The Briefing Room
General Category => Elections 2024 => Topic started by: Kamaji on June 19, 2023, 01:02:35 pm
-
There Are Some Serious Problems With These Polls Right Now
Scott Morefield
June 18, 2023
There's no doubt that former President Donald Trump is leading in GOP primary polling. He's been running for months, one felony indictment after another keeps drawing attention and making him a martyr, and he's running against about 98 other candidates, none of whom are former presidents with a penchant for sucking all the air out of every room they enter.
In a steady second sits Trump's primary challenger, Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. However, recent polling trumpeted by the Trump camp shows the former president's lead over his main competition growing, as well as a competitive general election race between Trump and Biden. The trumpeting seems aimed to present an air of inevitability like this is some sort of coronation instead of a contest. The goal, presumably, seems to be to get everyone to 'rally around Trump' and ignore everyone else based on the belief that he will beat DeSantis and that he can beat Biden.
Consider Harvard Harris, run by former Hillary Clinton pollster Mark Penn. Recent results from this polling outfit show Trump with seemingly insurmountable leads in the GOP primary. They also show the former president competitive in a general election race.
* * *
Look under the hood, and other polls, especially ones attempting to predict the general election, display similar weirdness:
* * *
When it comes to polling, especially this early in a presidential election, always look at the crosstabs and demographic sampling and compare those with complex data from actual past elections. For example, if no Republican has won the women's vote in decades, do you really think Donald Trump is going to be the one to break the cycle?
* * *
Source: https://townhall.com/tipsheet/scottmorefield/2023/06/18/there-are-some-serious-problems-with-these-polls-right-now-n2624649
-
Polls are commissioned by people and the results generally reflect what those who commission them expect.
-
Maybe. Anecdotally, women are the still the ones who buy most groceries.
-
I accidently answered a poll call the other day while driving. So with nothing better to do I took their questions. It was a Presidential Preference poll. Bottom line, it asked in the primary.... if it were held today would you vote Trump or DeSantis. I lied and said Trump.
-
Part of the problem with any polls right now is the campaign season is still in it’s infancy
Although, as of now, I do believe Trump will be the nominee, and he will go on to lose the general election. The hope if that happens is that there’s not a bunch of Trump backed candidates running for the House and Senate, thereby handing the Democrats a full governing majority after 2024.
The one bright spot for the Senate is Democrats have more seats to defend and it would just take just a few Republican pick ups to flip that
-
Maybe. But on the whole, the polls consistently show that DeSantis is not catching fire with the voters and those that support Trump are sticking with him like glue.
Polls are also consistently showing Trump is very competitive against Biden with the trend showing Trump is overtaking him.
-
Maybe. But on the whole, the polls consistently show that DeSantis is not catching fire with the voters and those that support Trump are sticking with him like glue.
Polls are also consistently showing Trump is very competitive against Biden with the trend showing Trump is overtaking him.
And yet TRUMP CAN'T POSSIBLY WIN THE GENERAL ELECTION. Let that sink in.
-
And yet TRUMP CAN'T POSSIBLY WIN THE GENERAL ELECTION. Let that sink in.
They will point to 2016 as an example of Trump being able to win. Hillary voters fell into the assumption that Hillary had it in the bag so a lot of them stayed home, a mistake they didn’t make anymore.
Also, Trump only got a plurality of votes, he did not win the popular vote, and it was the electoral college that bailed him out
Right now the polls reflect a very deep disgust with Biden. But we don’t elect our presidents through a national popular vote. They’re elected state by state. The electoral map is hostile for Republicans, no matter who the nominee is
-
And yet TRUMP CAN'T POSSIBLY WIN THE GENERAL ELECTION. Let that sink in.
@Jack Russell
According to who,you and your friends?
-
They will point to 2016 as an example of Trump being able to win. Hillary voters fell into the assumption that Hillary had it in the bag so a lot of them stayed home, a mistake they didn’t make anymore.
Also, Trump only got a plurality of votes, he did not win the popular vote, and it was the electoral college that bailed him out
Right now the polls reflect a very deep disgust with Biden. But we don’t elect our presidents through a national popular vote. They’re elected state by state. The electoral map is hostile for Republicans, no matter who the nominee is
@LMAO
True,and the ONLY thing that can change that around is to convince the people so disgusted with politics that they need to show up and vote. Which will be a hard uphill climb because they are disgusted with today's politics and politicians.
-
Polls this early are garbage, either way, especially with Trump's legal issues. If the facts that come out as the cases progress make him look good, he'll likely stay on top. If not...then it's a different ball game.
There is also the issue of whether Biden is actually going go be the Dems 2024 nominee. Because if he drops out or is replaced, that probably helps the Dems and hurts Trump.
-
We may see similar elections as we did during the Obama era.
Despite Barack Obama’s average low job approval rating and people not happy with the direction of the country, he still won reelection in 2012. However, after he left office in 2017, Republicans held most of the governorships, they increased their numbers in statehouses, and had a majority in both houses of Congress.
And we may just have to accept that that may be the case for quite a while
-
Polls this early are garbage, either way, especially with Trump's legal issues. If the facts that come out as the cases progress make him look good, he'll likely stay on top. If not...then it's a different ball game.
There is also the issue of whether Biden is actually going go be the Dems 2024 nominee. Because if he drops out or is replaced, that probably helps the Dems and hurts Trump.
@Maj. Bill Martin
Biden is going to drop out due to "Health Issues" so late in the campaign that it will be hard for the alleged Republicans to mount a campaign against him/her/multiple choice.
Biden is nothing more than a highly paid "blocking dummy" for the DNC.
And "No,I do NOT see his VP being allowed to take over his campaign and run in his place."
I see a whole new ticket emerging.
-
Dethroning Trump was always going to be an uphill battle. It is not impossible for Trump to win in the general election, just highly unlikely. I think it is depressing for partisans on both sides right now, looking at the seeming inevitability of what the primaries will yield. At least our side does not have a bunch of gutless cowards afraid to take on the standard-bearer.
-
Polls this far out of the election are as worthless as the polls in early Nov 16 that showed hellary in a landslide.
Meaning they are all useless and a tool of the media.
-
Dethroning Trump was always going to be an uphill battle. It is not impossible for Trump to win in the general election, just highly unlikely. I think it is depressing for partisans on both sides right now, looking at the seeming inevitability of what the primaries will yield. At least our side does not have a bunch of gutless cowards afraid to take on the standard-bearer.
@massadvj
Maybe I've been streaming too many 'action' movies lately.
“The president has put in place an organization that contains a kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life that’s going to be very, very powerful... And that database will have information about everything on every individual in ways that it’s never been done before. He’s been very smart,” Waters said of Obama. “I mean it’s very powerful what he’s leaving in place.”
― Maxine Waters
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2ohTksHIiI
It's not a stretch at all to see why nobody has even suggested challenging Biden.
-
So disgusted voters need to show up to vote for a disgusting candidate (Trump). Uh huh
:silly:
-
So disgusted voters need to show up to vote for a disgusting candidate (Trump). Uh huh
@Jack Russell
Don't worry. I didn't expect you to understand it.
-
I want to give a Shoutout here to the Briefers, who, all along knew that Trump wasn't the answer, you know who you are.
-
@massadvj
Maybe I've been streaming too many 'action' movies lately.
It would take at least 8 years of Republican administrations to undo what Obama put into place. He turned the entire federal government into a political patronage and enforcement arm of the Democratic Party.
-
It would take at least 8 years of Republican administrations to undo what Obama put into place. He turned the entire federal government into a political patronage and enforcement arm of the Democratic Party.
Disagree. It will take one angry man with no looming reelection campaign who knows where the evidence is buried and who put it there to pull down the whole house of cards.
@massadvj
-
@Maj. Bill Martin
Biden is going to drop out due to "Health Issues" so late in the campaign that it will be hard for the alleged Republicans to mount a campaign against him/her/multiple choice.
Biden is nothing more than a highly paid "blocking dummy" for the DNC.
And "No,I do NOT see his VP being allowed to take over his campaign and run in his place."
I see a whole new ticket emerging.
@sneakypete
That may very well be exactly what happens.
Of course, trying to shunt aside the first female black VP completely may not sit too well with certain of their constituencies. But they made that bed, so let them lie in it.
-
Nope. It will take one angry man with no looming reelection campaign who knows where the evidence is buried and who put it there.
If it's the guy you're probably thinking of, he couldn't find his big orange ass with both hands. He's as clueless regarding how the government actually works as is Biden. Maybe even more so, and I'm not even being facetious. He's not just anti-intellectual. He's anti-intelligence.
-
They will point to 2016 as an example of Trump being able to win. Hillary voters fell into the assumption that Hillary had it in the bag so a lot of them stayed home, a mistake they didn’t make anymore.
Also, Trump only got a plurality of votes, he did not win the popular vote, and it was the electoral college that bailed him out
Right now the polls reflect a very deep disgust with Biden. But we don’t elect our presidents through a national popular vote. They’re elected state by state. The electoral map is hostile for Republicans, no matter who the nominee is
With the fraud mechanisms not just still in place, but refined amidst claims of fraud allegedly being "debunked", and a real good handle on the point spread, ensuing GOP candidates will experience seamless and smooth losses to Democrats anywhere that there is any ability to claim the Democrat won in "an upset" or even "close contest".
While the polls don't set the point spread of actual votes, they do set the public's expectation of outcome, even down to establishing that those margins might be close.
-
It would take at least 8 years of Republican administrations to undo what Obama put into place. He turned the entire federal government into a political patronage and enforcement arm of the Democratic Party.
@massadvj
I am not even sure 8 years in a row is enough time to do more than just get things started.
-
Disagree. It will take one angry man with no looming reelection campaign who knows where the evidence is buried and who put it there to pull down the whole house of cards.
@massadvj
@Right_in_Virginia
Trump,IF elected,will need the support of the Party People in order to accomplish anything,and since he and his type of thinking is threatening to the RINO's and other wishy-washy scoundrels in the RNC,he is going to have a tough time getting it because ALL the RNC Party People will see any success by him as a threat to their own positions.
Still,a "verbal bomb thrower" that goes in wanting to make it big in the history books who can ONLY serve one term is what we need because he will be the only candidate not looking to piss people off because he wants to get re-elected 4 years down the road.
I think you will all agree that Trump doesn't worry about pissing people off.
We NEED a "VERBAL bomb-thower" to get the "change process" started,and then we need to have him followed by someone who is just as committed to change,but who has a milder personality and can "make friends".
4 years of Trump,followed by 8 years of a slightly milder but still dedicated conservative president just MIGHT be able to get things turned around enough to make a difference.
I know that is too much to ask for,but it costs nothing to hope,and miracles do occasionally happen.
-
Disagree. It will take one angry man with no looming reelection campaign who knows where the evidence is buried and who put it there to pull down the whole house of cards.
@massadvj
You mean the guy whose own FBI stole the election from him? That guy? The guy who made Fauci dictator for more than a year?
It will take a lot more than anger to dismantle a system that relies on inertia and embedded civil servants to function. It will take focus, patience and competence; all of which are sorely lacking in the individual you have in mind.
-
@Right_in_Virginia
Trump,IF elected,will need the support of the Party People in order to accomplish anything,and since he and his type of thinking is threatening to the RINO's and other wishy-washy scoundrels in the RNC,he is going to have a tough time getting it because ALL the RNC Party People will see any success by him as a threat to their own positions.
Still,a "verbal bomb thrower" that goes in wanting to make it big in the history books who can ONLY serve one term is what we need because he will be the only candidate not looking to piss people off because he wants to get re-elected 4 years down the road.
I think you will all agree that Trump doesn't worry about pissing people off.
We NEED a "VERBAL bomb-thower" to get the "change process" started,and then we need to have him followed by someone who is just as committed to change,but who has a milder personality and can "make friends".
4 years of Trump,followed by 8 years of a slightly milder but still dedicated conservative president just MIGHT be able to get things turned around enough to make a difference.
I know that is too much to ask for,but it costs nothing to hope,and miracles do occasionally happen.
Trump will likely have my support after he is nominated. I say "likely" in the unlikely event that he runs against RFKjr. If that happens I will have to take a long, hard look at the competing visions. I have always favored Jeffersonian classical liberalism over conservatism, and RFKjr may very well be more inclined in that direction than Trump.
Like all small l libertarians I have been a man without a country for a long, long time.
-
Disagree. It will take one angry man with no looming reelection campaign who knows where the evidence is buried and who put it there to pull down the whole house of cards.
