare it was his policy all along and run with it just as he did with Cruz's Immigration Policy.
-
Politically expedient or politically convenient? Accusing DeSantis of the wheelchair crappola is deceitful and doesn't accomplish a darn thing.
Trump had his chance as president to address this situation; especially with a full majority his first two years.
:thumbsup:
-
Politically expedient or politically convenient? Accusing DeSantis of the wheelchair crappola is deceitful and doesn't accomplish a darn thing.
Trump had his chance as president to address this situation; especially with a full majority his first two years.
Trump and other big government Republicans are part of the problem, really no different from the dems in this regard. It will be just like Obamacare … the media will ask him time and again for his solution to the looming SSA crisis, and he will blather about Hunter Biden.
-
Politically expedient or politically convenient? Accusing DeSantis of the wheelchair crappola is deceitful and doesn't accomplish a darn thing.
Trump had his chance as president to address this situation; especially with a full majority his first two years.
Expedient -convenient, six of one.
Trump had proposed cuts in his budgets.
-
Expedient -convenient, six of one.
Trump had proposed cuts in his budgets.
Ok so you are saying that Trump wanted to make cuts to SS and Medicare -- so who's the one throwing granny off the cliff in a wheel chair??
-
And the essence of your post once again avoids addressing the substance of the post you are attacking.
You're accusing me of not addressing your :bs: spam? GUILTY! :mauslaff:
-
And a founding member of the House Freedom Caucus...
Tea Party, Freedom Caucus, MAGA ....... I wonder what he thinks will help him next? :pondering:
-
Tea Party, Freedom Caucus, MAGA ....... I wonder what he thinks will help him next? :pondering:
@Right_in_Virginia ---
https://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/house-freedom-caucus-conservative-legislation-114593
https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/05/07/404805852/meet-the-tea-partys-new-favorite-candidate
His record of governor of FL will speak for itself. happy77
-
Tea Party, Freedom Caucus, MAGA ....... I wonder what he thinks will help him next? :pondering:
Being a straight-shooter who gets stuff accomplished, unlike Trump, who mostly just floundered around, made himself look stupid, weakened the presidency in certain respects, and mostly threw bombs that did more damage to the GOP than they did to libs/dems/progs.
-
Tea Party, Freedom Caucus, MAGA ....... I wonder what he thinks will help him next? :pondering:
So far, he's been TEA ... pretty much the same all along.
-
Ok, so what is Trump's proposal to help Social Security and Medicare?
From @realDonaldTrump: The pain must be borne by Washington, DC bureaucrats, not American families and American seniors. End the billions of taxpayer dollars in foreign aid to currupt countries; end the billions of dollars in Green New Deal extremism; secure our border and end the mass release of illegal aliens depleting our social safety net; end the millions being spent on military left wing gender programs; end all waste, fraud and abuse ---- but DO NOT CUT Social Security/Medicare for our seniors.
10:55 AM · Jan 20, 2023
-
So far, he's been TEA ... pretty much the same all along.
I don't think Desantis knows who or what he is from moment to moment. :shrug:
-
I don't think Desantis knows who or what he is from moment to moment. :shrug:
Are you trying to sling enough mud and hoping something sticks @Right_in_Virginia ???
I have yet to hear DeSantis backpedal on any issue. He knows exactly who he is and his actions demonstrate that. He is a conservative period; and that includes being a member of TEA and the Freedom Caucus and a really good governor here in FL.
Next.
-
Are you trying to sling enough mud and hoping something sticks @Right_in_Virginia ???
I have yet to hear DeSantis backpedal on any issue. He knows exactly who he is and his actions demonstrate that. He is a conservative period; and that includes being a member of TEA and the Freedom Caucus and a really good governor here in FL.
Next.
That's right. Mind you that I ain't really paying attention... I have only taken a cursory glance... But then, a cursory glance is all it took. :beer:
-
Being a straight-shooter who gets stuff accomplished, unlike Trump, who mostly just floundered around, made himself look stupid, weakened the presidency in certain respects, and mostly threw bombs that did more damage to the GOP than they did to libs/dems/progs.
DeSantis is a political hack blessed with a super majority in the statehouse and a Republican supreme court. He has never fought for anything in his political life, except his first run for governor ---- and he put that challenge in Trump's hands.
Ronnie is a snot-nosed wannabe who is an empty vessel with seasoned handlers and a voracious appetite for their spin.
-
Are you trying to sling enough mud and hoping something sticks @Right_in_Virginia ???
