Trump 2024 ???

[foszoe]

Trump didn't do all he could do. He could have done all the policy stuff with half the theatrics. That would have done more for the country than what he did and could have won him reelection

 

[BugI02]

We don't even have another choice at this point. Only potential choices. But there is only one choice ever for loyal Trumpers, regardless of any facts.

This is where you typically overplay your hand. You haven't made a choice, you are simply ruling out one of the possibilities

Why on earth would you think that those of us who HAVE made a choice should then be expected to rule out our preference because your OPINION is such that we have chosen unwisely, and then you ladle on some pseudo psychological bull**** designed to paint us as unable to 'look carefully at the issues from all sides™' when we merely disagree with you

Honestly, dude, if you were really all that as far as how carefully you seek to support your preconceived notions 'examine the issues from all sides', you wouldn't need to sell it so continuously. It would be apparent to everyone by inspection

 

[jamil]

Ok, sure... his stance is the EU should be giving more. What about us, the US?

Also, where do you get the 1/6th number? I'm not seeing any source for that and the sources I have don't show anything like that.


What is his stance for US policy?

Some here think the number should be zero an not our business.

Some think the support should be big, maybe even the amount spent and passed to be spent.

Others might be somewhere in the middle.

Perhaps any words about whether it's too hot, too cold, or just right?

And what the **** is a GWH?

Good Will Hunting?

 

[jamil]

He did lead the change in the tax laws,

Yep. There's one. And that's not nothing.

 

[BugI02]

First off more of your putting words in others mouths. A belief that Trump is best suited to the challenge is not “rooted in persona” it is rooted in actual evaluations of what the individual did previously under unprecedented fire.

I think the set up is that you obviously haven't looked dispassionately at all sides of the issue if you disagree with the prime exponent of his own such consideration

We are wrong, ipso facto

 

[BugI02]

Trump didn't do all he could do. He could have done all the policy stuff with half the theatrics. That would have done more for the country than what he did and could have won him reelection

Thank you, Dr Hindsight, for your unsupported opinion

I shall give it the careful consideration it deserves

 

[jamil]

This is where you typically overplay your hand. You haven't made a choice, you are simply ruling out one of the possibilities

I think I've explained my hand quite thoroughly. And given the past performance, I'm hoping for a better choice than Trump. No guarantees. I might have to settle for "meh, it's better than voting Democrat."

That's the executive summary of my hand.

Why on earth would you think that those of us who HAVE made a choice should then be expected to rule out our preference because your OPINION is such that we have chosen unwisely, and then you ladle on some pseudo psychological bull**** designed to paint us as unable to 'look carefully at the issues from all sides™' when we merely disagree with you

It's the fact that you HAVE made a choice that contributes to a growing belief that it's more about the man than the policies. It's my opinion that you have chosen unwisely. I'm pretty sure you have opinions about that too. I don't have to have your same opinions. You don't have to have mine. See? That's how this individual thing works.

I think you push that "look carefully at the issues from all sides" harder than reality expects. Maybe you do so because it's the angle you've grinded, so stick with it.

Having the capacity to see a point from different perspectives aids in wiser decisions. But it's just a tool. I don't always use it either. Humans do that. But, the point is that it's a tool. You can choose to use that for its best purposes, or you can use your rough hewn club to use on everything. Like that binary? I made it just for you.

Honestly, dude, if you were really all that as far as how carefully you seek to support your preconceived notions 'examine the issues from all sides', you wouldn't need to sell it so continuously. It would be apparent to everyone by inspection

I'm not sorry that I don't live up to all the standards you've assigned to me, if that's what you're looking for.

 

[foszoe]

Thank you, Dr Hindsight, for your unsupported opinion

I shall give it the careful consideration it deserves

Simply an answer to someone asking if Trump had done all he could, Tick.

 

[jamil]

Thank you, Dr Hindsight, for your unsupported opinion

I shall give it the careful consideration it deserves

Wait. The folly of behaving like a spoiled brat on the political stage is hindsight?

 

[Leadeye]

Personally, I don't think it's going to make a difference who runs, they will lose. We have to figure out how to deal with the "national machine" or you won't see anything better than what we have now. Money, and who is spending it will decide the leadership of this country and right now big lefty money has a powerful machine combination.

Money talks, the bigger it is the louder it talks.

 

[jamil]

Personally, I don't think it's going to make a difference who runs, they will lose. We have to figure out how to deal with the "national machine" or you won't see anything better than what we have now. Money, and who is spending it will decide the leadership of this country and right now big lefty money has a powerful machine combination.

Money talks, the bigger it is the louder it talks.

I think the lessons from the mid-term elections need to be learned or they'll be repeated. Some takeaways, but not an exhaustive list,

* Learn to use the voting system a state has to your advantage. Complaining about it won't win elections. It is what it is.

