DeSantis 2024?

[jamil]

Tell Trump to quit blaming Christie for recommending Wray. Own it.

If his advisors are to blame for the bad decisions they advised him on in a practical sense, then his advisors are also responsible for his good decisions in a practical sense that they advised him on. It cuts both ways. The same reasons people people give Trump all the credit for scotus picks works equally with the Wray decision.

That said, to my point on scotus picks, Presidents don’t know. That’s why they have advisors. You pick good ones, your decisions tend to be better. You pick bad ones? That’s how it goes. I don’t blame Trump in a practical sense for picking Wray. But he picked the advisor.

What I will blame Trump for. The buck does not stop with him. If you’re president, you own the decisions regardless of what you were advised.

In that sense we can give Trump credit for scotus picks. In that sense we can blame him for Wray. A strong and honorable leader seizes responsibility both ways. With Trump the buck stops with someone else if it’s bad and of course he’s quite willing to seize credit for things that turn out well.

 

[KG1]

If his advisors are to blame for the bad decisions they advised him on in a practical sense, then his advisors are also responsible for his good decisions in a practical sense that they advised him on. It cuts both ways. The same reasons people people give Trump all the credit for scotus picks works equally with the Wray decision.

That said, to my point on scotus picks, Presidents don’t know. That’s why they have advisors. You pick good ones, your decisions tend to be better. You pick bad ones? That’s how it goes. I don’t blame Trump in a practical sense for picking Wray. But he picked the advisor.

What I will blame Trump for. The buck does not stop with him. If you’re president, you own the decisions regardless of what you were advised.

In that sense we can give Trump credit for scotus picks. In that sense we can blame him for Wray. A strong and honorable leader seizes responsibility both ways. With Trump the buck stops with someone else if it’s bad and of course he’s quite willing to seize credit for things that turn out well.

I think Trump should've just stuck with his answer that it probably was a mistake to pick Wray without shifting the blame to Christie and left it at that, but I can see why he did it to call into question Christie's judgement as a primary opponent in recommending Wray.

 

[KLB]

Are you serious?
He doesn't get credit because - he had help and he had advice - Oh Waaaa!

If you want to stand on that kind of logic you better go back and reevaluate all the credit ever given to any leaders anywhere for anything.

The only real credit is being President when circumstance gave him the opportunity to appoint three new justices. Right place at the right time.

 

[jamil]

I think Trump should've just stuck with his answer that it probably was a mistake to pick Wray without shifting the blame to Christie and left it at that, but I can see why he did it to call into question Christie's judgement as a primary opponent in recommending Wray.

Fair point.

 

[nonobaddog]

When a federal judge makes a bonehead decision, or even a good decision, and somebody writes a news article about it they seem to always include that the judge was a Bush appointee or obummer appointee or a Lincoln appointee or whatever. They never say who the fricking advisers were or are. For the entire time that judge is sitting he is tied to the appointing president who gets credit in the public eye, positive or negative, for the appointment. This really isn't difficult.

 

[oze]

I'd say it's an exception. Conservatives do have their sacred cows, and I don't mean this mockingly or dismissively. There are political planks that are essential to maintaining the base.

It's an absolute, 100% litmus test for me. I suspect that puts me in the (non-zero) minority, but that doesn't even factor in my decision-making.

 

[Ingomike]

What? He gets credit for deciding to go with the ones he was advised to pick. He could have chosen his sister. That’s all any president does is pick from those advisors suggest. I didn’t say he gets zero credit. But you guys act like he gets all the credit. Maybe give some credit to the federalist society. They made the list. And probably Mitch McCo…nevermind. Whatever he contributed in advice, I just can’t.

The gambling experts can tell you about all the sure bets, but at the end of the day you, and you alone make the pick. Trump gets all the credit for making the right picks. Just like I gave George H W Bust all the blame for Souter…

 

[BugI02]

If people think the corrupt pedo influence pedler sucks less than the corrupt document stealing porn star ****ing bully does, then I don't think Trump comes out on top of that race [there just hasn't been enough pain yet]

Reach across the aisle is just another term for surrender, and Trump was electable in 2016. The need to change because you don't like him is exaggerated

Go examine the history of electoral demographics and see just how few of those claiming to be 'independent' actually are

In Reagan's re-election in 1984, independents still broke 3 : 5 for democrats in what was the greatest modern landslide ever

Even in 1988, the broke 4 : 5 for Dukakis, for god's sake

They're only independent in their own mind, the only way to move them away from the politics of faux 'helping the needy and protecting the people from greedy capitalists' is for the alternative to just be too painful (See: Jimmy Carter/record interest rates and inflation)

Those people are never going to vote for a conservative in numbers high enough to make much of a difference. The nominee needs to be out there hammering issues that concern the middle and the middle class the most, and many of those are not social issues. Trump hit it out of the park with ending needless foreign wars and having a strong economy as well as bring back domestic manufacturing and the good jobs that go with it. Those issues still resonate but most people can't see how social issues like restricting trans-affirming care will actually benefit them where it counts. They're uncomfortable with it but they're more worried about maintaining or improving their current lifestyle

IMO you just parrot the 'conventional wisdom' that conservatism can't stand on its own and has to make the tent so big as to become meaningless. If the elections are actually free and fair (at least most of them) and that many people can't see that what we had is better than what we've got then we're sunk anyway. There is recent evidence (polling) that shows only about 1/4 of DEMOCRATS agree with their party's hard left positions, preferring a more middle ground approach. But as I've said before, the only method history shows is proven to work is to utterly defeat an enemy and then perhaps be magnanimous as to terms if they deserve it. Conservative light/establishment GOP just doesn't cut it anymore. In todays political environment Romney would be polling like Asa Hutchinson outside of Utah (and maybe inside the state, too), that soften your image to appeal to people who will NEVER vote republican is poison to your own base. That type of politician is a dime a dozen and nobody is buying

I don't believe DeSantis is the answer at this moment, if ever. Seems like his donors don't, either

 

[BugI02]

Trump can't talk about election reform without making it about him. And Democrats have been successful in making elections a referendum on Trump. As has been pointed out many times in these election threads, Trump's 2022 candidates didn't fair well because Democrats were able to use that to stir up votes against.