I have yet to hear DeSantis backpedal on any issue.
You've also never heard DeSantis take the lead on anything ------ except fighting Disney, putting 75,0000 Floridian jobs at risk ending up with untold taxpayers millions in legal and court fees.
Yeah, this guy's a real treasure. :laugh:
-
You've also never heard DeSantis take the lead on anything ------ except fighting Disney, putting 75,0000 Floridian jobs at risk ending up with untold taxpayers millions in legal and court fees.
Yeah, this guy's a real treasure. :laugh:
You mean signing three dozen bills in one day isn't taking the lead?
-
It’s painfully obvious Trump doesn’t understand the concept of “unfunded liabilities”
It’s the old, “ if we just cut fraud and waste, we don’t need to touch SS and Medicare” mindset
But then again, he is the self proclaimed “King of Debt.”
-
You've also never heard DeSantis take the lead on anything ------ except fighting Disney, putting 75,0000 Floridian jobs at risk ending up with untold taxpayers millions in legal and court fees.
Yeah, this guy's a real treasure. :laugh:
Are you telling me what I've heard and not heard???? He took the lead on COVID, he took the lead after Ian, he took the lead on abortion, he took the lead on the 2A, etc. .... again slinging mud with Trumpian talking points is frivolous
I get that you realize that you see DeSantis as a huge threat and are trying to discredit him. I can only imagine what a tizzy you're going to be in if indeed he actually announces he's running. :laugh:
Bottom line; Trump IS attacking DeSantis once again. He's attacking someone who hasn't even announced that they're running. A tad ridiculous.
-
You mean signing three dozen bills in one day isn't taking the lead?
Again, DeSantis suggested or proposed an idea and his legislature passed the bills - DeSantis then signed. I gave you links with several examples.
DeSantis is a competent, conservative leader who gets things done.
-
Again, DeSantis suggested or proposed an idea and his legislature passed the bills - DeSantis then signed. I gave you links with several examples.
DeSantis is a competent, conservative leader who gets things done.
He also has a full GOP statehouse that makes his job easier. That’s not an advantage he would have with Congress. That competent leadership would be tested a lot more in Congress
And the US Congress has no shortage of members that believe government is the answer
-
He also has a full GOP statehouse that makes his job easier. That’s not an advantage he would have with Congress. That competent leadership would be tested a lot more in Congress
And the US Congress has no shortage of members that believe government is the answer
TRUE, but then, a governorship is the vetted proving ground for presidents... So off the cuff, I would take that bet over a failed president anytime.
-
He also has a full GOP statehouse that makes his job easier. That’s not an advantage he would have with Congress. That competent leadership would be tested a lot more in Congress
And the US Congress has no shortage of members that believe government is the answer
Oh, absolutely with a mostly GOP congress his job is much easier and he is taking advantage of that and getting a lot done.
No, he wouldn't likely have that advantage as President. However, who knows whether or not the GOP House will expand their majority or will the Senate expand theirs. Both Trump or DeSantis would be facing the same scenario so IMHO it's truly a vote for who is more conservative in the primaries should DeSantis run. Hands down DeSantis is more conservative.
-
Oh, absolutely with a mostly GOP congress his job is much easier and he is taking advantage of that and getting a lot done.
No, he wouldn't likely have that advantage as President. However, who knows whether or not the GOP House will expand their majority or will the Senate expand theirs. Both Trump or DeSantis would be facing the same scenario so IMHO it's truly a vote for who is more conservative in the primaries should DeSantis run. Hands down DeSantis is more conservative.
That depends... If he comes in on a mandate, you might be surprised how many suddenly get a backbone... And the TEA party would come suddenly back to life - It is still there you know... I continue to meet will TEA Partiers for the region.
Compared to a divisive president who has split the party, A man who can draw together the Conservative Coalition will do a helluva lot more. And the sky's the limit if he calls for moderate leadership to step down, and can get that done.
-
He also has a full GOP statehouse that makes his job easier. That’s not an advantage he would have with Congress. That competent leadership would be tested a lot more in Congress
And the US Congress has no shortage of members that believe government is the answer
And Trump started off with a GOP controlled Congress and still couldn’t get anything done. So even on that count, DeSantis is probably better than Trump as a political leader.
-
TRUE, but then, a governorship is the vetted proving ground for presidents... So off the cuff, I would take that bet over a failed president anytime.