@massadvj
:mauslaff: :mauslaff:
The same orange clown who couldn’t get out of his own way the first time around? Whose only lasting achievements were actually the achievements of other people who simply used the orange clown as a rubber stamp to accomplish those ends?
Good lord but some people love to delude themselves when worshipping their mortal god.
-
Trump will likely have my support after he is nominated. I say "likely" in the unlikely event that he runs against RFKjr. If that happens I will have to take a long, hard look at the competing visions. I have always favored Jeffersonian classical liberalism over conservatism, and RFKjr may very well be more inclined in that direction than Trump.
Like all small l libertarians I have been a man without a country for a long, long time.
Just out of curiosity, what positions of RFK Junior have that would consider at least taking a second look at him?
-
:mauslaff: :mauslaff:
The same orange clown who couldn’t get out of his own way the first time around? Whose only lasting achievements were actually the achievements of other people who simply used the orange clown as a rubber stamp to accomplish those ends?
Good lord but some people love to delude themselves when worshipping their mortal god.
It would be similar to Barack Obama running again for third term and his supporters claiming he’ll unite the races
-
Just out of curiosity, what positions of RFK Junior have that would consider at least taking a second look at him?
All of what I know so far was from his interview with Elon Musk. He opposed all of the government intervention based on COVID. He talks about the country being controlled by large corporations who push for wars, forced and coerced medical interventions for minors, terrible diet, etc. These corporations are enabled by the government and the laws that are in place to protect them need to be eliminated. He says he supports unregulated capitalism and free markets, but that this has been circumvented by the federal establishment. He also says he supports the second amendment. Basically, he sounds to me like a classical liberal. He would like to make sure there is a safety net for those most in need, but he opposes all the pork.
I will say for certain based on this interview he understands the constitution and cares about it a lot more than Trump does.
-
All of what I know so far was from his interview with Elon Musk. He opposed all of the government intervention based on COVID. He talks about the country being controlled by large corporations who push for wars, forced and coerced medical interventions for minors, terrible diet, etc. These corporations are enabled by the government and the laws that are in place to protect them need to be eliminated. He says he supports unregulated capitalism and free markets, but that this has been circumvented by the federal establishment. He also says he supports the second amendment. Basically, he sounds to me like a classical liberal. He would like to make sure there is a safety net for those most in need, but he opposes all the pork.
I will say for certain based on this interview he understands the constitution and cares about it a lot more than Trump does.
That's very interesting @massadvj thanks!
-
That's very interesting @massadvj thanks!
Yup
Ditto.
I personally would never vote for RFKjr. But if he were to get the nomination, I believe he would beat anybody the Republicans put up
-
You mean the guy whose own FBI stole the election from him? That guy?
I'll go with this guy over some snotnosed wannabe who denies the election was stolen @massadvj
The guy who made Fauci dictator for more than a year?
How? By following the US Constitution giving 50 governors the power and authority to use CDC guidelines as each saw fit, including not at all, as seven governors chose?
It will take a lot more than anger to dismantle a system that relies on inertia and embedded civil servants to function. It will take focus, patience and competence; all of which are sorely lacking in the individual you have in mind.
It will take one angry man who knows where the evidence is buried and who put it there, supported by a reenergized and equally angry victorious electorate. Your fraud from Florida is being paid to stop the dismantling of the administrative state and the coming reckoning, and his political career will end here because of it.
-
I'll go with this guy over some snotnosed wannabe who denies the election was stolen @massadvj
How? By following the US Constitution giving 50 governors the power and authority to use CDC guidelines as each saw fit, including not at all, as seven governors chose?
It will take one angry man who knows where the evidence is buried and who put it there, supported by a reenergized and equally angry victorious electorate. Your fraud from Florida is being paid to stop the dismantling of the administrative state and the coming reckoning, and his political career will end here because of it.
A 77 year old bitter old man on the verge of paranoid. This guy?
-
Your GOP is done, it is finished ----- and it will hit the bottom of the trash heap the abject failure and useless waste it is. Get used to it.
I am quite used to it. I have no illusions about that whatsoever. But it isn't "my GOP." Although I am a registered Republican, philosophically I am more of a small l libertarian who leans right. I would say I am a Jeffersonian constitutionalist who believes in having a very small government with just a few sensible laws that are vigorously enforced. RDS and I are out of sync on a number of issues, but I would take him over Trump.
I did not support GWB until the very end of his first general election. Ditto with Mitt Romney and John McCain. I would back Rand Paul over any other prominent Republican, and I supported Paul in 2016 when he ran in the primary against Trump. In fact, I even wrote Rand Paul's name in when the Pennsylvania primary came around and the race was already settled.
I will very likely support Trump if he wins the primary, and I expect he will. Just without my help. Will you support RDS if he wins the primary?
-
I will say for certain based on this interview he understands the constitution and cares about it a lot more than Trump does.
That's an impressive bit of hyperbole @massadvj Please, enlighten the uninformed and post your proof that Trump has limited understanding and regard for the Constitution of the United States. Include all your work, professor.
-
I am quite used to it. ....
Interesting, you addressed pointing-up the part of my post I deleted as irrelevant @massadvj I'd really appreciate you responding to the relevant part: pointing-down
You mean the guy whose own FBI stole the election from him? That guy?
I'll go with this guy over some snotnosed wannabe who denies the election was stolen @massadvj
The guy who made Fauci dictator for more than a year?
How? By following the US Constitution giving 50 governors the power and authority to use CDC guidelines as each saw fit, including not at all, as seven governors chose?
It will take a lot more than anger to dismantle a system that relies on inertia and embedded civil servants to function. It will take focus, patience and competence; all of which are sorely lacking in the individual you have in mind.
It will take one angry man who knows where the evidence is buried and who put it there, supported by a reenergized and equally angry victorious electorate. Your fraud from Florida is being paid to stop the dismantling of the administrative state and the coming reckoning, and his political career will end here because of it.
-
Trump is the albatross and the millstone around the neck of the GOP, and of the country.
-
I am quite used to it. I have no illusions about that whatsoever. But it isn't "my GOP." Although I am a registered Republican, philosophically I am more of a small l libertarian who leans right. I would say I am a Jeffersonian constitutionalist who believes in having a very small government with just a few sensible laws that are vigorously enforced. RDS and I are out of sync on a number of issues, but I would take him over Trump.
I did not support GWB until the very end of his first general election. Ditto with Mitt Romney and John McCain. I would back Rand Paul over any other prominent Republican, and I supported Paul in 2016 when he ran in the primary against Trump. In fact, I even wrote Rand Paul's name in when the Pennsylvania primary came around and the race was already settled.
I will very likely support Trump if he wins the primary, and I expect he will. Just without my help. Will you support RDS if he wins the primary?
That describes me very well @massadvj except the take RDS over Trump part. Not there yet.
-
Trump will likely have my support after he is nominated. I say "likely" in the unlikely event that he runs against RFKjr. If that happens I will have to take a long, hard look at the competing visions. I have always favored Jeffersonian classical liberalism over conservatism, and RFKjr may very well be more inclined in that direction than Trump.
I have a fondness for classic liberals. Principled Conservatives and Classic Liberals have very much in common.
You have not researched him yet. And you will not like what you find beneath the hood.
Like all small l libertarians I have been a man without a country for a long, long time.
How ironic that the choice is between two liberals, both telegraphing big government solutions.
Or is it?
-
How? By following the US Constitution giving 50 governors the power and authority to use CDC guidelines as each saw fit, including not at all, as seven governors chose?
No, by locking down the ports and interstates and choosing winners by designating large retail outlets as the only or at least preferred outlets... They controlled the thing through goods and energy ABOVE the states. And you know it.
It will take one angry man who knows where the evidence is buried and who put it there, supported by a reenergized and equally angry victorious electorate. Your fraud from Florida is being paid to stop the dismantling of the administrative state and the coming reckoning, and his political career will end here because of it.
Messianic bullcrap. He'll wind up wedged in the exact same corner - Governing by EO, and rubber-stamping checks.
-
Interesting, you addressed pointing-up the part of my post I deleted as irrelevant @massadvj I'd really appreciate you responding to the relevant part: pointing-down
How? By following the US Constitution giving 50 governors the power and authority to use CDC guidelines as each saw fit, including not at all, as seven governors chose?
It will take one angry man who knows where the evidence is buried and who put it there, supported by a reenergized and equally angry victorious electorate. Your fraud from Florida is being paid to stop the dismantling of the administrative state and the coming reckoning, and his political career will end here because of it.
On Trump and COVID, early in the crisis there was defacto martial law. The constitution was thrown out the window. Every church in the country was shuttered. So much for the First Amendment. Every small retail establishment in the country was forced to shut its doors. Then to add insult to injury, Trump pays everyone in the country $2500 for doing nothing, and gives every shyster in the country carte blanche to "borrow" from the government and never have to pay it back. Now we know the fraud from that program alone is somewhere in the neighborhood of $500 billion.
And you say this is a man who will dismantle the federal government? He will do no such thing. He will try to get even with his enemies, yes, and many of his enemies are despicable people. But I do not see a man who is ideologically inclined toward a less powerful government. Here is where spending went under his presidency:
(https://img.assets-c3.propublica.org/images/articles/20210114-trump-deficit-1200x630-chart-v3.jpg?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=630&imgixProfile=propublicaAssets&q=90&w=1200&s=e40de6d67c03940e5985f04d41b342a4)
Where is the evidence that Trump will "dismantle" anything? He is already on record as saying that Medicare and Social Security are off the table. From what I have seen of Trump, he is a populist nationalist without any particular ideology.
Will you support RDS if he wins the primary?
-
I have a fondness for classic liberals. Principled Conservatives and Classic Liberals have very much in common.
You have not researched him yet. And you will not like what you find beneath the hood.
How ironic that the choice is between two liberals, both telegraphing big government solutions.
Or is it?
I get along much better with conservatives than liberals.
The people on this board who know me over many. many years going back to the FR days, know that I was once an operative for Willie Brown back in the late 1970s and early 1980s. That experience -- which I regard as the years I was with "the Mafia" -- turned me into a limited government guy.
The American people have become like little birds in a nest begging mommy government for more and more worms and protection. No politician can get elected without catering to that. Freedom doesn't really sell anymore, except to a small minority.
-
:pop41:
-
On Trump and COVID, early in the crisis there was defacto martial law. The constitution was thrown out the window. Every church in the country was shuttered. So much for the First Amendment. Every small retail establishment in the country was forced to shut its doors. Then to add insult to injury, Trump pays everyone in the country $2500 for doing nothing, and gives every shyster in the country carte blanche to "borrow" from the government and never have to pay it back. Now we know the fraud from that program alone is somewhere in the neighborhood of $500 billion.
And you say this is a man who will dismantle the federal government? He will do no such thing. He will try to get even with his enemies, yes, and many of his enemies are despicable people. But I do not see a man who is ideologically inclined toward a less powerful government. Here is where spending went under his presidency:
(https://img.assets-c3.propublica.org/images/articles/20210114-trump-deficit-1200x630-chart-v3.jpg?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=630&imgixProfile=propublicaAssets&q=90&w=1200&s=e40de6d67c03940e5985f04d41b342a4)
Where is the evidence that Trump will "dismantle" anything? He is already on record as saying that Medicare and Social Security are off the table. From what I have seen of Trump, he is a populist nationalist without any particular ideology.
Will you support RDS if he wins the primary?
goopo
-
It will take one angry man who knows where the evidence is buried and who put it there
Ugh.
"Evidence" of what?? It isn't "evidence" that's required. There aren't any bodies buried anywhere that actually matter.
What's required is someone who actually understands our constitutional system, the relationship between the Constitution, our laws, the regulatory system, and the entire bureaucracy that has arisen around it. It is only by understanding all that that any leader can even begin to dismantle the parts that are corrupted and flawed. Otherwise, you're just a raging, demented Captain Queeg of politics accusing everyone around you of conspiracy and disloyalty. The kind of guy who believes that things can be fixed simply by venting your (allegedly) righteous anger and spouting populist talking points.
Even if you ignored all his other personal and policy flaws, Trump isn't the guy to fix anything. I won't go so far as to say he is actually stupid as much as he has deliberately chosen to be ignorant. He doesn't understand those Constitutional, legal, and regulatory systems, and doesn't care to understanding them because that would take too much nose to the grindstone work, and that's not him. He will always be easily manipulated and tricked because he lacks the basic intellectual curiosity to read and learn about those things he doesn't understand.
So even if Trump and his supporters think his mission is to find "where the bodies are buried", he is too ignorant of our system to be able to do anything about any "bodies" that he finds. He'll yell, rage, insult...and end up losing as those who actually understand how it all works run rings around him. And the conservative people who do understand how the system actually works and might otherwise be willing to assist him have been alienated and insulted enough times that they aren't going to risk their own future for a guy who won't take their advice anyway.
