Trump 2024 ???

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Status
    Not open for further replies.

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,169
    113
    Gtown-ish
    So, MF.... where exactly did I state anything like there is no such thing as TDS? I'll wait...

    For there record, there is and has been for sometime TDS. Rampant TDS. The traditional meaning was that ANYTHING and EVERYTHING Trump said or did was opposed by the progs and NeverTrumpers, reflexively.

    He used it to great effect to rope them into indefensible positions...

    Now, apparently, TDS is any and all criticism of Trump. Well, whatever... as the mini-Vader mentions above, much like -isms, defining it down also means losing it's effect.

    What you term "loss of emotional control" I'll let you in on a not so secret confidence: I'm beyond ****ed off at Trump. I'm mad as hell and not taking it anymore. His actions based solely upon his own petty, small-minded self-interest, delusions and revenge-fantasies have led this country in EXACTLY the opposite direction of making America great again. His actions over and over again have put TRUMP FIRST and AMERICA LAST.

    I do think that anyone who doesn't see that, or at least consider how a former Trump supporter could see things that way, well I do think that such rosy-eyed Trumpers suffer from another form of TDS - Trump Delusion Syndrome - the opposite of traditional TDS that posits anything and everything Trump says or does is RIGHT.

    Much like TDS 1.0, TDS 2.0 leads adherents to indefensible, nonsensical positions. Just the flip side of the same coin.

    So, anyway, I'm done, done and done with Trump.

    Color me a Never Again Trump'er because to me he's "Donny the Loser", a sore loser at that, and pulling MAGA and AF down with him - and THAT is what makes me ANGRY.
    Probably the difference between us is I’m not angry with him. I just think he’s not it. He has some good traits but he has some very bad traits that tend to sabotage his own success. And there is no social pressure for him to improve himself. He thinks he’s perfect. His fanbois think he’s perfect. Nothing to fix there.

    But. I’d vote for him again over any Democrat.
     
    Last edited:

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    31,896
    149
    Columbus, OH
    You left out the backlash over abortion. The Ds painted the Rs as in favor of blocking all abortions all the time. I'm sure that played no small part in at least some of those losses.
    Might need to be left out to support the narrative All Trump's Fault/Competence Man Will Save Us. Overt support for ending abortion was never part of Trump's platform in either '16 or '20, at least that I can find in archived materials on official election websites
     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    31,896
    149
    Columbus, OH
    When Trump said we'd be tired of winning so much, I had a different picture entirely. :rolleyes:

    You know, actually WINNING.


    Ducey was re-elected governor of Arizona in 2018 by over 14%.

    But yes, a venture capitalist who's never even run, let alone been elected, to office ever... had just as good of a shot as a popular two-term governor. :rolleyes:
    How does that go?

    "Past performance is no guarantee of future results"

    For a guy who is big on 'the evidence' when it forwards his argumentation you seem quite willing to use unsupported claims otherwise

    Much as there is 'no evidence' of cheating in the 2020 election, there is no evidence that Ducey would have done better than Lake. I believe the current argument is statistical inference =/= evidence, yes?
     

    SheepDog4Life

    Natural Gray Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    May 14, 2016
    5,293
    113
    SW IN
    You left out the backlash over abortion. The Ds painted the Rs as in favor of blocking all abortions all the time. I'm sure that played no small part in at least some of those losses.
    IMO, this can and has been overplayed as a national narrative. Candidates in each race need to be sure their positions aren't view as extreme in the state/district they are running in.

    Desantis signed a 15-week abortion ban, and won.

    Kemp signed a 6-week heartbeat abortion ban and won.

    IMO, the vast majority of voters that aren't tribal on this issue are fine with 12-15 weeks. The tribal ones already have their votes locked in regardless of Dobbs. Be more extreme than that - in either direction - in competitive races and you lose votes.
     

    SheepDog4Life

    Natural Gray Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    May 14, 2016
    5,293
    113
    SW IN
    How does that go?

    "Past performance is no guarantee of future results"

    For a guy who is big on 'the evidence' when it forwards his argumentation you seem quite willing to use unsupported claims otherwise

    Much as there is 'no evidence' of cheating in the 2020 election, there is no evidence that Ducey would have done better than Lake. I believe the current argument is statistical inference =/= evidence, yes?
    Ummm... you've got the wrong race.

    Ducey was term limited for Governor and wouldn't have been in Lake's place. This is the cliched popular Governor runs for the Senate.

    This is a Ducey vs Masters question - you know Masters, who's only resume qualification I can find was being a successful "vulture capitalist" which somehow makes him a rising star, though I'd say he's more like a Beto with an R. Well, that and $15 Million of a Billionaire's money... also venture capital "blood" money.

    ETA: Just to be clear, Masters was a Thiel protege, but Trump issued the "Never Ducey" edict far before the primary sign-ups.
     
    Last edited:

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,169
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Might need to be left out to support the narrative All Trump's Fault/Competence Man Will Save Us. Overt support for ending abortion was never part of Trump's platform in either '16 or '20, at least that I can find in archived materials on official election websites
    Maybe some are saying “all Trump’s fault.” As I’ve said in other posts there were many factors. But, one of those factors is Trump.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: KLB

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    31,896
    149
    Columbus, OH
    Ummm... you've got the wrong race.