:thumbsup:
-
Too much time on my hands.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CqnU-BcrXBA/
-
And Trump started off with a GOP controlled Congress and still couldn’t get anything done. So even on that count, DeSantis is probably better than Trump as a political leader.
Trump started off with an antagonistic GOPe controlled Congress. Coalition building takes all parties to be involved. Trump never had that.
-
Trump started off with an antagonistic GOPe controlled Congress. Coalition building takes all parties to be involved. Trump never had that.
Ah, but wasn't Trump supposedly the ultimate deal maker? He didn't use the best people and was unable to form that coalition; that is on him. He created divisiveness and still is. The GOPe still is the majority. That is why I will never vote for anyone other than a conservative -- the RINO's need to go.
-
Too much time on my hands.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CqnU-BcrXBA/
LOL
-
Trump started off with an antagonistic GOPe controlled Congress. Coalition building takes all parties to be involved. Trump never had that.
Trump personalizes every disagreement, and insults those who disagree with him on anything. That alienated some RINOs who might otherwise have been persuadable.
That same approach of pissing off everyone who disagrees with him because he thinks insults are funny are likely why we lost a massive 41 seats in the midterms, and handed the House back to Nancy Pelosi. He deliberately alienates anyone who isn't already a supporter.
You just can't do that if you want to be a successful politician The lefties are always going to vote for the left, conservatives are going to vote conservatives, so the key is getting as many people in the middle as you can. A lot of those people are not voters on issues, but on things like personality and how "Presidential" someone seems. Trump loses almost all those obtainable votes because of who he is and how he acts.
We've already seen that show in his first term. I can't imagine how a second term, post-Jamuary 6 and post-lawsuit/conviction Trump would be any more appealing to independents than he was in his first term.
-
Trump started off with an antagonistic GOPe controlled Congress.
Trump started off married and deeply committed to the GOP Establishment. That was his coalition.
-
Trump started off with an antagonistic GOPe controlled Congress. Coalition building takes all parties to be involved. Trump never had that.
Boo-hoo-hoo.
Thank you for admitting that Trump was not a leader.
That’s not the way it works; this isn’t some new agey “everyone has to consent” bullshit. This is the age-old art of political leadership, in which an actual leader can figure out how to herd cats.
Trump was such a failure as a political leader that he couldn’t even corral the cats that were already on his side of the fence, let alone the other side.
Face facts: Trump was a pretty decent businessman, but a complete failure at political leadership, which just goes to show that skill in business does NOT translate into skill in political leadership, so idolizing big business leaders is just another useless, self-defeating fetish.
-
Trump personalizes every disagreement, and insults those who disagree with him on anything. That alienated some RINOs who might otherwise have been persuadable.
That same approach of pissing off everyone who disagrees with him because he thinks insults are funny are likely why we lost a massive 41 seats in the midterms, and handed the House back to Nancy Pelosi. He deliberately alienates anyone who isn't already a supporter.
You just can't do that if you want to be a successful politician The lefties are always going to vote for the left, conservatives are going to vote conservatives, so the key is getting as many people in the middle as you can. A lot of those people are not voters on issues, but on things like personality and how "Presidential" someone seems. Trump loses almost all those obtainable votes because of who he is and how he acts.
We've already seen that show in his first term. I can't imagine how a second term, post-Jamuary 6 and post-lawsuit/conviction Trump would be any more appealing to independents than he was in his first term.
:thumbsup:
-
Boo-hoo-hoo.
Thank you for admitting that Trump was not a leader.
That’s not the way it works; this isn’t some new agey “everyone has to consent” bullshit. This is the age-old art of political leadership, in which an actual leader can figure out how to herd cats.
Trump was such a failure as a political leader that he couldn’t even corral the cats that were already on his side of the fence, let alone the other side.
Face facts: Trump was a pretty decent businessman, but a complete failure at political leadership, which just goes to show that skill in business does NOT translate into skill in political leadership, so idolizing big business leaders is just another useless, self-defeating fetish.
That's damn well right.
-
Boo-hoo-hoo.
Thank you for admitting that Trump was not a leader.
That’s not the way it works; this isn’t some new agey “everyone has to consent” bullshit. This is the age-old art of political leadership, in which an actual leader can figure out how to herd cats.
Trump was such a failure as a political leader that he couldn’t even corral the cats that were already on his side of the fence, let alone the other side.