He is the epitome of someone who is all style, and not a shred of substance.
-
I get along much better with conservatives than liberals.
The people on this board who know me over many. many years going back to the FR days, know that I was once an operative for Willie Brown back in the late 1970s and early 1980s. That experience -- which I regard as the years I was with "the Mafia" -- turned me into a limited government guy.
The American people have become like little birds in a nest begging mommy government for more and more worms and protection. No politician can get elected without catering to that. Freedom doesn't really sell anymore, except to a small minority.
You're preaching to the choir. As a Reaganite, I do embrace all of the Conservative principles - I think they all intertwine and are interdependent, which is why Reaganism is right - Do harm to one, do harm to all.
But in the context of that, in arguing with populists over Tumpy, I have found my thinking coming to a rigid irreducible complexity. Within the Conservative principles, what is irreducible is Goldwater - libertarianism and fiscal conservatism. That is the root. If one is not standing upon small and distributed government, then you're part of the problem. Especially so on the Right.
As an aside, I have seen some remarkable conversions out of progressive liberalism in and around the 'Intellectual Dark Web' debates. Rubin, and I suppose Rogan, as examples... I was along for Rubin's ride, as he inexorably became convinced. It was awesome to watch him change his mind intellectually... Jordan Peterson - Another conversion - deserves a lot of the credit.
The interesting part is how many of them settle into Classic Liberalism... Finding out their alignment is really with that root. It is almost common. It makes me wonder if the liberalism claimed by progressives is really a complete and utter bastardization of the real thing - Like 'Big L' libertarians often find they were in when discovering Goldwater...
It's a thing... Jussayin.
-
Ugh.
"Evidence" of what?? It isn't "evidence" that's required. There aren't any bodies buried anywhere that actually matter.
What's required is someone who actually understands our constitutional system, the relationship between the Constitution, our laws, the regulatory system, and the entire bureaucracy that has arisen around it. It is only by understanding all that that any leader can even begin to dismantle the parts that are corrupted and flawed. Otherwise, you're just a raging, demented Captain Queeg of politics accusing everyone around you of conspiracy and disloyalty. The kind of guy who believes that things can be fixed simply by venting your (allegedly) righteous anger and spouting populist talking points.
Even if you ignored all his other personal and policy flaws, Trump isn't the guy to fix anything. I won't go so far as to say he is actually stupid as much as he has deliberately chosen to be ignorant. He doesn't understand those Constitutional, legal, and regulatory systems, and doesn't care to understanding them because that would take too much nose to the grindstone work, and that's not him. He will always be easily manipulated and tricked because he lacks the basic intellectual curiosity to read and learn about those things he doesn't understand.
So even if Trump and his supporters think his mission is to find "where the bodies are buried", he is too ignorant of our system to be able to do anything about any "bodies" that he finds. He'll yell, rage, insult...and end up losing as those who actually understand how it all works run rings around him. And the conservative people who do understand how the system actually works and might otherwise be willing to assist him have been alienated and insulted enough times that they aren't going to risk their own future for a guy who won't take their advice anyway.
He is the epitome of someone who is all style, and not a shred of substance.
Yep. All hat and no cattle. I see that too.
Good post.
-
The terrier wrote in #6 above:
"TRUMP CAN'T POSSIBLY WIN THE GENERAL ELECTION. Let that sink in."
Then please explain to us:
- Will Mr. DeSantis (the only other possible candidate other than Mr. Trump) win in Pennsylvania?
- Will Mr. DeSantis win in Michigan?
- Will Mr. DeSantis win in Wisconsin?
- Will Mr. DeSantis win in Arizona?
- Will Mr. DeSantis win in Georgia?
This is where The Party's underground (and above-ground) election apparatus will be strongly ensconced in 2024.
Without these states, NO Republican can win the presidency any longer. It's simple arithmetic.
Since 2016, when Mr. Trump won all of them, which way have these states trended?
Which party now has them under control? (yes, the Pubbies control the statehouse in Georgia, but look at how the last several Senate elections have gone there)
The 2024 election will be about more than "personalities".
It will be about "the apparatus", and whether anyone can defeat it.
The only possible Republican with enough horsepower to do so will be Mr. Trump.
And even his chances aren't great (I'll admit that right up front).
But he has the greatest level of "base support" amongst Republicans.
Without that, no one else -- not Mr. DeSantis, nor any other candidate -- can win.
-
The terrier wrote in #6 above:
"TRUMP CAN'T POSSIBLY WIN THE GENERAL ELECTION. Let that sink in."
Then please explain to us:
- Will Mr. DeSantis (the only other possible candidate other than Mr. Trump) win in Pennsylvania?
- Will Mr. DeSantis win in Michigan?
- Will Mr. DeSantis win in Wisconsin?
- Will Mr. DeSantis win in Arizona?
- Will Mr. DeSantis win in Georgia?
This is where The Party's underground (and above-ground) election apparatus will be strongly ensconced in 2024.
Without these states, NO Republican can win the presidency any longer. It's simple arithmetic.
Since 2016, when Mr. Trump won all of them, which way have these states trended?
Which party now has them under control? (yes, the Pubbies control the statehouse in Georgia, but look at how the last several Senate elections have gone there)
The 2024 election will be about more than "personalities".
It will be about "the apparatus", and whether anyone can defeat it.
The only possible Republican with enough horsepower to do so will be Mr. Trump.
And even his chances aren't great (I'll admit that right up front).
But he has the greatest level of "base support" amongst Republicans.
Without that, no one else -- not Mr. DeSantis, nor any other candidate -- can win.
Fox already called AZ for Biden in '24.
-
You're preaching to the choir. As a Reaganite, I do embrace all of the Conservative principles - I think they all intertwine and are interdependent, which is why Reaganism is right - Do harm to one, do harm to all.
But in the context of that, in arguing with populists over Tumpy, I have found my thinking coming to a rigid irreducible complexity. Within the Conservative principles, what is irreducible is Goldwater - libertarianism and fiscal conservatism. That is the root. If one is not standing upon small and distributed government, then you're part of the problem. Especially so on the Right.
As an aside, I have seen some remarkable conversions out of progressive liberalism in and around the 'Intellectual Dark Web' debates. Rubin, and I suppose Rogan, as examples... I was along for Rubin's ride, as he inexorably became convinced. It was awesome to watch him change his mind intellectually... Jordan Peterson - Another conversion - deserves a lot of the credit.
The interesting part is how many of them settle into Classic Liberalism... Finding out their alignment is really with that root. It is almost common. It makes me wonder if the liberalism claimed by progressives is really a complete and utter bastardization of the real thing - Like 'Big L' libertarians often find they were in when discovering Goldwater...
It's a thing... Jussayin.
Jordan Peterson is fully converted. Joe Rogan is a work in progress. I think anyone who has taken the intellectual journey through all of the various political ideologies; really examined the assumptions of each, and the consequences, settles upon something like classical liberalism as the best and most sustainable system for humankind.
One problem is that historically a megalomaniac with a mob can overwhelm a system based on personal freedom, and the system has no adequate defense.
-
On Trump and COVID, early in the crisis there was defacto martial law. The constitution was thrown out the window. Every church in the country was shuttered. So much for the First Amendment. Every small retail establishment in the country was forced to shut its doors.
In 2020, "defacto martial law" was called by US governors, not the POTUS. Seven Republican governors exercised their Constitutional right to ignore CDC recommendations and kept their states completely open .... without fear of retaliation from the federal government. In those states every business and house of worship remained open.
In fact, even governors choosing to lock down their states carved out essential businesses, medical care and implemented work from home. Did it have the desired affect on the economy right before an election? You bet it did. But, this was not Trump's doing. Every time he called for reopening, he was branded a cold-hearted killer. Never once stopped him from calling for it, though.
And you say this is a man who will dismantle the federal government?
I say this is the man who knows where the root of the government's corruption is, along with its branches --- by name and with receipts. This man is also fearless. If you're serious about changing the inner workings of the federal administrative state, Donald Trump is the man.
If you're longing for the status quo, pitching hyperbolic :bs: is the only strategy you've got.
@massadvj
-
This man is also fearless. If you're serious about changing the inner workings of the federal administrative state, Donald Trump is the man.
A statement not backed by past and present actions.
-
One problem is that historically a megalomaniac with a mob can overwhelm a system based on personal freedom, and the system has no adequate defense.
Bears repeating
-
In 2020, "defacto martial law" was called by US governors, not the POTUS. Seven Republican governors exercised their Constitutional right to ignore CDC recommendations and kept their states completely open .... without fear of retaliation from the federal government. In those states every business and house of worship remained open.
In fact, even governors choosing to lock down their states carved out essential businesses, medical care and implemented work from home. Did it have the desired affect on the economy right before an election? You bet it did. But, this was not Trump's doing. Every time he called for reopening, he was branded a cold-hearted killer. Never once stopped him from calling for it, though.
I say this is the man who knows where the root of the government's corruption is, along with its branches --- by name and with receipts. This man is also fearless. If you're serious about changing the inner workings of the federal administrative state, Donald Trump is the man.
If you're longing for the status quo, pitching hyperbolic :bs: is the only strategy you've got.
@massadvj
@Right_in_Virginia
But....but....but,he is RUDE!
He is also a freaking billionaire,AND he is orange!
Any one of the three is enough to get the typical airhead to hate and be jealous of him,but all three is an overdose.
-
In 2020, "defacto martial law" was called by US governors, not the POTUS. Seven Republican governors exercised their Constitutional right to ignore CDC recommendations and kept their states completely open .... without fear of retaliation from the federal government. In those states every business and house of worship remained open.
In fact, even governors choosing to lock down their states carved out essential businesses, medical care and implemented work from home. Did it have the desired affect on the economy right before an election? You bet it did. But, this was not Trump's doing. Every time he called for reopening, he was branded a cold-hearted killer. Never once stopped him from calling for it, though.
I say this is the man who knows where the root of the government's corruption is, along with its branches --- by name and with receipts. This man is also fearless. If you're serious about changing the inner workings of the federal administrative state, Donald Trump is the man.
If you're longing for the status quo, pitching hyperbolic :bs: is the only strategy you've got.
@massadvj
The reason we have a constitution is to prevent any state from enforcing martial law. But in this case the CDC and Fauci encouraged the states to do so, and Trump even criticized DeSantis for not adhering to the CDC directives. So you are basically defending Trump for NOT declaring federal martial law and encouraging the states do it on their own. The point of the COTUS is to protect the rights of the people against martial law, not to enable the states to declare it. Fauci should never have been given this kind of authority.
I notice you have no answer for Trump's massive spending and giveaways. I assume that is because they are indefensible.
I also notice you do not answer whether you will support RDS if he is the nominee.
-
Then please explain to us:
- Will Mr. DeSantis (the only other possible candidate other than Mr. Trump) win in Pennsylvania?
- Will Mr. DeSantis win in Michigan?
- Will Mr. DeSantis win in Wisconsin?
- Will Mr. DeSantis win in Arizona?
- Will Mr. DeSantis win in Georgia?
It's not as if Trump broke into Fort Knox back in 2016. Georgia and Arizona are red states with Trump haters. Yes all but a few candidates would beat Joe Biden there. From that point, only 7 EVs are needed. George Bush lost Wisconsin by 11,384 votes, and other republicans get elected there quite often. Trump destroyed the GOP in Pennsylvania and Michigan, but in a normal environment those are swing states along with New Hampshire and Nevada.
-
The terrier wrote in #6 above:
"TRUMP CAN'T POSSIBLY WIN THE GENERAL ELECTION. Let that sink in."
Then please explain to us:
- Will Mr. DeSantis (the only other possible candidate other than Mr. Trump) win in Pennsylvania?
- Will Mr. DeSantis win in Michigan?
- Will Mr. DeSantis win in Wisconsin?
- Will Mr. DeSantis win in Arizona?
- Will Mr. DeSantis win in Georgia?
This is where The Party's underground (and above-ground) election apparatus will be strongly ensconced in 2024.
Without these states, NO Republican can win the presidency any longer. It's simple arithmetic.
Since 2016, when Mr. Trump won all of them, which way have these states trended?
Which party now has them under control? (yes, the Pubbies control the statehouse in Georgia, but look at how the last several Senate elections have gone there)
The 2024 election will be about more than "personalities".
It will be about "the apparatus", and whether anyone can defeat it.
The only possible Republican with enough horsepower to do so will be Mr. Trump.