History cautions against refighting the last war, using the same tactics. That would seem to apply just as much to democrats as republicans

 

[BugI02]

And again, yes, he's responsible for the shift in views around the trust issue with elections. It's like half the people think the problem with elections is that Democrats cheated. The other half think Trump tried to cheat when he pulled that **** with the delegates.

I think this gap is unbridgeable at this time. It is analogous to the liberal SCOTUS/conservative(constitutional) SCOTUS, partisans think excesses in one direction were just fine when it was their preferred direction and think it is a problem that needs to be addressed when exactly the same thing happens just not in their preferred direction

People that think election problems began and ended with January 6 are self-deluded

 

[BugI02]

I completely agree. Can Trump do this? If not, he should have a surrogate do it for him. I think that could work. But, it's not the top on the list of platform positions. It's near the top in terms of importance, because if we don't have fair elections, we can't have a functioning democratically determined republic.

Trump/Nunes 2024?

 

[oze]

The gambling experts can tell you about all the sure bets, but at the end of the day you, and you alone make the pick. Trump gets all the credit for making the right picks. Just like I gave George H W Bust all the blame for Souter…

...and I'll never forgive Reagan for Sandra Day O'Connor.

 

[BugI02]

About his participation in overturning RvW, those were chosen by the federalist society. All Trump did was choose from the list with advisement from Mitch McConnell.

The usual Trump deserves little or no credit for ACTUAL accomplishments bull****

You focus primarily on his perceived flaws and then claim even-handedness

He was given the list, but he certainly did not have to choose from it. He could have nominated a Harriet Meiers type if he wanted to. His imprimatur is what made those picks (and eventual elevations to the court) possible

 

[BugI02]

Just about any candidate should have beaten Hillary.

Absolutely unproven and likely unprovable

Paths not taken are ... not taken

 

[BugI02]

...and I'll never forgive Reagan for Sandra Day O'Connor.

All the women SCOTUS justices have been more Jacinda Ardern than Margaret Thatcher

 

[jamil]

Absolutely unproven and likely unprovable

Paths not taken are ... not taken

That was an opinion. I think a pretty accurate opinion. It’s also an opinion that Trump was uniquely qualified to beat Hillary. Paths not taken are not taken.

 

[BugI02]

If his advisors are to blame for the bad decisions they advised him on in a practical sense, then his advisors are also responsible for his good decisions in a practical sense that they advised him on. It cuts both ways. The same reasons people people give Trump all the credit for scotus picks works equally with the Wray decision.

For such a champion of nuance, you seemingly can never see fit to apply it where Trump is concerned

Short (or no) shrift given for the dems having already entangled him with the FBI (and subsequently a special prosecutor), limiting his ability to dismiss Comey for cause and/or replace him with a more law and order, limited government power type. If he had named an outsider over Wray and it had turned into a 'Saturday night massacre' type situation, I am quite confident you would be blaming Trump for making a poor choice

And that is not even considering the difficulties he would have had getting the type of FBI head we would like through the confirmation process

Why so binary, spectrum dude?

 

[BugI02]

That was an opinion. I think a pretty accurate opinion. It’s also an opinion that Trump was uniquely qualified to beat Hillary. Paths not taken are not taken.

A startling weak riposte, there, Cyrano

'Any candidate could have beaten Hitlary'. Evidence available, zero - pure opinion

'Trump uniquely qualified to beat Hitlary' (which is not a claim I'm making, BTW Alfalfa)
Evidence available, Trump DID, indeed, beat Hitlary - against all expectation. And Trump was certainly unique, so the case CAN be made that he was uniquely qualified to beat a dem considered 'a shoe-in' to get 'her turn' in the big chair

 

[BugI02]

DeSantis fires roughly a dozen campaign staffers: report

“There is an overall sense, including with me, that he just has not ignited the way we thought he would.”

nypost.com

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article277237263.html

Young conservatives at Turning Point’s South Florida conference say they favor Trump

He isn't going to happen. Time to jump on the Ramaswamy bandwagon? It would be a careful decision after weighing all sides, because you are notnotTrump of course

 

[foszoe]

This is a good example of what are essentially 'jamil says ...' assertions that when challenged to support with citations you never do

Here are a couple of actual citations, from RCP. These are general election polls and presumably include Dems, Reps and Independents, so 'broad appeal' should be apparent, yes?

View attachment 287312
Trump, who supposedly couldn't beat Biden has closed the gap to a virtual dead heat in the poll average

Biden 43.8 Trump 43.6 for Trump -0.2
Worst result Biden +4, best result Trump +6, with Trump moving in the right direction

View attachment 287313
DeSantis, who supposedly was the only one who could beat/was beating Biden is moving in the wrong direction, losing his perceived advantage and falling behind

Biden 43.5 DeSantis 42.0 for DeSantis -1.5
Worst result Biden +6, best result Desantis +1 with DeSantis falling away

Again, general election poll, should include full spectrum of the electorate and 'broad support' should be apparent

How statistically correct are polls 15 months before an election?

For general elections I have always heard September is the magic month. Is there such a thing for primaries?