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2FNSpCUJmOHq1P2%2Fgiphy-downsized-large.gif&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=04ad95c376834a8a2624ff08b5160c25079e2439cc58ff49384f0687b269a20c&ipo=images)
-
That’s not the way it works; this isn’t some new agey “everyone has to consent” bullshit. This is the age-old art of political leadership, in which an actual leader can figure out how to herd cats.
And look what all those decades of age-old political leadership have done to this country. We're being crushed by the golden age of the Uniparty, and you're crying out, pleading for more from it.
I don't know if you refuse to believe the tectonic shift in the national political paradigm that took place in 2016, or if you simply don't understand it. The Uniparty certainly understands what happened, and why --- so do the DOJ, FBI, CIA; and they're all deadly serious about stopping it. Why are you helping them?
-
And look what all those decades of age-old political leadership have done to this country. We're being crushed by the golden age of the Uniparty, and you're crying out, pleading for more from it.
I don't know if you refuse to believe the tectonic shift in the national political paradigm that took place in 2016, or if you simply don't understand it. The Uniparty certainly understands what happened, and why --- so do the DOJ, FBI, CIA; and they're all deadly serious about stopping it. Why are you helping them?
So let me get this straight... Trump was unable to do the stuff the first time around so let's give him another chance to fail. Sorry, but you can blame the so-called GOPe, Uniparty, or some other talk radio BS all you want. The fact is this Trump failed the first time around. Reagan was able to get a lot of his agenda through and he had a Democrat control Congress to work with.
Yes, he didn't get all he wanted, but that is life. Sometimes you win some or lose some. But he knew that you go for the easy victories and then fight another day.
-
So let me get this straight... Trump was unable to do the stuff the first time around so let's give him another chance to fail. Sorry, but you can blame the so-called GOPe, Uniparty, or some other talk radio BS all you want. The fact is this Trump failed the first time around. Reagan was able to get a lot of his agenda through and he had a Democrat control Congress to work with.
Yes, he didn't get all he wanted, but that is life. Sometimes you win some or lose some. But he knew that you go for the easy victories and then fight another day.
Exactly. Why elect a proven loser for a second round of losing?
-
Exactly. Why elect a proven loser for a second round of losing?
Exactly... Also, I'm done with the so-called fights on social media. I want an American President to act Presidential. The Bull in the China shop routine is old and tiresome.
-
And look what all those decades of age-old political leadership have done to this country. We're being crushed by the golden age of the Uniparty, and you're crying out, pleading for more from it.
I don't know if you refuse to believe the tectonic shift in the national political paradigm that took place in 2016, or if you simply don't understand it. The Uniparty certainly understands what happened, and why --- so do the DOJ, FBI, CIA; and they're all deadly serious about stopping it. Why are you helping them?
People have been hoodwinked successfully by charismatic politicians since the beginning of the Republic, convinced that this singular person -- and only that person -- can make all their dreams come true.
They never do.
Fortunately, they all have a shelf life that expires sooner or later. That includes your modern-day Huey Long.
-
Exactly... Also, I'm done with the so-called fights on social media. I want an American President to act Presidential. The Bull in the China shop routine is old and tiresome.
Same here. Ronald Reagan was a bomb-thrower before he became President, with all his lines about the evils of government etc. And he was right about all of it. But once elected, he successfully took that passion and turned it into real, durable action. He built coalitions while sticking to his principles, and as a result was the most consequential President since FDR. The problem with being just a Bull in the China shop is that once you've smashed everything, you're incapable of building anything better.
Trump identified a single issue in which the GOP had been out of step with the grass roots for decades, and that was immigration. People rightly were pissed that nobody was listening to them, and that was the issue that got him the nomination. The problem is that the same style that won him the nomination made him incapable of building legislative support, so all we got were stop gaps and emergency funding that wasn't even all used. As a consequence, barely two years after he left office, we're now faced with the single biggest flood of illegal immigrants ever. I honestly cannot fathom the logic behind why we should expect it to be any different if he were somehow to win a second term. All his bombast, all his loud promises, would once again amount to nothing more than a fart in a high wind. And the second he'd be out of office, it would all crumble once again.
We've already seen this movie once. Seeing it a second time isn't going to change the ending.
-
Same here. Ronald Reagan was a bomb-thrower before he became President, with all his lines about the evils of government etc. And he was right about all of it. But once elected, he successfully took that passion and turned it into real, durable action. He built coalitions while sticking to his principles, and as a result was the most consequential President since FDR. The problem with being just a Bull in the China shop is that once you've smashed everything, you're incapable of building anything better.