And even his chances aren't great (I'll admit that right up front).
But he has the greatest level of "base support" amongst Republicans.
Without that, no one else -- not Mr. DeSantis, nor any other candidate -- can win.
For the record, and this will come as a surprise to the Trump supporters, I think the person best equipped to win the general election will be the one who wins the primary. If RDS cannot win the primary, then he can't win the general election, either. We have primaries to vet these things, and although they are flawed, they do tend to sort out who is better at establishing himself as a proven vote-getter.
-
But in this case the CDC and Fauci encouraged the states to do so, and Trump even criticized DeSantis for not adhering to the CDC directives.
Educate yourself @massadvj More than once President Trump tried to keep and get Florida open:
1. "Two years ago today, @GovRonDeSantis became a “Lockdown Governor” when he issued a stay-at-home order for Floridians.”. [Listen to what RDS says about his explaining the lockdown to President Trump toward the end of the video]
Video: https://twitter.com/sfdb/status/1509857474903527437
2. DeSantis in May 2020 on reopening FL: "Now, we did, when I announced phase one, we followed the White House guidelines, but we didn’t even do everything that they said you could do in phase one. So, it was a limited phase one. It was a safe step." (Video)
https://twitter.com/MAGAIncWarRoom/status/1671592773978316816
3. "Here’s video of DeSantis in June 2020 calling Fauci’s directives “important” & threatening to revoke licenses of FL businesses that didn’t comply."
https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1632477718351675393
4. "Ron DeSantis says he "defers" to Fauci and that he is pushing President Trump to restrict domestic air travel." (Video)
https://twitter.com/MAGAIncWarRoom/status/1664381991330930691
For extra study:
5. RDS: “We’ve embraced the vaccines, we’ve embraced the science on it, the data I’ve said has been good from the beginning in terms of clinical trials, it’s even better in real life.” (Video)
https://twitter.com/here_I_go_so/status/1666426743006142465
-
The reason we have a constitution is to prevent any state from enforcing martial law. So you are basically defending Trump for NOT declaring federal martial law and encouraging the states do it on their own. The point of the COTUS is to protect the rights of the people against martial law, not to enable the states to declare it.
Guess again @massadvj
Two centuries of law guide legal approach to modern pandemic
American Bar Association, Apr 2020
Under the U.S. Constitution’s 10th Amendment and U.S. Supreme Court decisions over nearly 200 years, state governments have the primary authority to control the spread of dangerous diseases within their jurisdictions. The 10th Amendment, which gives states all powers not specifically given to the federal government, allows them the authority to take public health emergency actions, such as setting quarantines and business restrictions.
With states adopting emergency measures, there are several broad public health tools that governors can invoke. They can, for example, order quarantines to separate and restrict the movement of people who were exposed to a contagious disease to see if they become sick. They can also direct that those who are sick with a quarantinable communicable disease be isolated from people who are not sick. And, as a growing number of governors have done in recent days, states can order residents to stay at home with exceptions for essential work, food or other needs. The governors’ orders, akin to shelter-in-place directives, affect tens of millions in the affected states. Curfews are another tool they can impose.
The power to quarantine and take even more stringent measures in the name of public health has belonged largely to the states for nearly 200 years. In 1824, the Supreme Court drew a clear line in Gibbons v. Ogden between the state and federal governments when it came to regulating activities within and between states. In a unanimous ruling, then-Chief Justice John Marshall cited the 10th Amendment in saying that police powers are largely reserved to states for activities within their borders.
Those police powers, he explained, include the ability to impose isolation and quarantine conditions. Marshall wrote that quarantine laws “form a portion of that immense mass of legislation which embraces everything within the territory of a state not surrendered to the general government.”
In 1902, the Supreme Court directly addressed a state’s power to quarantine an entire geographical area. In Compagnie Francaise de Navigation a Vapeur v. Louisiana State Board of Health, the justices upheld a Louisiana Supreme Court decision that the state could enact and enforce quarantine laws unless Congress had decided to preempt them. Thus Louisiana could exclude healthy persons from an infested area populated with persons with a contagious or infectious disease (the Port of New Orleans), and that this power applied as well to persons seeking to enter the infected place, whether they came from within the state or not. The decision in Compagnie Francaise remains unchanged, and numerous courts have cited it as authority for state quarantines as recently as the Ebola outbreak.
While President Donald Trump has played down the need for the federal government to declare national quarantines or isolations, some interpret he has that power under the Commerce Clause, which governs commerce with “foreign nations and among” states. The federal government did not invoke the Commerce Clause during the global 1918–1919 Spanish Influenza pandemic, which killed an estimated 40 million worldwide, including 675,000 Americans.
The president could urge other governors across the United States to issue “stay home” orders following the lead of California and New York, which were the first states to issue such directives. But as a Congressional Research Service report explained in 2014 amid the Ebola threat, governors have broad powers to invoke restrictions in their state while the power of the president is significantly more limited by law and Supreme Court precedent.
The president, for instance, said on March 17 that he discussed “a national lockdown” with advisers to minimize the spread of COVID-19, but three days later he dismissed the idea. While some say such a centralized federal response would be more effective and needed, any executive order to that effect would be unprecedented and would likely lead to a court challenge on constitutional grounds.
https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/publications/youraba/2020/youraba-april-2020/law-guides-legal-approach-to-pandemic/
Bonus video:
"November, 2021. Fauci criticizes Trump for leaving the Covid mitigation decisions up to the states." (Video)
https://twitter.com/mazemoore/status/1664447318089662471
-
Educate yourself @massadvj More than once President Trump tried to keep and get Florida open:
1. "Two years ago today, @GovRonDeSantis became a “Lockdown Governor” when he issued a stay-at-home order for Floridians.”. [Listen to what RDS says about his explaining the lockdown to President Trump toward the end of the video]
Video: https://twitter.com/sfdb/status/1509857474903527437
2. DeSantis in May 2020 on reopening FL: "Now, we did, when I announced phase one, we followed the White House guidelines, but we didn’t even do everything that they said you could do in phase one. So, it was a limited phase one. It was a safe step." (Video)
https://twitter.com/MAGAIncWarRoom/status/1671592773978316816
3. "Here’s video of DeSantis in June 2020 calling Fauci’s directives “important” & threatening to revoke licenses of FL businesses that didn’t comply."
https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1632477718351675393
4. "Ron DeSantis says he "defers" to Fauci and that he is pushing President Trump to restrict domestic air travel." (Video)
https://twitter.com/MAGAIncWarRoom/status/1664381991330930691
For extra study:
5. RDS: “We’ve embraced the vaccines, we’ve embraced the science on it, the data I’ve said has been good from the beginning in terms of clinical trials, it’s even better in real life.” (Video)
https://twitter.com/here_I_go_so/status/1666426743006142465
@Right_in_Virginia
I STRONGLY suspect what you are going to hear from the DeSanctimonious Supporters will be either "Hit taint sew!",or dead silence.
-
I notice you have no answer for Trump's massive spending and giveaways. I assume that is because they are indefensible. I also notice you do not answer whether you will support RDS if he is the nominee.
@massadvj
Why, in the name of all that is Holy, would I ----- of all people ----- feed the strategy to deflect whenever hyperbolic falsehoods thrown against President Trump are exposed for the BS they are??
But, thanks for noticing. 88devil
-
For the record, and this will come as a surprise to the Trump supporters, I think the person best equipped to win the general election will be the one who wins the primary.
@massadvj
Isn't this the usual outcome?
-
@Right_in_Virginia
I STRONGLY suspect what you are going to hear from the DeSanctimonious Supporters will be either "Hit taint sew!",or dead silence.
I'm going to vote for dead silence. This thread will now be disappeared :laugh:
@sneakypete
-
@massadvj
Why, in the name of all that is Holy, would I ----- of all people ----- feed the strategy to deflect whenever hyperbolic falsehoods thrown against President Trump are exposed for the BS they are??
But, thanks for noticing. 88devil
I kind of figured that your answer would be along these lines when the question was presented. happy77
-
@Right_in_Virginia
But....but....but,he is RUDE!
He is also a freaking billionaire,AND he is orange!
Any one of the three is enough to get the typical airhead to hate and be jealous of him,but all three is an overdose.
Just looking back at some of your earlier posts when you first joined TBR.... @sneakypete
BTW,you seem to be obsessed with Trump's money. Does this mean you will support Bloomberg if he jumps into the election? After all,Bloomberg has 18 times as much money as Trump,and he didn't even inherit it.
https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,192335.0.html
BTW,you seem so obsessed with Trump's money and net worth. Please answer this question,ok?
Someone that idolizes Trump accusing someone else of hyperbole is both hilarious and hypocritical at the same time. P.T Barnum was modest compared to Trump.
The purchasing power of the money he has today is probably less than the purchasing power of the money and other assets he inherited 40 or s so years ago.
And he is constantly claiming he is the smartest man in the world,and the most accomplished.
Is that your way of admitting Trump isn't a financial genius,and as perfect as he claims?
BTW,none of the other people you mentioned started out wealthy with successful businesses and assets given to them,and none of them based or base their wealth on money manipulation.
It's not about inherited money. It is about a political candidate whose whole financal well-being is based on inherited money bragging about his wealth,and his supporters bragging about how good a businessman he is because he is rich,and how this means he will bail out the country.
No matter how many times you tell those people his business model is bankruptcy and he has declared bankruptcy at least 4 times,they don't believe it because they don't WANT to believe it.
You even argued with RiV over it...
The first part is a quote,the second part is your opinion. I personally don't think a financial career based on bankruptcy makes someone a genius when it comes to restoring our economy.
Thank you. It should be noted that the first inheritance he got was for 12 million,plus all those NYC rental properties,and it came from his grandfather. IIRC,that was a trust fund he got when he turned 21.
The 200 million plus other assets came from his father.
Given what he started with,he's really a pretty lousy businessman.
Inheriting money doesn't make you smart....
You have no problem with nicknames for Trump back in the day
Trumpeteer is a negative name for a Trump fan,now? If they/you find that insulting,why are you fans of Trump?
BTW,nice job of removing the word Trumpeteer so that others will think I actually did call them something they would see as degrading.
Here you have an early example of you using the "orange" term... in some of your very first posts at TBR...
I didn't vote for him,and I won't be voting for the poser with the orange possum on his head,either.
All the above posts didn't take long to curate, they were within a page or so of 1890 in your replies. I forgot your "rude" remark, but you also pointed that out in your early posts.
-
Just looking back at some of your earlier posts when you first joined TBR.... @sneakypete
https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,192335.0.html
You even argued with RiV over it...
You have no problem with nicknames for Trump back in the day
Here you have an early example of you using the "orange" term... in some of your very first posts at TBR...
All the above posts didn't take long to curate, they were within a page or so of 1890 in your replies. I forgot your "rude" remark, but you also pointed that out in your early posts.
@Sighlass
Good finds!
-
@Sighlass
Good finds!
And it wasn’t long ago that he thought DeSantis would be the ideal 2028 candidate
It was only after Donald Trump claimed he was being backstabbed did he adopt that position,also
-
@Sighlass
Good finds!
It was funny how SP argued with the Mods over the use of the terms too.
-
It was funny how SP argued with the Mods over the use of the terms too.
LOL!
Been here so long...remember when using the words "hate" and "liar" were verboten.
Ironic...IMO, because of @sneakypete 's arguing, the words are ignored by today's MOD Squad.
Thanks, Pete! :beer:
-
Just looking back at some of your earlier posts when you first joined TBR.... @sneakypete
https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,192335.0.html
You even argued with RiV over it...
You have no problem with nicknames for Trump back in the day
Here you have an early example of you using the "orange" term... in some of your very first posts at TBR...
All the above posts didn't take long to curate, they were within a page or so of 1890 in your replies. I forgot your "rude" remark, but you also pointed that out in your early posts.
:2popcorn:
-
People change their minds when they perceive they are wrong. I refuse to get on Pete's shit for that. I may or may not agree with his current perception because I have a job here, and that ain't it.
-
People change their minds when they perceive they are wrong. I refuse to get on Pete's shit for that. I may or may not agree with his current perception because I have a job here, and that ain't it.
Given all that Pete has dealt with health wise in recent years, I'm inclined to pass on it as well.
-
I reserve the right to change my mind @changemymind :tongue2:
-
I reserve the right to change my mind @changemymind :tongue2:
Time to move on from the bickering against one another in here.
