Trump 2024 ???

[BugI02]

You would know this how? So either you're a trumper or a democrat? That's an extraordinarily unlikely binary. Independents figured in heavily on Trump's unlikely win in swing states.

But. Go ahead. Alienate everyone else. **** it. Trump juice is enough to win on I guess. And when Biden 2.0 is inaugurated (whoever that is) I'm going to make sure you remember those words. You'll probably be complaining about cheating, because Biden 2.0 couldn't possibly beat your beloved Trump.

Maybe America Hasn’t Suffered Enough - The American Spectator | USA News and PoliticsThe American Spectator | USA News and Politics

It's late as I write this, though not late enough to know how things will turn out. But there are things we can safely say just after midnight Eastern time on

spectator.org

 

[indyblue]

Nope. I think that used to be true but not any longer. I think most people in the US lean left, but could potentially vote Republican under some circumstances.

54 percent of Republicans want him to run for president again in 2024. Further, a majority of those who voted for Trump in 2020 want him to run again as well.

Blue hilight is in addition to R's. So I take take that to mean the majority of I's that voted for trump before will again*.

* standard disclaimer of validity of polls

 

[jamil]

Because he was an unknown long shot and the establishment wing of his own party was also against his ideas, he did not have much of a bench to choose from the first time. That resulted in some appointees being just there to stand on his shoulders so they could reach the next rung of their ladder up.

Yep. not to mention, later on, that the cabal destroyed the reputation of anyone willing to be in his government.

The ongoing effort to limit blame to only Trump for 2020 as well as demonize him personally and having the establishment wing still against him will pretty much guarantee that is again the case

It's a problem.

What mystifies me is why they think anyone who IS America First to the bone won't get the same ****ty end of that stick, or conversely why they think anyone who the establishment wing is willing to tolerate could in any way be authentically America First. Something has to change. I, and those similarly aligned, have had a taste of having a president who is genuinely America First, who accomplished a lot given the overwhelming nature of opposition to him, who fought for the ideals he espoused and who still hasn't given up. There is no going back

Anyone who wants to be heir apparent has big shoes to fill

I think that the media's success in defining a candidate on the right is dependent on their ability to make it stick. Just using DeSantis as an example in FL, the extent to which the media did try to destroy him politically, did not stick. The don't-say-gay language didn't stick. All their attacks didn't stick. Because what the people in FL saw, was him competently governing. If a leader presents a stark difference between what is claimed, and actual behavior, the **** will only stick with the people who wouldn't vote for him anyway.

No doubt it would be ratcheted up orders of magnitude at the federal level. But that's the formula. Don't let it stick. Republicans in the past let it stick by not fighting it. Trump lets it stick by acting in a way that's easy to make it stick. Trump as POTUS had the bully pulpit. I think he could have been more successful if he'd have used it to show all Americans that he's working for them. I don't think he used the bully pulpit to his advantage.

 

[Twangbanger]

No, we're saying that you always sound like you believe that if Patton hadn't slapped the gold-bricking soldier he would have been a better general. He would not have been, he just would have perhaps furthered his career

We are saying that expecting Trump to self-censor in the interest of furthering his career is suicidal. If he becomes just another polling driven political climber he will no longer appeal to the base; and conversely, anyone who would appeal to the base will have to show real conviction and not just focus-group driven pandering. Anyone but Trump starts at a disadvantage with a significant part of the republican electorate unless and until they prove their bona fides

If you don't believe that, then why try so hard to convince us not to write him in in '24? 'Protest' voting used to be all the rage on INGO. Gimme some of that handwash

I would have cheered out loud if Trump had fired Victoria Coates' ass for disloyalty. (Regardless of any civil service or whatever other BS laws might have prohibited it - IANAL and don't care).

Why part of conservative bona-fides requires you to be an a$$hole? Why couldn't Trump point out RINO, CoC, and NeoCons' fecklessness without saying stupid things like "I prefer people who didn't get captured?" Why are the two simultaneously necessary in your mind?

I know why Trump can't change, and I don't expect him to. But you seem to have a philosophical objection to mathematical reality. You can't accept that this motivates a certain set of voters to show up and oppose him. It's true whether you accept it or not. It doesn't have to make sense to you. There are not enough Trumpers to win a general election. That means he has to win people over. Things like those mentioned above sabotage his ability to do that.

If Trumpers will not vote for Trump if he tones down his a$$hole rhetoric, then it's really Trumpers who are destroying our chances of having a conservative President.

 

[KG1]

Honestly I liked that he said "****hole countries". But I guess maybe I'm a little bit of an ***hole too. I was entertained by it, but, not everyone appreciates the humor in that. It would have been politically better for him not to say that, or say it in a way that doesn't turn people off. Another one was his inarticulate way of saying about Mexicans, "they're not sending their best." And of course he was talking about MS13. But he lofted a floater down the middle in the strike zone and the dishonest media smacked it. That was another unforced error.

I think the term he used was "they are animals" crossing the border illegally Now of course like you said he was taking about MS 13 but the MSM pushed the narrative that he was talking about all illegals coming across the border.

It's just like when what he said about Charlottsville was misrepresented. Biden was a big one on the campaign trail that kept pushing the false narrative along with the MSM.

Those are a couple of examples of how the Democrats will go to great lengths to misrepresent what Trump has said.

 

[jamil]

Blue hilight is in addition to R's. So I take take that to mean the majority of I's that voted for trump before will again*.