Trump identified a single issue in which the GOP had been out of step with the grass roots for decades, and that was immigration. People rightly were pissed that nobody was listening to them, and that was the issue that got him the nomination. The problem is that the same style that won him the nomination made him incapable of building legislative support, so all we got were stop gaps and emergency funding that wasn't even all used. As a consequence, barely two years after he left office, we're now faced with the single biggest flood of illegal immigrants ever. I honestly cannot fathom the logic behind why we should expect it to be any different if he were somehow to win a second term. All his bombast, all his loud promises, would once again amount to nothing more than a fart in a high wind. And the second he'd be out of office, it would all crumble once again.
We've already seen this movie once. Seeing it a second time isn't going to change the ending.
:thumbsup:
-
Same here. Ronald Reagan was a bomb-thrower before he became President, with all his lines about the evils of government etc. And he was right about all of it. But once elected, he successfully took that passion and turned it into real, durable action. He built coalitions while sticking to his principles, and as a result was the most consequential President since FDR. The problem with being just a Bull in the China shop is that once you've smashed everything, you're incapable of building anything better.
Trump identified a single issue in which the GOP had been out of step with the grass roots for decades, and that was immigration. People rightly were pissed that nobody was listening to them, and that was the issue that got him the nomination. The problem is that the same style that won him the nomination made him incapable of building legislative support, so all we got were stop gaps and emergency funding that wasn't even all used. As a consequence, barely two years after he left office, we're now faced with the single biggest flood of illegal immigrants ever. I honestly cannot fathom the logic behind why we should expect it to be any different if he were somehow to win a second term. All his bombast, all his loud promises, would once again amount to nothing more than a fart in a high wind. And the second he'd be out of office, it would all crumble once again.
We've already seen this movie once. Seeing it a second time isn't going to change the ending.
Also, the founding fathers set up a wonderful system of governance. To their fault, they didn't foresee us electing a reality game show host and some old fart who doesn't even know where he is.
:amen:
-
Tip O'Neill was full of pizz and vinegar upon Reagan's Election in 80. 8 years later they were best of Friends.
That is how you Govern, successfully.
-
So let me get this straight... Trump was unable to do the stuff the first time around so let's give him another chance to fail.
Not at all @kevindavis007 I'm of the opinion that Trump did so damn well inspite of forces from hell, bring him back! We need him even more now.
Sorry, but you can blame the so-called GOPe, Uniparty, or some other talk radio BS all you want
The Uniparty and their weaponized DOJ, FBI, CIA are the enemy. I don't know how talk radio got on your list, but it looks like you crossed some Marxist talking points. You might want to check your notes.
Reagan was able to get a lot of his agenda through and he had a Democrat control Congress to work with
So, amnesty for illegals was Reagan's agenda? How about increasing the national debt ---- was this keeping a campaign promise? Come to think of it, just what "Reagan agenda" did he get through Congress and sign into law? Enlighten me.
-
Tip O'Neill was full of pizz and vinegar upon Reagan's Election in 80. 8 years later they were best of Friends.
That is how you Govern, successfully.
Sure ---- Tip was a happy man. He brought a conservative icon straight to amnesty. Some would call *this* leadership. :laugh:
-
Not at all @kevindavis007 I'm of the opinion that Trump did so damn well inspite of forces from hell, bring him back! We need him even more now.
The Uniparty and their weaponized DOJ, FBI, CIA are the enemy. I don't know how talk radio got on your list, but it looks like you crossed some Marxist talking points. You might want to check your notes.
So, amnesty for illegals was Reagan's agenda? How about increasing the national debt ---- was this keeping a campaign promise? Come to think of it, just what "Reagan agenda" did he get through Congress and sign into law? Enlighten me.
Again spare me with Talk Radio BS! The only thing that held Trump back was Trump! Not Deep State, not the GOPe, Not the Uniparty. It was Trump!
Reagan wasn't perfect, but I may remind you something... HE HAD A MANDATE! HE WON REFLECTION!
Trump barely beat Hillary Clinton and lost legitimately, to Joe Frickin Biden!
Sorry, I want someone new and YOUNGER in 2024!
-
Again spare me with Talk Radio BS! The only thing that held Trump back was Trump! Not Deep State, not the GOPe, Not the Uniparty. It was Trump!
I'll spare you nothing. If this upsets you, scroll on by.
Reagan wasn't perfect, but I may remind you something... HE HAD A MANDATE! HE WON REFLECTION!