-
MISSION STATEMENT
From This Day Forward
« on: November 08, 2016, 11:08:40 pm »
Quote
In recent months, The Briefing Room (and our Nation) has suffered the throes of a contentious election season like no other in our lifetime. Factions on the Right have formed deep divides that, in our view, threaten Conservatism to its roots and in turn, our Constitutional Republic. These divides seem impassable. Too many words have been said in anger, too many have planted their standards and dared others to move them.
This must not be.
The Briefing Room will not foster that divide. This forum exists to promote general unity and knowledge on the Right. We continue to believe Conservatism thrives best when our tent is large, welcoming, and a free exchange of Conservative-based ideas is allowed. We all know from where the existential threats to our Republic originate and we have spent too much time and equity bickering about the futile placement of the chairs on the deck, rather than fixing the holes below the waterline.
Going forward, TBR will re-dedicate this forum to robust but healthy discussion/debate based in Conservatism and protecting our broad principles. To the extent possible, we seek to halt the fractious, divisive rhetoric that has been all too common of late. Continued division will lead to our demise. We are a political news site and we understand our liberal political adversaries wish our destruction and our voices silenced. November 9 is OUR new reality and we at TBR will move forward absent recriminations.
We still want and strive for what Ronald Reagan envisioned..a *Big Tent Policy*...We have challenges ahead, Let's work together!
Myst
https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,233386.msg1131913.html#msg1131913
@mystery-ak @Cyber Liberty
-
Thanks for the reminder, @bigheadfred!
Nice trip down Memory Lane there. That thread was posted several months after I became "the new Mod," so I was involved in the discussions leading up to it.
I had forgotten how many great Briefers we lost because of the Trump War. The post you quoted was laying the foundation to keep that from happening again.
-
MISSION STATEMENT
From This Day Forward
« on: November 08, 2016, 11:08:40 pm »
Quote
In recent months, The Briefing Room (and our Nation) has suffered the throes of a contentious election season like no other in our lifetime. Factions on the Right have formed deep divides that, in our view, threaten Conservatism to its roots and in turn, our Constitutional Republic. These divides seem impassable. Too many words have been said in anger, too many have planted their standards and dared others to move them.
This must not be.
The Briefing Room will not foster that divide. This forum exists to promote general unity and knowledge on the Right. We continue to believe Conservatism thrives best when our tent is large, welcoming, and a free exchange of Conservative-based ideas is allowed. We all know from where the existential threats to our Republic originate and we have spent too much time and equity bickering about the futile placement of the chairs on the deck, rather than fixing the holes below the waterline.
Going forward, TBR will re-dedicate this forum to robust but healthy discussion/debate based in Conservatism and protecting our broad principles. To the extent possible, we seek to halt the fractious, divisive rhetoric that has been all too common of late. Continued division will lead to our demise. We are a political news site and we understand our liberal political adversaries wish our destruction and our voices silenced. November 9 is OUR new reality and we at TBR will move forward absent recriminations.
We still want and strive for what Ronald Reagan envisioned..a *Big Tent Policy*...We have challenges ahead, Let's work together!
Myst
https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,233386.msg1131913.html#msg1131913
@mystery-ak @Cyber Liberty
I haven't found this thread to be particularly divisive or acrimonious. I sure as heck don't think it is unfair to take a poster's words from the past and use them to make a point. I don't see any name calling or personal attacks at all.
So c'mon. This is a political forum, not a quilting circle.
-
I haven't found this thread to be particularly divisive or acrimonious. I sure as heck don't think it is unfair to take a poster's words from the past and use them to make a point. I don't see any name calling or personal attacks at all.
So c'mon. This is a political forum, not a quilting circle.
:yowsa: :amen:
-
In 2020, "defacto martial law" was called by US governors, not the POTUS.
Yeah, the buck NEVER stops with Trump, right?
Oh wait!
How They Convinced Trump to Lock Down
https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=14461
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1249712404260421633?s=20 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1249712404260421633?s=20)
For the purpose of creating conflict and confusion, some in the Fake News Media are saying that it is the Governors decision to open up the states, not that of the President of the United States & the Federal Government. Let it be fully understood that this is incorrect....
...It is the decision of the President, and for many good reasons. With that being said, the Administration and I are working closely with the Governors, and this will continue. A decision by me, in conjunction with the Governors and input from others, will be made shortly!
-
I haven't found this thread to be particularly divisive or acrimonious. I sure as heck don't think it is unfair to take a poster's words from the past and use them to make a point. I don't see any name calling or personal attacks at all.
So c'mon. This is a political forum, not a quilting circle.
@massadvj
Actually, this thread is a product of that Statement from @mystery-ak and, by design, its not acrimonious. I am glad that we have adhered to it.
Thank You to all Briefers that have labored to save us from ourselves!
-
I haven't found this thread to be particularly divisive or acrimonious. I sure as heck don't think it is unfair to take a poster's words from the past and use them to make a point. I don't see any name calling or personal attacks at all.
So c'mon. This is a political forum, not a quilting circle.
Meant to be a FWIW post.
-
Just looking back at some of your earlier posts when you first joined TBR.... @sneakypete
@Sighlass
That just means I know how to think,and change my mind if circumstances prove me wrong.
You should try it.
-
And it wasn’t long ago that he thought DeSantis would be the ideal 2028 candidate
It was only after Donald Trump claimed he was being backstabbed did he adopt that position,also
@LMAO
I am PROUD to be recognized as NOT supporting a back-stabbing little bitch.
You should try it.
-
People change their minds when they perceive they are wrong.
Not THEM! All that "thinking stuff" and making decisions on their own makes their heads hurt.
-
@LMAO
I am PROUD to be recognized as NOT supporting a back-stabbing little bitch.
You should try it.
The point was is you didn’t have that position until Trump made the claim of disloyalty
I can find you posting history on this if you’ve forgotten
-
The point was is you didn’t have that position until Trump made the claim of disloyalty
I can find you posting history on this if you’ve forgotten
@LMAO
Nice try at slander,but false. I decided to dump Sanctimonious when I discovered he was a back-stabbing little bitch.
Maybe YOU like to be associated with weasels like that,but I don't.
-
@Sighlass
That just means I know how to think,and change my mind if circumstances prove me wrong.
You should try it.
This is one of your posts from the past
“The same people that bought the presidency for Bathhouse Barry.
Did you showhow miss the fact that Trump earns his living and has alwasy earned his living from scamming people? You act just like because he has 2 billion dollars in assets that it means he doesn't want more.
BTW,you seem to be obsessed with Trump's money. Does this mean you will support Bloomberg if he jumps into the election? After all,Bloomberg has 18 times as much money as Trump,and he didn't even inherit it.“
So, if that isn’t how you feel today, why? Do you agree with this post? If you agree he was a scam artist back then, why don’t you believe he’s one today? Why are you now in a position to demand others must support him today or , in your words, they’ll be just helping Biden when it appears you thought he was crooked when he ran in 2016?
Claiming a presidential candidate has made his money scamming others is a pretty serious claim.
-
@LMAO
Nice try at slander,but false. I decided to dump Sanctimonious when I discovered he was a back-stabbing little bitch.
Maybe YOU like to be associated with weasels like that,but I don't.
I’m just simply pointing out a stand you had not long ago. It’s not slander to point out someone’s own past statement
There was hints he was going to run before he made it official
-
This is one of your posts from the past
“The same people that bought the presidency for Bathhouse Barry.
Did you showhow miss the fact that Trump earns his living and has alwasy earned his living from scamming people? You act just like because he has 2 billion dollars in assets that it means he doesn't want more.
BTW,you seem to be obsessed with Trump's money. Does this mean you will support Bloomberg if he jumps into the election? After all,Bloomberg has 18 times as much money as Trump,and he didn't even inherit it.“
So, if that isn’t how you feel today, why? Do you agree with this post? If you agree he was a scam artist back then, why don’t you believe he’s one today? Why are you now in a position to demand others must support him today or , in your words, they’ll be just helping Biden when it appears you thought he was crooked when he ran in 2016?
Claiming a presidential candidate has made his money scamming others is a pretty serious claim.
@LMAO
So what? It means I am capable of changing my mind with changing circumstances.
You should try it.
-
@LMAO
So what? It means I am capable of changing my mind with changing circumstances.
You should try it.
You made a claim in this post that Trump was a crook who made his money by scamming people. Were you lying then? Were did you get that information?
I’ve never heard that claim anywhere
-
I’m just simply pointing out a stand you had not long ago. It’s not slander to point out someone’s own past statement
@LMAO
No,you are not. You went searching for cheap shots because I was exposing your boy for the weasel he really is,so you went looking for quotes from long ago to try to discredit me.
-
@LMAO
No,you are not. You went searching for cheap shots because I was exposing your boy for the weasel he really is,so you went looking for quotes from long ago to try to discredit me.
Just confronting you with your own past statements based on your very own posting history :shrug:
-
@LMAO
So what? It means I am capable of changing my mind with changing circumstances.
You should try it.
I think it is admirable that you were able to change your point of view. It could demonstrate that you are able to grow, but it could also indicate that you've been taken in. I think that is why people are interested in probing your thinking process in this regard. If we still see the charlatan you saw, what are we missing now? What changed your point of view about Trump?
-
Just confronting you with your own claims based on past posting history :shrug:
@LMAO
ROFlaughing MY ass off!
I do thank you for your efforts,though. It proves to me that I am scoring "hits that hurt".
-
@LMAO
ROFlaughing MY ass off!
I do thank you for your efforts,though. It proves to me that I am scoring "hits that hurt".
I’m not hurt at all
It’s just you never called RDS a backstabbing bitch even when it was clear he was going to run until recent
If you’d like, I’d be more than happy to find your posts
And were did you get the information in 2016 that Trump made his money by scamming people? I’ve never heard that claim
-
I’m not hurt at all
It’s just you never called RDS a backstabbing bitch even when it was clear he was going to run until recent
@LMAO
NOW you are whining because I didn't call him a backstabbing little bitch until he BECAME a backstabbing little bitch?
-
@LMAO
NOW you are whining because I didn't call him a backstabbing little bitch until he BECAME a backstabbing little bitch?
Hey, I’m just using your own posting history. If you’re upset with that, take it up with yourself… Lol.
And you’re still avoiding the question of where you got the information in 2016 that Donald Trump made his money by scamming people
-
Hey, I’m just using your own posting history. If you’re upset with that, take it up with yourself… Lol.
And you’re still avoiding the question of where you got the information in 2016 that Donald Trump made his money by scamming people
@LMAO
First of all,I do NOT remember posting that. It was obvious to anyone that cared to look that he inherited a fortune,and before he inherited a fortune he was working for his father who was a Billionaire. Trump has NEVER been poor.
-
@LMAO
First of all,I do NOT remember posting that. It was obvious to anyone that cared to look that he inherited a fortune,and before he inherited a fortune he was working for his father who was a Billionaire. Trump has NEVER been poor.
Well, it’s clear you’re going to avoid the question and I’m not gonna take up any more space here to try to get an answer to a question I know I’m probably not going to get one
The reason that you made yourself a target is because you have no problem claiming those of us who are not keen on a Trump third term as wanting Jeb Bush or opposing him because he’s rich and orange. It appears, based on your posting history, it was you that had a problem with him, because he was orange and rich
-
I went to one of RiV linked Twitter accounts (@Here_I_Go_So)... I don't use Twitter much (maybe 10X times a year if that, mainly from links here) but wanted to read some replies to that account and look around... I logged in to my account (I have like three people I follow just to have something, libsofTictok (I think is the name) and Ted Cruz)... Anyhoo that twitter account sure sounds like someone here, so I "followed" them and was looking around (I do that sometimes) and got to one post where they were complaining about being blocked... Suddenly I found I was blocked (and I hadn't even posted to them). The Irony of twitter, folks that want to be seen and read so intensely but have so many enemies that don't they trust anyone.
-
I think it is admirable that you were able to change your point of view. It could demonstrate that you are able to grow, but it could also indicate that you've been taken in. I think that is why people are interested in probing your thinking process in this regard. If we still see the charlatan you saw, what are we missing now? What changed your point of view about Trump?
Hey, @sneakypete could you have a look at this? If you care to, I'd like to know this too.
-
Well, it’s clear you’re going to avoid the question and I’m not gonna take up any more space here to try to get an answer to a question I know I’m probably not going to get one
It appears, based on your posting history, it was you that had a problem with him, because he was orange and rich
I have no doubt that is but only one of the delusions you have every day.
The reason that you made yourself a target is because you have no problem claiming those of us who are not keen on a Trump third term as wanting Jeb Bush or opposing him because he’s rich and orange.
"Third Trump term? When did the second one happen?
-
Hey, @sneakypete could you have a look at this? If you care to, I'd like to know this too.