    Ducey was term limited for Governor and wouldn't have been in Lake's place. This is the cliched popular Governor runs for the Senate.

    This is a Ducey vs Masters question - you know Masters, who's only resume qualification I can find was being a successful "vulture capitalist" which somehow makes him a rising star, though I'd say he's more like a Beto with an R. Well, that and $15 Million of a Billionaire's money... also venture capital "blood" money.
    So change Lake to Masters, still no 'evidence'

    It is refreshing to see that you acknowledge that being a vulture capitalist could hurt someones senate election chances, as long as we're not discussing Pennsylvania I guess

    There's hope for you yet
     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    31,896
    149
    Columbus, OH
    Maybe some are saying “all Trump’s fault.” As I’ve said in other posts there were many factors. But, one of those factors is Trump.
    Oh, I've certainly heard, somewhere, that you carefully consider all sides of every issue before forming an opinion
     

    SheepDog4Life

    Natural Gray Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    May 14, 2016
    5,293
    113
    SW IN
    So change Lake to Masters, still no 'evidence'

    It is refreshing to see that you acknowledge that being a vulture capitalist could hurt someones senate election chances, as long as we're not discussing Pennsylvania I guess

    There's hope for you yet
    Funny how you flip on a dime that Oz was preferable to a "vulture capitalist" but a popular two-term governor is meh, versus one... and not even THE "vulture capitalist", but the "vulture capitalist's" errand boy... I.e. a 30-something Thiel protege.

    Glad you got my VC reference. :)

    But since you're comparing McCormick now (gee, talk about moving goalposts)... what's his resume look like:
    • West Point Grad
    • 82nd Airborne
    • Served in first Iraq War
    • McKinsey consultancy for 3 years
    • Joined a software start-up company
    • Rose to President then CEO of the software start-up company (FreeMarkets)
    • Brought on as President of the company that acquired that start-up (Ariba)
    • Served for 4 years in the W Bush administration
    • Joined Bridgewater Associates as President in 2009 - rising to sole CEO
    Interesting that you categorize BA as "vulture" capital as it serves institutional investors and under McCormick's direction - he rose from President to sole CEO.

    I don't know BA but it appears to be the type on long-term venture capital firms that "invest" in companies longer term... and provides hedges against economic forecasts... unlike the "vultures" who are more akin to loan sharks for promising companies. The only black-eye that I see, and this is definitely Monday morning QB, was it's China strategy in 2017...

    Anyhow, that is a resume that shows accomplishment and service.

    Or, write a whacko book with a whacko Billionaire, be his VC errand boy and run for a Senate seat on $15 Million of the billionaire's money.

    Same-same. :rolleyes:

    ETA: Sorry, I forgot Masters' Crossfit chatroom blog. 'Nuff said.
     
    Last edited:

    SheepDog4Life

    Natural Gray Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    May 14, 2016
    5,293
    113
    SW IN

    Yes, he was... but that still doesn't absolve him of inviting an antisemitic Black Hebrew Israelite in Defcon-3 mode on the Jews and a Holocaust-denier to publicly dine with him at his special table.

    Tone deaf, unforced turn-over, Barney Fife 4-D shooting self in foot, move.
     

    KG1

    Forgotten Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    25,633
    149
    It's easy to see why Trump endorsed Oz over McCormick. McCormick has strong ties to the Republican establishment. He even held a fundraiser for Jebbie Bush in 2015. It's something I'm sure that Trump never forgot.
     

    KLB

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Sep 12, 2011
    23,011
    77
    Porter County
    IMO, this can and has been overplayed as a national narrative. Candidates in each race need to be sure their positions aren't view as extreme in the state/district they are running in.

    Desantis signed a 15-week abortion ban, and won.

    Kemp signed a 6-week heartbeat abortion ban and won.

    IMO, the vast majority of voters that aren't tribal on this issue are fine with 12-15 weeks. The tribal ones already have their votes locked in regardless of Dobbs. Be more extreme than that - in either direction - in competitive races and you lose votes.
    I think it played a part in holding back the "red wave". There are quite a few Republicans that would not come out and say they were ok with that. Just look at the discussions on this forum.

    Our election here was the closest it had been in over 100 years. I really wonder if Green didn't lose in the end because of abortion. Her response to the issue was to try to paint Mrvan as the opposite extreme, abortion any time for any reason.

    She was a Trump supporter, but I don't remember that being thrown at her at all.
     

    SheepDog4Life

    Natural Gray Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    May 14, 2016
    5,293
    113
    SW IN
    It's easy to see why Trump endorsed Oz over McCormick. McCormick has strong ties to the Republican establishment. He even held a fundraiser for Jebbie Bush in 2015. It's something I'm sure that Trump never forgot.
    Exactly... Trump's vendetta against McCormick was successful... he won... we lost.
     