You still haven't defined Reagan's legacy. It's appearing more likely that Reagan actually squandered ( *bouche* ) his electoral victory.
Sorry, I want someone new and YOUNGER in 2024!
Sounds like someone needs a puppy. :chien:
-
A perspective.
Ronald Reagan (1981-1989)
President Reagan increased the debt by $1.86 trillion, or by 186%. Reagan's supply-side economics didn't grow the economy enough to offset the lost revenue from its tax cuts. Reagan also increased the defense budget by 35%.2
Donald Trump
At the end of fiscal year 2020, the debt was $26.9 trillion. Trump added $6.7 trillion to the debt between fiscal year 2017 and fiscal year 2020, a 33.1% increase, largely due to the effects of the coronavirus pandemic and 2020 recession.
-
Tip O'Neill was full of pizz and vinegar upon Reagan's Election in 80. 8 years later they were best of Friends.
That is how you Govern, successfully.
They were actually good friends after 5 PM, Washington DC time
I am more of a Coolidge/Goldwater conservative. Maybe I’ll end up writing in Calvin Coolidge for the 2024 presidential election. We can’t afford any more of the GWB/Obama/Trump/Biden era
-
A perspective.
Ronald Reagan (1981-1989)
President Reagan increased the debt by $1.86 trillion, or by 186%. Reagan's supply-side economics didn't grow the economy enough to offset the lost revenue from its tax cuts. Reagan also increased the defense budget by 35%.2
Donald Trump
At the end of fiscal year 2020, the debt was $26.9 trillion. Trump added $6.7 trillion to the debt between fiscal year 2017 and fiscal year 2020, a 33.1% increase, largely due to the effects of the coronavirus pandemic and 2020 recession.
You got in the orange koolaid again, didn't you?
Actually, Reagan's trickle down economy lasted twenty years. Two decades. The most unprecedented growth in our history. Tumpy's didn't even make it through his own presidency.
And your numbers suck. Recheck your work.
-
They were actually good friends after 5 PM, Washington DC time
I am more of a Coolidge/Goldwater conservative. Maybe I’ll end up writing in Calvin Coolidge for the 2024 presidential election. We can’t afford any more of the GWB/Obama/Trump/Biden era
They disagreed, fought hard, but never took it personally. That's how Reagan was able to get so much of his agenda enacted in 1981 despite Democrats having a majority in the House. Reagan could peel away enough Democrats on those votes because he didn't always make it "us" v. "them". Trump so deliberately alienates as a personal matter everyone who disagrees with him that people refuse to support his agenda even if they agree with some of it.
-
You got in the orange koolaid again, didn't you?
Actually, Reagan's trickle down economy lasted twenty years. Two decades. The most unprecedented growth in our history. Tumpy's didn't even make it through his own presidency.
And your numbers suck. Recheck your work.
Don't kill the messenger. :shrug:
https://www.thebalancemoney.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296
-
Don't kill the messenger. :shrug:
https://www.thebalancemoney.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296
Go add up the bills Tumpy actually signed.
-
Not at all @kevindavis007 I'm of the opinion that Trump did so damn well inspite of forces from hell, bring him back! We need him even more now.
The Uniparty and their weaponized DOJ, FBI, CIA are the enemy. I don't know how talk radio got on your list, but it looks like you crossed some Marxist talking points. You might want to check your notes.
So, amnesty for illegals was Reagan's agenda? How about increasing the national debt ---- was this keeping a campaign promise? Come to think of it, just what "Reagan agenda" did he get through Congress and sign into law? Enlighten me.
:mauslaff:
In other words, Trump was such a lame failure as a leader, he couldn't get anything done, and you want sloppy seconds of a lame failure.
Wow. The cult of personality runs deep.
-
MAGA’s are all over the map when it comes to the debt incurred under Donald Trump’s watch it’s hard to tell what their position is. They either do a “Reagan did it, too(which is true)” or make the dubious claim that Donald Trump had nothing to do with it because it was all spending agreements made by the previous administration. Or, failing at those two, and this one makes me smile, he was afraid to fight Congress over spending so he was forced to sign
But when Trump entered office, debt to GDP ratio was already over 100%. He helped grow that. And I suppose if you wanted to make an argument over Covid spending, that would be a fair argument to make.
The problem is he’s promising even more spending should he be reelected.
-
:mauslaff:
In other words, Trump was such a lame failure as a leader, he couldn't get anything done, and you want sloppy seconds of a lame failure.