@Cyber Liberty
Trump happens to be the "right candidate at the right time". If we get "more of the usual",America is lost. We NEED a "verbal bomb thrower that can't be bribed" to wake up a lot of people and make them aware of the corruption of the DNC and WAAAAY too many of those in the RNC.
Trump owes nobody anything,and the ONLY thing he cares about is how he is written about in the history books. Because of this,he can't be bought and can't even be bribed.
It's either Trump,or one of the "Usual Suspects",and it was the Usual Suspects working with their Dim counterparts that got us to where we are now.
-
"Third Trump term? When did the second one happen?
I mean a third Trump attempt. My bad
But you’re still avoiding my question
I had a chance to go back and read your posting history in that link and you were very brutally anti-Trump. And you made a lot of claims regarding him.
-
The purpose of polls is to gauge the effectiveness of MSM propaganda.
-
Yeah, the buck NEVER stops with Trump, right?
What buck are you talking about @Timber Rattler ? President Trump was accused of implementing Marshall Law during the lockdowns, something the Constitution prohibits. I simply pointed out the errors in this line of attack ------ that the President left it to each governor to decide, in compliance with the 10th Amendment and supported several times by USSC decisions.
For your review:
Two centuries of law guide legal approach to modern pandemic
American Bar Association, Apr 2020
Under the U.S. Constitution’s 10th Amendment and U.S. Supreme Court decisions over nearly 200 years, state governments have the primary authority to control the spread of dangerous diseases within their jurisdictions. The 10th Amendment, which gives states all powers not specifically given to the federal government, allows them the authority to take public health emergency actions, such as setting quarantines and business restrictions.
With states adopting emergency measures, there are several broad public health tools that governors can invoke. They can, for example, order quarantines to separate and restrict the movement of people who were exposed to a contagious disease to see if they become sick. They can also direct that those who are sick with a quarantinable communicable disease be isolated from people who are not sick. And, as a growing number of governors have done in recent days, states can order residents to stay at home with exceptions for essential work, food or other needs. The governors’ orders, akin to shelter-in-place directives, affect tens of millions in the affected states. Curfews are another tool they can impose.
The power to quarantine and take even more stringent measures in the name of public health has belonged largely to the states for nearly 200 years. In 1824, the Supreme Court drew a clear line in Gibbons v. Ogden between the state and federal governments when it came to regulating activities within and between states. In a unanimous ruling, then-Chief Justice John Marshall cited the 10th Amendment in saying that police powers are largely reserved to states for activities within their borders.
Those police powers, he explained, include the ability to impose isolation and quarantine conditions. Marshall wrote that quarantine laws “form a portion of that immense mass of legislation which embraces everything within the territory of a state not surrendered to the general government.”
In 1902, the Supreme Court directly addressed a state’s power to quarantine an entire geographical area. In Compagnie Francaise de Navigation a Vapeur v. Louisiana State Board of Health, the justices upheld a Louisiana Supreme Court decision that the state could enact and enforce quarantine laws unless Congress had decided to preempt them. Thus Louisiana could exclude healthy persons from an infested area populated with persons with a contagious or infectious disease (the Port of New Orleans), and that this power applied as well to persons seeking to enter the infected place, whether they came from within the state or not. The decision in Compagnie Francaise remains unchanged, and numerous courts have cited it as authority for state quarantines as recently as the Ebola outbreak.
While President Donald Trump has played down the need for the federal government to declare national quarantines or isolations, some interpret he has that power under the Commerce Clause, which governs commerce with “foreign nations and among” states. The federal government did not invoke the Commerce Clause during the global 1918–1919 Spanish Influenza pandemic, which killed an estimated 40 million worldwide, including 675,000 Americans.
The president could urge other governors across the United States to issue “stay home” orders following the lead of California and New York, which were the first states to issue such directives. But as a Congressional Research Service report explained in 2014 amid the Ebola threat, governors have broad powers to invoke restrictions in their state while the power of the president is significantly more limited by law and Supreme Court precedent.
The president, for instance, said on March 17 that he discussed “a national lockdown” with advisers to minimize the spread of COVID-19, but three days later he dismissed the idea. While some say such a centralized federal response would be more effective and needed, any executive order to that effect would be unprecedented and would likely lead to a court challenge on constitutional grounds.
https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/publications/youraba/2020/youraba-april-2020/law-guides-legal-approach-to-pandemic/
Bonus video:
"November, 2021. Fauci criticizes Trump for leaving the Covid mitigation decisions up to the states." (Video)
https://twitter.com/mazemoore/status/1664447318089662471
-
What buck are you talking about @Timber Rattler ? President Trump was accused of implementing Marshall Law during the lockdowns, something the Constitution prohibits. I simply pointed out the errors in this line of attack ------ that the President left it to each governor to decide, in compliance with the 10th Amendment and supported several times by USSC decisions.
For your review:
Bonus video:
"November, 2021. Fauci criticizes Trump for leaving the Covid mitigation decisions up to the states." (Video)
https://twitter.com/mazemoore/status/1664447318089662471
*****rollingeyes*****
-
@Cyber Liberty
Trump happens to be the "right candidate at the right time". If we get "more of the usual",America is lost. We NEED a "verbal bomb thrower that can't be bribed" to wake up a lot of people and make them aware of the corruption of the DNC and WAAAAY too many of those in the RNC.
Trump owes nobody anything,and the ONLY thing he cares about is how he is written about in the history books. Because of this,he can't be bought and can't even be bribed.
It's either Trump,or one of the "Usual Suspects",and it was the Usual Suspects working with their Dim counterparts that got us to where we are now.
:thumbsup: Well said @sneakypete
-
@Cyber Liberty
Trump happens to be the "right candidate at the right time". If we get "more of the usual",America is lost. We NEED a "verbal bomb thrower that can't be bribed" to wake up a lot of people and make them aware of the corruption of the DNC and WAAAAY too many of those in the RNC.
Trump owes nobody anything,and the ONLY thing he cares about is how he is written about in the history books. Because of this,he can't be bought and can't even be bribed.
It's either Trump,or one of the "Usual Suspects",and it was the Usual Suspects working with their Dim counterparts that got us to where we are now.
Thank you for responding.
-
What buck are you talking about @Timber Rattler ? President Trump was accused of implementing Marshall Law during the lockdowns
Really? Where can I find this accusation? Who made it? Or is this simply another in a long string of you making up crap as you go?
-
What buck are you talking about @Timber Rattler ? President Trump was accused of implementing Marshall Law during the lockdowns, something the Constitution prohibits. I simply pointed out the errors in this line of attack ------ that the President left it to each governor to decide, in compliance with the 10th Amendment and supported several times by USSC decisions.
BUT HE DIDN'T, and said so himself!
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1237820230296010752 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1237820230296010752)
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1249712404260421633 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1249712404260421633)
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1249712413219397632 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1249712413219397632)
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1295677038301523968 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1295677038301523968)
Surely you are not THAT obtuse!
Here's more:
How 15 Days Became 45: Trump Extends Guidelines To Slow Coronavirus
https://www.npr.org/2020/03/30/822448199/how-15-days-became-45-trump-extends-guidelines-to-slow-coronavirus
Two weeks ago, President Trump entered the White House briefing room and announced an aggressive plan to slow the spread of the coronavirus.
Stay home for 15 days, he told Americans. Avoid groups of more than 10 people. "If everyone makes this change, or these critical changes, and sacrifices now, we will rally together as one nation and we will defeat the virus," he said.
On Sunday, the night before Day 15, Trump told the country to stick with the plan for another month, until April 30.
"The better you do, the faster this whole nightmare will end," Trump said.
It was an abrupt end to two weeks of whiplash as Trump veered between conflicting advice from public health experts, who were looking at data from labs and hospitals, and friends in the business community, who were looking at the harm to the economy.
In the beginning, Trump focused on the virus. "We're getting rid of the virus," he said. "That's what we're doing. That's the best thing we can do. By the way, for the markets. For everything. It's very simple. It's a very simple solution. We want to get rid of it."
Almost overnight, American life changed in fundamental ways. Schools and restaurants closed. Many people started working from home, and more than 3 million Americans quickly lost their jobs. Anxiety grew about the rising death toll and the number of patients swamping hospitals.
Trump described the decision to issue the guidelines as "one of the most difficult decisions I've ever made" and said he was skeptical when his medical experts came to him with the plan.
"I wasn't happy about it," he said on Fox News last week. "They came in — experts — and they said, 'We are going to have to close the country.' I said, 'We have never closed the country before. This has never happened before.' I said, 'Are you serious about this?' "
From the start, there were questions of what would happen after 15 days, whether the push for what public health officials call social distancing would become the new normal. "People are talking about July, August, something like that," Trump said.
Then, about a week into those 15 days, Trump's message changed.
-
I mean a third Trump attempt. My bad
But you’re still avoiding my question
I had a chance to go back and read your posting history in that link and you were very brutally anti-Trump. And you made a lot of claims regarding him.
@LMAO
I know you are a DeSantimonious fan boi,but even robots like you should have better things to do with your time than search for posts by me that are several years old. It reeks of desperation.
I also understand that you are a fan boi with no imagination so you can't conceive of someone changing their mind.
What are you going to do with yourself when he loses?
-
BUT HE DIDN'T, and said so himself!
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1237820230296010752 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1237820230296010752)
The governors decided on lockdowns, masks; all CDC Guidelines. The "full force of the government" referred to managing our borders and international travel, building emergency care facilities, partnerships with the private sector to manufacture and distribute PPEs and ventilators, removing bureaucracy slowing research, development and distribution of emergency use vaccines and medications, emergency funding for the states.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1249712404260421633 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1249712404260421633)
This is about opening the states governors had chosen to shut down ---- which the President was hellbent on doing. He made no secret of his desire to reopen the country ----- even targeting Easter Sunday as the date. But, he knew he was Constitutionally powerless to do anything beyond cajoling, offering assistant and removing obstacles ----- hence, no lawsuits were filed by either side.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1295677038301523968 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1295677038301523968)
It was turned off ---- by those governors who decided shutdowns were the best tool to save lives. And, the President was right ------ the economy he built was resilient and strong enough to rebound as (Republican) governors reopened. Democrats were not about to help prove the President right about the economy ----- or turn off the mail-in ballot spigot ----- so they stayed closed into 2021.
__________________________________
Here's more ---- where the truth slips out:
"November, 2021. Fauci criticizes Trump for leaving the Covid mitigation decisions up to the states." (Video)
https://twitter.com/mazemoore/status/1664447318089662471
-
Bookmark... @sneakypete
Curious what was SneakyPete's turning point... Late January 2016 (Post 47092) and far as I can tell he is still anti-Trump... and still on talking terms with Musiclady.
Why would you vote for a draft-dodger to be the Commander in Chief?
Are you REALLY comfortable with the idea of someone as mentally unstable as Trump having access to the nuclear launch codes?
-
@LMAO
I know you are a DeSantimonious fan boi,but even robots like you should have better things to do with your time than search for posts by me that are several years old. It reeks of desperation.
I also understand that you are a fan boi with no imagination so you can't conceive of someone changing their mind.
What are you going to do with yourself when he loses?
Deflecting and dodging, as expected
-
@Cyber Liberty
Trump happens to be the "right candidate at the right time". If we get "more of the usual",America is lost. We NEED a "verbal bomb thrower that can't be bribed" to wake up a lot of people and make them aware of the corruption of the DNC and WAAAAY too many of those in the RNC.
Trump owes nobody anything,and the ONLY thing he cares about is how he is written about in the history books. Because of this,he can't be bought and can't even be bribed.
It's either Trump,or one of the "Usual Suspects",and it was the Usual Suspects working with their Dim counterparts that got us to where we are now.
@sneakypete
Thank Yew!!
-
The fan-boi delusions are deep.
-
So SneakyPete came to TBR and made 75 posts on his first day mostly attacking Trump and defending it. He also was "leaning" Cruz.
It is also a major reason I am leaning towards backing Cruz. I'm not locked in on him yet,but at this point I honestly can't see me voting for any of the others.
Honestly...
I also have a slight problem with the "lesser of two evils" people because if you think both candidates are evil,why the HELL are you voting for either one of them? You are KNOWINGLY voting for someone you don't even want to see in public office or trust to me in public office because you THINK someone else might be slightly worse. These people need to wake up and realize that as long as we keep voting for evil,every candidate presented to us will be evil. It's a closed loop.
@sneakypete @roamer_1
Wow, here is Pete actually defending some of us today.
By Mid February it looks like something is starting to form... Pete likes that Trump attacks Bush.