    SheepDog4Life

    Natural Gray Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    May 14, 2016
    5,293
    113
    SW IN
    I think it played a part in holding back the "red wave". There are quite a few Republicans that would not come out and say they were ok with that. Just look at the discussions on this forum.

    Our election here was the closest it had been in over 100 years. I really wonder if Green didn't lose in the end because of abortion. Her response to the issue was to try to paint Mrvan as the opposite extreme, abortion any time for any reason.

    She was a Trump supporter, but I don't remember that being thrown at her at all.
    I'm not in NWI and so didn't follow that race at all, let alone closely.

    A quick look indicates Green was unabashedly pro-life, ban all abortions because life begins at conception. Her opponent was the opposite extreme.

    Like it or not, ban-all-abortions loses votes from people who would be fine with a 12-15 week bans even versus "let the woman" decide anything goes opposition. IMO, those swing voters see both positions as "extreme" but if it decides their vote, they see one as more extreme than the other. Not saying that is RIGHT, but IMO it is the way it is.

    Are you saying that Dobbs removed the "safety net" for swing voters to vote for Green because her "extreme" abortion position was moot under Roe?
     

    KG1

    Forgotten Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    25,633
    149
    Exactly... Trump's vendetta against McCormick was successful... he won... we lost.
    I read this opinion about what motivates Trump and plays a part when it comes to who he endorsees. Can't say that I disagree with it in part. It's part of his well-established personality

    — often driven more by a thirst for revenge or flattery than strategic considerations about who is best positioned to win a general election —

    This seems to be the case in the PA primaries. Trump found Oz to be flattering and it stroked his ego.
     

    printcraft

    INGO Clown
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    16   0   0
    Feb 14, 2008
    38,993
    113
    Uranus
    Again, I’m not convinced the establishment republicans really wanted to win BIG this go around. Everything is **** on ice right now, if they were “in charge” again they would have to perform.
    It’s safe governing from the backseat, they can use it to drive donations, and absolve themselves from blame for the current mess going forward to 2024.
     

    Twangbanger

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    21   0   0
    Oct 9, 2010
    7,062
    113
    ...

    Ranked choice isn't good for radicals because they can't exploit the advantage primaries give them of being more motivated to go vote in primary elections.

    Ranked choice is better for reflecting the overall values of the state of the jurisdiction in which they're voting.
    If the state is heavily Trumper, then the Trumper candidate will probably win even in ranked choice.
    60% of Alaskans voted for a Republican in the House race, yet they ended up being represented by a Democrat. Now, you can say that's a one-time thing based on some special combination of candidates, or throw in some snark about Sarah Palin or whatever to distract from the point. But it happened and it needs to be acknowledged.

    Switching to a different race, Lisa Murkowski's campaign people are on-tape saying they helped orchestrate the RCV ballot-issue push in order to keep insurgent (read: America-First) Republican candidates from being elected. They were precisely right.

    Maybe protecting America from radicals is the "feature not a bug" which you think is admirable about RCV. But the reality which has to be acknowledged is that in today's woke-dominated election environment, "America First" is the "radical" position which is mostly being protected against. Right now, it seems like a one-way ratchet. Republicans and Democrats are working together and using it to keep America-First candidates out of power. But I can't think of a single example where it worked the other way. And that's where I think we have to put aside whatever theoretical benefits we see in the system, and look more to the empiricals of how it's actually being used.

    Can anybody point up an example of a far-Left radical we've been protected-against as a result of RCV? I cannot think of one. But I'd like to hear of it, if it exists. If the system works the way you think it is, there should be at least some examples of it going the other way.
     

    actaeon277

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Nov 20, 2011
    92,864
    113
    Merrillville
    Again, I’m not convinced the establishment republicans really wanted to win BIG this go around. Everything is **** on ice right now, if they were “in charge” again they would have to perform.
    It’s safe governing from the backseat, they can use it to drive donations, and absolve themselves from blame for the current mess going forward to 2024.
    A LOT of people that want to 'run' things, don't want to do it when stuff is happening.
     

    Twangbanger

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    21   0   0
    Oct 9, 2010
    7,062
    113
    A LOT of people that want to 'run' things, don't want to do it when stuff is happening.
    Yessir. Everybody wants to be Captain...until there's "Captain Stuff" needing to be done.

    One of the biggest things that ruined the GOP, in my opinion, was being able to sit back during the Obama Administration and run-up their Congressional and state-level advantages, while opposing the Captain from the safety of the galley rec-room. They felt like they got rewarded for doing nothing, and the GOP came away from that experience with the impression that loudly protesting from the shadows was a safe and sustainable way for them to stay relevant. All the really big culture-war issues were getting settled by fiat by the 5-4 Anthony Kennedy Supreme Court, giving the GOP a pass on those ("There's nothing we can do - The Court settled it"), and corporate PAC money streamed in to support congressional Republicans in their opposition to Obama, while the CEOs of those same companies were elbowing each other out of the way for photo-ops with the FSBP (First Sorta Black President). There was never a time when Republicans got rewarded so much, for doing so little.
     
    Last edited:
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    Top Bottom