Wow. The cult of personality runs deep.
We are tribal and emotional beings. We are made to form emotional bonds and defend our “tribes” against all enemies, real or perceived
I would think the last group of people anybody would want to form emotional bonds with are people running for office. They should all be viewed with a healthy amount of skepticism simply because they wield power.
Reagan’s granting of amnesty for illegal immigrants was probably the biggest black eye of his presidency. US policy should never be to reward people who don’t follow our laws.
I remember when he did that and people swarmed over the border
-
A perspective.
Ronald Reagan (1981-1989)
President Reagan increased the debt by $1.86 trillion, or by 186%. Reagan's supply-side economics didn't grow the economy enough to offset the lost revenue from its tax cuts. Reagan also increased the defense budget by 35%.2
Donald Trump
At the end of fiscal year 2020, the debt was $26.9 trillion. Trump added $6.7 trillion to the debt between fiscal year 2017 and fiscal year 2020, a 33.1% increase, largely due to the effects of the coronavirus pandemic and 2020 recession.
Then how come Trump lost?
-
Then how come Trump lost?
Piss Poor Political Practice
-
It was just a fluke* that he beat hellary, IMHO.
* fluke
an unlikely chance occurrence, especially a surprising piece of luck
-
Then how come Trump lost?
He didn't.
-
Piss Poor Political Practice
So you want another round Piss Poor Political Practice?
-
It was just a fluke* that he beat hellary, IMHO.
* fluke
an unlikely chance occurrence, especially a surprising piece of luck
:yowsa:
-
Then how come Trump lost?
The election was stolen period. End of story. We're going to be up against the same scenario in '24; nothing has changed and now we have MILLIONS of ILLEGALS that will more than likely be granted amnesty and given voting rights.
-
He didn't.
If he didn't he would still be in office.
-
It was just a fluke* that he beat hellary, IMHO.
* fluke
an unlikely chance occurrence, especially a surprising piece of luck
A lot of Democrats stayed home in 2016 because they thought Hillary already had it in the bag
They didn’t make that mistake in 2018, 2020, and especially 2022. And Trump only won because our system elects presidents based on the electoral college, not the popular vote. It’s a little something that the framers had the wisdom to put in the constitution to keep the more populated areas from easily dominating less populated areas
After Trump lost in 2020, I remember having a conversation with somebody who was upset that Donald Trump won in 2016 and wanted the electoral college abolished. I told him he would’ve switched his position if Donald Trump won the popular vote but Biden won the EC
-
A lot of Democrats stayed home in 2016 because they thought Hillary already had it in the bag
They didn’t make that mistake in 2018, 2020, and especially 2022. And Trump only won because our system elects presidents based on the electoral college, not the popular vote. It’s a little something that the framers had the wisdom to put in the constitution to keep the more populated areas from easily dominating less populated areas
After Trump lost in 2020, I remember having a conversation with somebody who was upset that Donald Trump won in 2016 and wanted the electoral college abolished. I told him he would’ve switched his position if Donald Trump won the popular vote but Biden won the EC
I bet you if the opposite happened, a lot of MAGA people would be calling for the Electoral College to go away.
-
:thumbsup:
-
The election was stolen period. End of story. We're going to be up against the same scenario in '24; nothing has changed and now we have MILLIONS of ILLEGALS that will more than likely be granted amnesty and given voting rights.
It wasn't stolen. He ran a crappy campaign end of story.
-
So you want another round Piss Poor Political Practice?
As it stands now.
-
It wasn't stolen. He ran a crappy campaign end of story.
I wouldn’t say he ran a crappy campaign. He was just very unpopular with the general electorate
After Hillary lost in 2016, I went to check out, left-wing blogs to see what they had to say about it and they made all the same claims about the stolen election. Russian interference caused her loss. Faulty voting machines. You name it.
That doesn’t mean I don’t agree that the 2020 election, with the stupid Covid rules, was a mess and that there needs to be some cleaning up. But I will remain very agnostic on the idea that 2020 was stolen from Trump.
I know it stings to lose. And it’s hard to accept that a candidate one passionately supports could lose. But it happens.
-
:mauslaff:
In other words, Trump was such a lame failure as a leader, he couldn't get anything done, and you want sloppy seconds of a lame failure.
Wow. The cult of personality runs deep.
I love it when the MAGA's slam Reagan. A perfect illustration of who truly are Republicans in Name Only.