Yup. Trump,regardless of his intentions,has done the nation a service by daring to challenge the PC assumptions that had been allowed to pass as facts because the left had used the tool of "ism" (racism,sexism,etc,etc,etc) to silence conservatives from pointing out the truth about leftism. Trump spoke out and wasn't even struck by lightening! Not only that,but the more he spoke out in a non-PC manner,the higher his ratings went despite him never having an actual plan to solve any of our national problems.
Earlier Pete said Bush's response to 9/11 was the highlight of his career... Here after claiming earlier that his run-in with JimRob (for pointing out Roberson's love of Bush) was the reason for him being thrown off FR.
Quoted in full (IE: Post 46900) because it needs to be carved in stone and put on display somewhere future generations of school children can see it.
I got banned from FR for the final time by being against that dumbass war.
Still Anti-Trump enough .... Feb. 23
Can you picture President Trump and Kim Jong-un getting into a slap fight over who is the smartest? Do you REALLY want a 70 year old man with the maturity of a spoiled 12 year old child with his finger on the nuclear trigger?
Moving on to March... Still not in Trump's camp...
"Trump has the charisma,"
I beg to differ. If anything he has anti-charisma when he purses his lips up and squints his piggy eyes to attack anyone who thinks he might be slightly less than absolutely wonderful,and every time I see him do it I am more determined than ever to not vote for him.
I despise the clown even when he is saying things I want to hear.
That ain't being charismatic.
Classic Pete ...
Somebody named Dump? Chump? Sump?
Suddenly Cruz is not favored anymore... (post 46651)
Cruz lost me when he allowed the Bush nose under his administration tent.
I won't be voting for anyone in the presidential primary.
-
So SneakyPete came to TBR and made 75 posts on his first day mostly attacking Trump and defending it. He also was "leaning" Cruz.
@Sighlass
I hate to embarrass you,but SOME people learn from their mistakes,and this,in addition to more information causes them to change their minds.
You should try some of that "mind changing" some time.
BTW,since you people are so desperate to attack me that you are willing to spend the time to research posts I made a decade or more ago,I am thinking about changing my mind again right now. I think I will support whatever weasel you vote for,even if it is DeSanctimonious.
"Ahm in wid da in-crowd......"
Is there some sort of secret handshake or word I need to know?
YEE,HAW!
-
@Sighlass
I hate to embarrass you,but SOME people learn from their mistakes,and this,in addition to more information causes them to change their minds.
You should try some of that "mind changing" some time.
BTW,since you people are so desperate to attack me that you are willing to spend the time to research posts I made a decade or more ago,I am thinking about changing my mind again right now. I think I will support whatever weasel you vote for,even if it is DeSanctimonious.
"Ahm in wid da in-crowd......"
Is there some sort of secret handshake or word I need to know?
YEE,HAW!
What I have been saying. People change their minds when they get new information. I know you don't need me to defend you, but I think the point was made in dredging up your old posts from 7 years ago, and I would be happy if it were to stop now.
-
Not embarrassed at all SneakyPete, just curious and have some time to kill while listening to music. I go outside and get hot, come back in and relax (cool off) and do some interesting research. Just something that I have time to do and you make an interesting test subject. If I was scientific I would divide in halves to more quickly find the exact point but the method I am using gets more popcorn butter on my fingers.
Edit: CyberLiberty says "I would be happy if it were to stop now."
After reading clash after clash with SneakyPete vs Mods I sure don't care to be compared to him.
Your wish is my command... I will do my research in private instead of using TBR's pages to bookmark my findings. I am just curious.
-
Not embarrassed at all SneakyPete, just curious and have some time to kill while listening to music. I go outside and get hot, come back in and relax (cool off) and do some interesting research. Just something that I have time to do and you make an interesting test subject. If I was scientific I would divide in halves to more quickly find the exact point but the method I am using gets more popcorn butter on my fingers.
Edit: CyberLiberty says "I would be happy if it were to stop now."
After reading clash after clash with SneakyPete vs Mods I sure don't care to be compared to him.
Your wish is my command... I will do my research in private instead of using TBR's pages to bookmark my findings. I am just curious.
No worries, its all good. As I said, @sneakypete doesn't need me to defend him. I work for TBR.
-
@Sighlass I definitely see a pattern developing here.
Cruz lost me when he allowed the Bush nose under his administration tent.
He was FOR Cruz until the Trumpers convinced him Bush was pulling his strings.
HE would be FOR DeSantis except the same dam people convinced him that the Govenor always carries a switchblade AND knows how to use it.
@sneakypete has Conservative bones in his body though IMHO it gets too cold up there for him to feel his bones, at times.
-
What I have been saying. People change their minds when they get new information. I know you don't need me to defend you, but I think the point was made in dredging up your old posts from 7 years ago, and I would be happy if it were to stop now.
@Cyber Liberty
To me,it reeks of desperation.
-
What I have been saying. People change their minds when they get new information. I know you don't need me to defend you, but I think the point was made in dredging up your old posts from 7 years ago, and I would be happy if it were to stop now.
Thanks, @Cyber Liberty
:beer:
-
What I'd like to know is what objective information changed before and after Tumpy to garner such welded support - Because by and large the information I have received since then has only served to reinforce what was prominently displayed all the way along... In capital letters.
I am left with the impression that such dogged faith is based in emotion, and cannot be defended objectively at all. :shrug:
-
@Sighlass
I hate to embarrass you,but SOME people learn from their mistakes,and this,in addition to more information causes them to change their minds.
You should try some of that "mind changing" some time.
BTW,since you people are so desperate to attack me that you are willing to spend the time to research posts I made a decade or more ago,I am thinking about changing my mind again right now. I think I will support whatever weasel you vote for,even if it is DeSanctimonious.
"Ahm in wid da in-crowd......"
Is there some sort of secret handshake or word I need to know?
YEE,HAW!
So.... when you were against Trump, did you support JEB and did you oppose him(Trump) then because he was orange, rude, and rich? wink777
-
So.... when you were against Trump, did you support JEB and did you oppose him then because he was orange, rude, and rich? wink777
@LMAO
Another cheap shot from the past,but I will admit to having no idea that JEB was orange,rude,and rich. Well,I did know he was rich.
-
So.... when you were against Trump, did you support JEB and did you oppose him then because he was orange, rude, and rich?
Well that was one thing consistent with Pete, there was NO love so far as I have read towards any of the Bushes. None Nada. Lol, he said he would rather vote for satan over any of the Bushes (as the lesser of two evils).
I will leave this quote for others to read... the amazing thing is it could of been written by some of us holdover anti-Trumpers today... minus a few Sneakisms thrown in for shock value of course.
No,there is no real difference,other than he has smaller hands,and her penis is battery-powered.
I am DONE voting against anyone,and have been for the last few presidential election cycles. The whole "lesser of two evils" argument is nothing but a shape-shifting lie people tell themselves to justify doing something they know in their hearts is wrong.
I either vote FOR someone because I actually want to see them in office,or I don't vote for anyone to fill that office. I am done forever with voting for the "lesser of two evils" because by definition that means I would purposely and knowingly be voting for evil. I don't have to justify my votes to you or to anyone else,but I damn sure have to justify them to ME.
You guess who had this opinion above ...
Speaking of opinions that came true... give Victoria a gold star...
(https://i.postimg.cc/htttLYqn/Sessions.jpg)
______________________________________
______________________________________
Finally the self proclaimed change in @sneakypete where he actually made a thread about his "change of heart"..... called "Meet the Depressed just talked me into voting for Trump"... October 23, 2016, 10:13:31 am
https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,231099.0.html
-
Any nationwide general election polling that doesn’t sample at D+6 is grossly flawed. The continued and expanding emergence of hyper-liberal, lazy, self-centered Gen-Z voters into the electorate will push it further to the left. And no, there is no way Trump is winning that demographic.
-
Any nationwide general election polling that doesn’t sample at D+6 is grossly flawed. The continued and expanding emergence of hyper-liberal, lazy, self-centered Gen-Z voters into the electorate will push it further to the left. And no, there is no way Trump is winning that demographic.
Depends on how pissed the lefties are over abortion IMO. My feeling is maybe the GOTV factor of it has calmed down a bit, but I could be wrong.
-
Any nationwide general election polling that doesn’t sample at D+6 is grossly flawed. The continued and expanding emergence of hyper-liberal, lazy, self-centered Gen-Z voters into the electorate will push it further to the left. And no, there is no way Trump is winning that demographic.
On the other hand, there is some evidence that Millennials are turning more conservative.
-
On the other hand, there is some evidence that Millennials are turning more conservative.
@massadvj
I think it is generally accepted that most people get more conservative as they age. Not everybody,because there seems to be a lot of young people out there today who are to the left of Marx. They could mellow out and get more conservative,but it would still be at a level most of us would consider to be far left.
Ironically enough,from what I have seen,it seems to be the biggest "pull to the right" seems to come at about the same time as life changes like getting a steady job,making house payments,and marriage/raising children. Go figure.
-
@massadvj
I think it is generally accepted that most people get more conservative as they age. Not everybody,because there seems to be a lot of young people out there today who are to the left of Marx. They could mellow out and get more conservative,but it would still be at a level most of us would consider to be far left.
Ironically enough,from what I have seen,it seems to be the biggest "pull to the right" seems to come at about the same time as life changes like getting a steady job,making house payments,and marriage/raising children. Go figure.
That's all right, @sneakypete , but I believe @massadvj is speaking to a different thing than the norm.
Gen Z is choosing traditional religion more than than Gen X... They are choosing traditional relationships, traditional gender definitions and roles...
I have been commenting on this for some time - Being a tech to the hillbillies around here and willing to barter, I see hill folk around here a lot (or did before Covid)... A subset of that is young folks who have left the city to buy land and build a life - often scratch-building a homestead, home-schooling... the whole 9 yards.
Being chock full of that sort of information, knowing all the folks to connect to, I will often sit with these kids, teaching them what they want or need, and developing a more intimate understanding of their motives than I normally would... And their stories are very much the same - Tired of the phony world of their parents they are seeking something real. And that is leading them toward conservative pastures.
My own observations are anecdotal to the point, but I have considered it a phenomena for a while.
-
That's all right, @sneakypete , but I believe @massadvj is speaking to a different thing than the norm.
Gen Z is choosing traditional religion more than than Gen X... They are choosing traditional relationships, traditional gender definitions and roles...
I have been commenting on this for some time - Being a tech to the hillbillies around here and willing to barter, I see hill folk around here a lot (or did before Covid)... A subset of that is young folks who have left the city to buy land and build a life - often scratch-building a homestead, home-schooling... the whole 9 yards.
Being chock full of that sort of information, knowing all the folks to connect to, I will often sit with these kids, teaching them what they want or need, and developing a more intimate understanding of their motives than I normally would... And their stories are very much the same - Tired of the phony world of their parents they are seeking something real. And that is leading them toward conservative pastures.
My own observations are anecdotal to the point, but I have considered it a phenomena for a while.
Nice to know. Thanks for the info.
-
Nice to know. Thanks for the info.
It really is extraordinary. I mean, it ain't like I am speaking to crowds or nothing... it's all pretty one-on-one... but I have held this information all the way along, and I never had young folks coming to me and sitting on the porch to suck it up before.
Had a similar thing impact the hillbilly scene a while back. There was a hippie gathering up here a while back... maybe in the 90s... And a whole bunch of em stayed. I mean A LOT of em. You couldn't hardly throw a rock without hitting a commune, just about anywhere there was a road into the woods.
Well eventually a hard winter came, and by spring they were all disappeared. But there's a very real clutch of hillbilly wives that came out of that crowd. Always a bit granola-head, always neck deep in foraging and natural medicine, still like their weed and rock and roll... married up to these hard-core redneck hillbillies. It is enough of a thing that there are three basic varieties of hilljilly... Actual hilljillies, born of the blood - tend to be Norweigian or Irish/ Scots-Irish. First Peoples hilljillies - Generally Salish/Kootenai, with some Blackfeet and Cheyenne, and those ex hippie gals.
This influx of young city kids coming out here stand to change the hillfolk to a similar degree.
It's a thing.
-
That's all right, @sneakypete , but I believe @massadvj is speaking to a different thing than the norm.
Gen Z is choosing traditional religion more than than Gen X... They are choosing traditional relationships, traditional gender definitions and roles...
@roamer_1
I hadn't really given it much thought,but now that you mention it,it makes sense. Seems like every generation rebels against the rules of their parents generation,just to show their independence.
Chances are this new generation will have children who will end up rebelling against leftism in order to show their independence.