* Learn to harvest ballots effectively, efficiently.

* put up serious candidates in important races. Name recognition might be important but Oz and Walker prove that losers aren't made winners just because people recognize their names.

* anticipate ways Democrats will bend and break rules and make a plan to deal with it

 

[1DOWN4UP]

As F uped as thing are now, and trillion seems to be the old billion, will anyone who actually wants to fix things actually show up to play? I don't think so. I have only seen 2 attempt to fight the Swamp in my lifetime. Jesus ain't commin' to run for POTOS. WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT THE JOB?

 

[Leadeye]

It's going to be tough, but the we need to figure out how to stop the ballot harvesting as it's the key to success. It's either that or we will have to match the number of activists in various places and their organization to achieve parity and I think that's going to be tough. Republicans will have to commit a lot of money to a national "ground war" that I don't think they will.

 

[BugI02]

Also, where do you get the 1/6th number? I'm not seeing any source for that and the sources I have don't show anything like that.

It isn't something I bookmarked, so I can't find it right now. I can give you charts that show we have given 4x the military aid to Ukraine as the entire rest of the world has, so that would I think make the 6x what NATO/EU has done plausible

Those charts would be from the CSIS (Center for Strategic and International Studies) and would only be up through the end of June this year. You would need to interpolate from the bar graphs. I'll keep looking for the six to one claim

 

[BugI02]

And what the **** is a GWH?

Great White Hope

 

[bwframe]

... we need to figure out how to stop the ballot harvesting as it's the key to success...

I believe that's what Trump was trying to get across with his famous "constitution" remark.

The problem is that elections are state issues. The valid argument is that a handful of "purple" states end up allowing conditions such as ballot harvesting, which are ripe for uncatchable fraud. This uncatchable fraud is common in the blue states. With all of these loose "rules" in so called swing states, their fraud can tip to "win" the whole country. Exactly as they did in 2020.

They have generations of dems that have been raised to win by whatever means. Why do we think they argue so vehemently against voter ID? They can't win if they can't cheat.

Right now, I think our only answer is to overwhelm the dems with real votes that they cannot realistically beat by cheating.

 

[jamil]

Great White Hope

Dang it! I was gonna say that as a joke and would have gotten a kick out of being ironically correct!

But instead I went with the less controversial one, Good Will Hunting. Missed opportunities.

 

[jamil]

It's going to be tough, but the we need to figure out how to stop the ballot harvesting as it's the key to success. It's either that or we will have to match the number of activists in various places and their organization to achieve parity and I think that's going to be tough. Republicans will have to commit a lot of money to a national "ground war" that I don't think they will.

Ballot harvesting isn't gonna stop in states that aren't run by Republicans willing to stop it.

I don't think we have to match their number. Just need to turn enough apathy into votes to get it done.

In terms of ground game funding, that probably needs to start happening soon.

 

[Leadeye]

I believe that's what Trump was trying to get across with his famous "constitution" remark.

The problem is that elections are state issues. The valid argument is that a handful of "purple" states end up allowing conditions such as ballot harvesting, which are ripe for uncatchable fraud. This uncatchable fraud is common in the blue states. With all of these loose "rules" in so called swing states, their fraud can tip to "win" the whole country. Exactly as they did in 2020.

They have generations of dems that have been raised to win by whatever means. Why do we think they argue so vehemently against voter ID? They can't win if they can't cheat.

Right now, I think our only answer is to overwhelm the dems with real votes that they cannot realistically beat by cheating.

I hope they can find those those real votes. My take on the last election is that the national machine is running well and refining it's organization. I remember reading about the people watching the ballot boxes and the pile of abuse they received from big media over this. I suspect if the idea of watching these boxes becomes popular you will see the machine pay thugs to disrupt the watching and we'll be well on our way to seeing the national machine's SA, with all of it's future implications.

 

[bwframe]

I hope they can find those those real votes. My take on the last election is that the national machine is running well and refining it's organization. I remember reading about the people watching the ballot boxes and the pile of abuse they received from big media over this. I suspect if the idea of watching these boxes becomes popular you will see the machine pay thugs to disrupt the watching and we'll be well on our way to seeing the national machine's SA, with all of it's future implications.

I agree, it's very scary. We can not know until it's too late that there will never be a nation effecting election we can win again?

On the other hand, in recent years we had wins and or better than should have results in VA, PA, NY and NJ.

Another thing to consider is how sentiment can vary with successful national narrative changes. Would we have had the red wave we were supposed to last election, if not for the SCOTUS ruling on Roe vs Wade? Would SCOTUS have ruled on Roe prior to the election, had they not been prompted by the leak? Why have we still not found the leaker?