* standard disclaimer of validity of polls

He needs ALL of them to win. Having only 54% of Republicans wanting him to run means 46% don't want him to run. A majority of the independents who voted for him last time isn't 100%. Again, this is a different political landscape. You're not gonna get rid of mail in ballots. You're not going to get rid of ballot harvesting unless you find a way to beat Democrats with it. So in this political world, you have to get everyone who voted for Trump before to go to vote for him again, and then some. I just don't see that happening for Trump. Probably any Republican for that matter.

 

[foszoe]

I came back in because you kept mentioning me specifically in posts as if I was also in some way at fault for your little hissy fit

Keep my name outta yo' 'mouth' and we will be done

You were in no way at fault.

 

[BugI02]

Life is rarely binary

jamil shill account, is that you?

 

[Ingomike]

It's in the swing districts they performed poorly.

It is the same old states that allow the vote to occur in an environment that facilitates dem debauchery…

 

[Ingomike]

Could you show the math on this? I don't want you to get defensive; I just want to be shown how 75 million votes translates to victory, when it didn't in 2020, and with Democrats getting better and better at mail ballots every time around.

Easy, the folks here beefing get off their butts, stop whining about the party or some other boogieman and get out the votes, you know, kinda like dems do.

 

[Ingomike]

And if the predictable response is, "But don't you see they cheated!", then fine - how do you propose that Trump gets around that, when at least 40% of white voters find him poisonous? If Trump couldn't get around "the steal" in 2020, how does he get around it in 2024? Republicans cannot win "close ones." Trump guarantees the GOP can never do better than "close."

Who can get over this hurdle? You guys act like Trump is unique in not having the ability to get over it. Truth is Trump has a base he needs to grow that base. No other candidate has a base…

 

[jamil]

Maybe America Hasn’t Suffered Enough - The American Spectator | USA News and PoliticsThe American Spectator | USA News and Politics

It's late as I write this, though not late enough to know how things will turn out. But there are things we can safely say just after midnight Eastern time on

spectator.org

That's actually a pretty good article. Some things wrong. but pretty good. I disagree with the conlcusion that DeSantis is the blueprint for the GOP. I kinda think Lake is, notwithstanding that Lake lost, through questionable circumstances, and DeSantis won in a landslide in a smo0thly run election.

 

[jamil]

Who can get over this hurdle? You guys act like Trump is unique in not having the ability to get over it. Truth is Trump has a base he needs to grow that base. No other candidate has a base…

Trump has some unique baggage that makes it less likely than someone who doesn't have that baggage. But like I've been saying, I'm kinda black-pilled on the whole thing. I hope I'm wrong but I don't think any Republican can win. But 2024 is still in the distance. We'll see.

Edit: Just noticed your last sentence. WTF? No other candidate has a base? Don't you mean cult? If it's a base around a certain ideal, like AF, that's not a person. If you're talking about base as in people fiercely loyal to a person, that's problematic because that person you're talking about is poison to a huge chunk of the electorate.

 

[jamil]

Since I had not responded to Ziggidy, I figured we were done with the subject. You came in and decided to interject into the conversation...twice and twice said you didn't care....i think you're right. When you say you don't give a whatever, it's got a different meaning because you keep responding.

Uh, I think I asked you for an explanation of the "Judas of 2000 years ago". I still don't know why it's relevant that it's specific. I'd kinda like to know.

 

[jamil]

jamil shill account, is that you?

yes. Yes it is. See. That's another way I throw people off track about my shill accounts. I rail against Ayn Rand's horrible prose, and then pick a screen name like J Galt. See? No one got the wiser until I mistakenly spoke negatively about binaries. I mean. Who does that?

 

[jamil]

It is the same old states that allow the vote to occur in an environment that facilitates dem debauchery…

yes. The blue/pink haired activists harvesting votes don't have to give a handies to people to get them to vote against someone they can paint as a Trumper. They'll do that for free.

It's the world we live in now. GOP better figure out how to use harvesting for their benefit.

 

[indyblue]

Personally I don't think any of it matters. At all. Any more.

After this latest passage of the omnibus bill, we conservatives are done for! They just proved the UNIparty has complete and utter control.

They keep referring to themselves as leaders. In this Democratic Republic we aren't supposed to have any leaders, we're supposed to have REPRESENTITVES that REPRESENT the will of their constituents; We The People. Clearly that's no longer the case.

If Trump doesn't get the nomination, or if he does and loses again I am officially through with all of them. I'll vote indepentdent no matter what the cost because what we're doing isn't working and to keep voting R or D won't fix it either and won't cost any more.

Obama won. He was right when he said "Today we begin the fundamental transformation of the USA" and he has.

EDIT: Oh, and it wasn't Trump that divided us, it was Obammy that started the great divide.

 

[J Galt]

jamil shill account, is that you?

Clearly it is. We typed the same words, in completely different posts, so obviously that means we are totally aligned.

foszoe and I both drink water. Clearly that means we are "literally" the same person.

Senseless posts detract from any credibility the person making it may have.

 

[jamil]

Clearly it is. We typed the same words, in completely different posts, so obviously that means we are totally aligned.

foszoe and I both drink water. Clearly that means we are "literally" the same person.

Senseless posts detract from any credibility the person making it may have.

Wait. Foz is not my shill account. Just wanted to correct my shill account account on that.

 

[jamil]

You would have thought after the Jan 6th ordeal Trump would have been prosecuted and tried!