Reagan's defense build-up is what ended up bringing down the Soviet Union, and that generated the massive "peace dividend" that actually let Clinton run a surplus for a bit. It more than paid for itself in the end.
-
Reagan's defense build-up is what ended up bringing down the Soviet Union, and that generated the massive "peace dividend" that actually let Clinton run lie about running a surplus for a bit.
There, fixed it. We haven't had a surplus since Eisenhower was in office.
-
There, fixed it. We haven't had a surplus since Eisenhower was in office.
Even though it was the 94 congress that allowed him that brag anyway...
-
If he didn't he would still be in office.
I think you're overwhelmed @kevindavis007 I'd be happy to help you understand what happened in 2020; and why it matters.
-
:mauslaff:
In other words, Trump was such a lame failure as a leader, he couldn't get anything done, and you want sloppy seconds of a lame failure.
Wow. The cult of personality runs deep.
You're not the brightest bulb in the string, are you. :pondering:
No worries, I enjoy how hard you try. Kudos.
-
You're not the brightest bulb in the string, are you. :pondering:
No worries, I enjoy how hard you try. Kudos.
Sorry, but I don't vote for losers like Trump.
-
I think you're overwhelmed @kevindavis007 I'd be happy to help you understand what happened in 2020; and why it matters.
Well, Trump failed to prove it after losing over 60 court cases. I'm still waiting for the Kraken to be released.
-
Sorry, but I don't vote for losers like Trump.
@kevindavis007
I hope you realize my post was in reply to @Kamaji 's post to me. It wasn't to or referencing you. happy77
-
Well, Trump failed to prove it after losing over 60 court cases. I'm still waiting for the Kraken to be released.
Actually, Trump's case wasn't presented in court ..... @kevindavis007 I think the judiciary, including the Supreme Court, running away from this and denying the Trump campaign and the American people their day(s) in court before a jury is one of the most significant travesties perpetrated.
As for the Kraken.....I still hope Sidney Powell loses her license to practice law. :laugh:
-
Actually, Trump's case wasn't presented in court ..... @kevindavis007 I think the judiciary, including the Supreme Court, running away from this and denying the Trump campaign and the American people their day(s) in court before a jury is one of the most significant travesties perpetrated.
As for the Kraken.....I still hope Sidney Powell loses her license to practice law. :laugh:
Well Trump hires the best people.
-
Actually, Trump's case wasn't presented in court ..... @kevindavis007 I think the judiciary, including the Supreme Court, running away from this and denying the Trump campaign and the American people their day(s) in court before a jury is one of the most significant travesties perpetrated.
As for the Kraken.....I still hope Sidney Powell loses her license to practice law. :laugh:
Amen!!!!! (I know this wasn't directed to me but I completely agree).
-
If there's all this uncontrovertible evidence that Trump would have won but for fraud, then why are so many of the people who made those claims -- Giuliani, Sidney Powell, FoxNews, etc.. -- unable to muster any of that evidence to defend themselves against claims of defamation, or the filing of frivolous lawsuits, etc.?
Does anyone still believe the Kraken was real?
-
Well, Trump failed to prove it after losing over 60 court cases. I'm still waiting for the Kraken to be released.
Some of those cases were dismissed for lack of standing, but some weren't. There were also some affirmative legal actions taken against some of those who made some of those claims. The hard evidence just isn't there. A lot of circumstantial stuff, but too much of it was ambiguous/inconclusive.
There is a difference between what you "believe" is true, and what you can prove is true.
-
If there's all this uncontrovertible evidence that Trump would have won but for fraud, then why are so many of the people who made those claims -- Giuliani, Sidney Powell, FoxNews, etc.. -- unable to muster any of that evidence to defend themselves against claims of defamation, or the filing of frivolous lawsuits, etc.?
Their chief mistake was their legal strategy. It would have been an easy task to sue for legal violations and improprieties in the election process. In Georgia, there were blatant violations of State election law beginning in April 2020. But that is not what the Trump advocates sued for. No, their main point of attack was driven by Trump's ego. Fraud, fraud, fraud. Trump, Trump, Trump. Trump was robbed. Trump was defrauded. This was their legal challenge. Unfortunately, fraud is a hell of a lot more difficult to prove than proving that more drop boxes were put in place than state law allows, that chain of custody rules were not followed, and that changes were made to election software without recertifying.
Trump should have seen this coming a year prior. But he chose to fill his ranks with GOP Establishment types who were part of the problem instead of relying on those vested in fixing the system.