I have been commenting on this for some time - Being a tech to the hillbillies around here and willing to barter, I see hill folk around here a lot (or did before Covid)... A subset of that is young folks who have left the city to buy land and build a life - often scratch-building a homestead, home-schooling... the whole 9 yards.
Being chock full of that sort of information, knowing all the folks to connect to, I will often sit with these kids, teaching them what they want or need, and developing a more intimate understanding of their motives than I normally would... And their stories are very much the same - Tired of the phony world of their parents they are seeking something real. And that is leading them toward conservative pastures.
My own observations are anecdotal to the point, but I have considered it a phenomena for a while.
Your thinking on this issue is very similar to mine. We are ALL "creatures of our environment and experiences".
Proof of this is you VERY rarely see or hear about a child that grew up in the country turning into a leftist radical,and you VERY rarely see a child that grew up in a big city growing up to live a traditional lifestyle.
It happens occasionally,but it is more the exception than it is the rule.
-
That's all right, @sneakypete , but I believe @massadvj is speaking to a different thing than the norm.
Gen Z is choosing traditional religion more than than Gen X... They are choosing traditional relationships, traditional gender definitions and roles...
I have been commenting on this for some time - Being a tech to the hillbillies around here and willing to barter, I see hill folk around here a lot (or did before Covid)... A subset of that is young folks who have left the city to buy land and build a life - often scratch-building a homestead, home-schooling... the whole 9 yards.
Being chock full of that sort of information, knowing all the folks to connect to, I will often sit with these kids, teaching them what they want or need, and developing a more intimate understanding of their motives than I normally would... And their stories are very much the same - Tired of the phony world of their parents they are seeking something real. And that is leading them toward conservative pastures.
My own observations are anecdotal to the point, but I have considered it a phenomena for a while.
Interesting.
Up until I retired in May 2021 I was a college professor. My experience with GenZ was that they are extremely low in self-esteem, terribly undereducated, and psychologically dependent on their social networks which insist on strict adherence to subcultural "norms" regardless of how absurd they may be.
I was a known conservative/libertarian in my university, and until 2020 or so I was respected and listened to by students, even if most of them did not agree with me. Then there was a seismic shift, and some students started complaining that my point of view was "toxic" and they were "threatened" whenever they were in my presence. This was what I saw as the dangerous, passive-aggressive political nature of this generation. They are like Bolsheviks.
Fortunately, it was time to retire anyway. I am glad not to be having to deal with them anymore. They are for the most part incapable of rigorous academic work. They know no math or basic grammar to speak of. The universities have dumbed down the curriculum to accommodate them and keep the dollars flowing.
I know I sound like a dinosaur and I probably am.
-
Interesting.
Up until I retired in May 2021 I was a college professor. My experience with GenZ was that they are extremely low in self-esteem, terribly undereducated, and psychologically dependent on their social networks which insist on strict adherence to subcultural "norms" regardless of how absurd they may be.
I was a known conservative/libertarian in my university, and until 2020 or so I was respected and listened to by students, even if most of them did not agree with me. Then there was a seismic shift, and some students started complaining that my point of view was "toxic" and they were "threatened" whenever they were in my presence. This was what I saw as the dangerous, passive-aggressive political nature of this generation. They are like Bolsheviks.
Fortunately, it was time to retire anyway. I am glad not to be having to deal with them anymore. They are for the most part incapable of rigorous academic work. They know no math or basic grammar to speak of. The universities have dumbed down the curriculum to accommodate them and keep the dollars flowing.
I know I sound like a dinosaur and I probably am.
You may be experiencing that from within a bubble that is different from mine... My sister is a whacko-liberal, married to a college dean, and her opinion of this generation mirrors yours - Albeit that she and hers are as liberal as they come, which is different from you... but the environs are probably similar to yours...
I have avoided the modern education system like a plague. Likewise cities... The kids I am running into have discovered that perspective. Mostly blue collar, some with a bit of college, but having dropped out, all of them utterly ignorant of country life, but what of it they've watched on yootoob.
Imagine cutting loose from the hamster wheel and attempting to enter into an environment entirely alien to all you know, and attempt to enter into a society built on the opposite of what you were taught, a highly introverted society, closed tight against the outside... Well, that's what these kids are up against. It is no small thing for them. It takes stones and hair... something they likely don't possess.
Some don't succeed... their broken dreams lie scattered on the forest floor. But them that do... they become evangelists. They KNOW which way is right.
It is quite a pastime for me, or at least it was. As a teacher, I am sure you will understand me when I speak of a moment when a student's lights click on... That moment of awareness, when understanding dawns. Of course I met that moment many times in my own kids... But it is different with someone outside one's clan. I have come to find that a most enjoyable moment to look for. It is very rewarding.
And the struggle - not over books, but over life and death in real time. The moment a kid from the city has to kill his first chicken, as it were... It is so profound. And there are many chickens to kill.
I admire it in those that prevail, I really do. It is one thing to be raised up in it... Another to come to it on purpose... Because it is a hard, hard way. Those that do have truly overcome much.
-
You may be experiencing that from within a bubble that is different from mine... My sister is a whacko-liberal, married to a college dean, and her opinion of this generation mirrors yours - Albeit that she and hers are as liberal as they come, which is different from you... but the environs are probably similar to yours...
I have avoided the modern education system like a plague. Likewise cities... The kids I am running into have discovered that perspective. Mostly blue collar, some with a bit of college, but having dropped out, all of them utterly ignorant of country life, but what of it they've watched on yootoob.
Imagine cutting loose from the hamster wheel and attempting to enter into an environment entirely alien to all you know, and attempt to enter into a society built on the opposite of what you were taught, a highly introverted society, closed tight against the outside... Well, that's what these kids are up against. It is no small thing for them. It takes stones and hair... something they likely don't possess.
Some don't succeed... their broken dreams lie scattered on the forest floor. But them that do... they become evangelists. They KNOW which way is right.
It is quite a pastime for me, or at least it was. As a teacher, I am sure you will understand me when I speak of a moment when a student's lights click on... That moment of awareness, when understanding dawns. Of course I met that moment many times in my own kids... But it is different with someone outside one's clan. I have come to find that a most enjoyable moment to look for. It is very rewarding.
And the struggle - not over books, but over life and death in real time. The moment a kid from the city has to kill his first chicken, as it were... It is so profound. And there are many chickens to kill.
I admire it in those that prevail, I really do. It is one thing to be raised up in it... Another to come to it on purpose... Because it is a hard, hard way. Those that do have truly overcome much.
Yes, and I did have some exceptional ones, even at the end. It was just that they were fewer and farther in between.
-
People change their minds when they perceive they are wrong. I refuse to get on Pete's shit for that. I may or may not agree with his current perception because I have a job here, and that ain't it.
@Cyber Liberty
Yeah,imagine THAT!
What a concept!
@sneakypete you could have ended your post right there, there is no need for the personal insult
Then again,if you don't HAVE a mind,you fall in behind a backstabbing litttle bitch like Dey Do Ron Rom
.
-
Then again,if you don't HAVE a mind,you fall in behind a backstabbing litttle bitch like Dey Do Ron Rom.
For the umpteenth time, how is DeSantis a backstabber? Are you still insisting that Trump promised to make him his VP?
-
For the umpteenth time, how is DeSantis a backstabber? Are you still insisting that Trump promised to make him his VP?
@Hoodat
For the umpteenth time,"You know,but refuse to admit it."
-
I really don't think that even @Right_in_Virginia can come up with the link to justify your view that DeSantis ever promised Trump that he wouldn't run against him @sneakypete
*And she's very Resourceful
-
I really don't think that even @Right_in_Virginia can come up with the link to justify your view that DeSantis ever promised Trump that he wouldn't run against him @sneakypete
*And she's very Resourceful
@corbe
Ok,PLEASE supply me with the name of the poster who is claiming I even wrote such a thing. I did NOT make that claim,period.
-
@corbe
Ok,PLEASE supply me with the name of the poster who is claiming I even wrote such a thing. I did NOT make that claim,period.
Isn't that the basis for the 'Stab you in the back' DeSantis theory? What do you think Desantis owes Trump or the bigger question I would ask Is Trump Entitled to it?
GHWB learned that lesson the hard way.
-
@corbe
Ok,PLEASE supply me with the name of the poster who is claiming I even wrote such a thing. I did NOT make that claim,period.
This is true. @sneakypete claimed that DeSantis was supposed to be Trump's running mate. I think it was @Right_in_Virginia who claimed that DeSantis promised not to run against him.
-
Isn't that the basis for the 'Stab you in the back' DeSantis theory?
I've been trying to get an answer to that for months now.
-
Who knows what deals will be cut by the convention? Just a lot of speculative hoo-hah at this point.
-
Who knows what deals will be cut by the convention? Just a lot of speculative hoo-hah at this point.
Heck, they could all kiss and make up by then.
-
Isn't that the basis for the 'Stab you in the back' DeSantis theory?
NOW you are going to switch it to "the basis" because your charge is proven to be false?
What do you think Desantis owes Trump or the bigger question I would ask Is Trump Entitled to it?
DeSanctimonious OWES Trump nothing. AFAIK,there was no "I scratch your back,you scratch my back" agreement between the two.
Of course,that changes nothing. It still makes him a whiny little backstabbing bitch.
Or at least it does those of us who have a personal sense of honor.
-
Heck, they could all kiss and make up by then.
Exactly.
In the meantime, the kerfuffle will keep everyone else out of the news.
-
(https://publicrelationsmatters.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Reagan-Mondale-debate-There-you-go-again-again.gif)
with that 'back stabbing' $hit @sneakypete
-
(https://publicrelationsmatters.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Reagan-Mondale-debate-There-you-go-again-again.gif)
with that 'back stabbing' $hit @sneakypete
@corbe
Don't blame ME,bubba!
I ain't the one doing it.
-
I really don't think that even @Right_in_Virginia can come up with the link to justify your view that DeSantis ever promised Trump that he wouldn't run against him @sneakypete
*And she's very Resourceful
In defense of @sneakypete , I'd say his argument is that the loyalty obligation DeSantis had to Trump is inherent in Trump supporting him in 2018, and doesn't need to be explicitly stated to exist. I personally don't agree with that argument, but I think that's his point. Therefore, you don't need a link or direct quote.
-
In defense of @sneakypete , I'd say his argument is that the loyalty obligation DeSantis had to Trump is inherent in Trump supporting him in 2018, and doesn't need to be explicitly stated to exist. I personally don't agree with that argument, but I think that's his point. Therefore, you don't need a link or direct quote.
@Maj. Bill Martin
That IS my point.
Thank you very much for expressing it better than I was able to express it.
-
In defense of @sneakypete , I'd say his argument is that the loyalty obligation DeSantis had to Trump is inherent in Trump supporting him in 2018, and doesn't need to be explicitly stated to exist. I personally don't agree with that argument, but I think that's his point. Therefore, you don't need a link or direct quote.
It goes deeper than this. Trump's career saving support for RDS in both the 2018 primary and again in the general elections is only where it begins.
Beyond his using Trump to save his career, RDS was vocal and effusive in his praise of Donald Trump --- from the economy (not trade), to judges, to appointments, immigration, the military, Israel, his support and push for freedom in our hemisphere, his handling of COVID and assistance for Florida ---- RDS couldn't stop praising President Trump.
In speeches, interviews, tweets, going back to his impassioned soliloquy on the debate stage defending Trump against attacks from every corner of the political sphere the likes of which no President has endured, ending with the promise "I am not going to pile on" ----- RDS presented himself as a loyal supporter of the President.
Everything changed when DeSantis crossed the term limits Rubicon in Florida and jettisoned the President. In so doing, RDS proved himself to be a lying fraud and backstabbing little bitch ----- not only toward the President, but toward his supporters, as well.
On the plus side, RDS has become the author of one of the most stunning and ultimately fatal self-inflicted political wounds in American history.
@sneakypete
@corbe
-
Claims of a “Stab in the back” are so redolent of the failed socialist ideologies of the past.
I wonder if past is prologue in this case?
-
Everything changed when DeSantis crossed the term limits Rubicon in Florida and jettisoned the President.
Uh, no. Trump and his "lying little bitch" sycophants turned against DeSantis long before your Rubicon was crossed. That's when everything changed.
-
And all this time I thought the primary was about selecting the best person to run for office and not who owes who...
-
And all this time I thought the primary was about selecting the best person to run for office and not who owes who...
Everything with that guy is personal. The boss who likes whoever sucks up the most rather than whoever is best at the job.
-
Uh, no. Trump and his "lying little bitch" sycophants turned against DeSantis long before your Rubicon was crossed. That's when everything changed.
:thumbsup: