ADVERTISEMENT

Is anyone for Micah Beckwith?

It’s this kind of approach which ends up in getting statewide candidates like Kari Lake…twice.

She loses elections that ought to be very winnable…but at least she makes her supporters feel really good in the process.
Maybe. However, Arizona has seen a major shift in their demographics and population recently. There population is up almost 20% the past 15 years. So, not sure how much is Lake and how much is from the shift in demographic/population.
 
I was never a huge fan of Pence. He was pretty “meh” as a governor.

But Daniels was a rock star and Holcomb’s been quietly effective and efficient (if a bit unremarkable).

But the Republican Party is clearly undergoing a shift — and it’s not a good one.
I agree with all of those assessments, besides the last sentence, which is why I'm happy with how the state has been Governed.
 
Last edited:
You were conservative until the John Birch Society took control and redesigned conservatism away from you and Reagan.
You are kind of obsessed with the John Birch Society. I'm up there in age and only vaguely remember hearing about it and never really knew what it was, nor did it affect my thinking.
 
Both parties had this takeover attempt, Bernie on the left and Trump on the right. Bernie was defeated. Which all goes to the point, there is virtually no difference between a Bernie Bros and MAGA voter. Completely interchangeable.

There has been a long thread of populism in the US, at least since the Know Nothing Party. The name changes every generation or two. It was called Birch at one time, the people in it today are just the successors to that mantle. US on gold, US out of the UN, all the other crazy beliefs (replace gold with fake coin).
Are you kidding? Bernie wasn't 'defeated' - he personally may have been, but his ideas are main Democrat policies now.
 
Maybe. However, Arizona has seen a major shift in their demographics and population recently. There population is up almost 20% the past 15 years. So, not sure how much is Lake and how much is from the shift in demographic/population.
It's a competitive state. But Doug Ducey was able to win a couple elections as governor. And Katie Hobbs was generally seen as a lightweight -- but was still able to beat Lake, because Lake was just that bad. And now she's about to lose again, using the same schtick that failed for her two years ago.

But many on the right adore her -- she's always fencing with the press and saying things that sound "edgy." She highlights the problem the GOP is beginning to have: primary voters are coming out to nominate candidates who are very appealing to them, but unappealing to the electorate in a general election.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Indyhorn and larsIU
What was Reagan? Pro free trade. Pro immigration. Pro military. Neocons hijacked nothing.
Pro immigration? Hardly. He got snookered by Tip O'Neal, on the idea that forgiving those illegally in the country would mean we'd get tougher on the border.

Trump rebuilt the military and gave them everything they asked for. He's just not finding an excuse to use them.

All Republicans are for free trade, but Reagan and others are for fair trade. Trump is the only one willing to enforce the 'fair' part.
 
Last edited:
Are you kidding? Bernie wasn't 'defeated' - he personally may have been, but his ideas are main Democrat policies now.
I can't disagree with this.

I discussed it in the thread about David Frum and his case for voting for Kamala Harris. One of the premises he had was that the left-wing has lost their influence within the Democratic Party.

No, the Dems neutralized the electoral threat Sanders posed by embracing a number of his priorities -- including moving the student debt burden over onto the shoulders of taxpayers, taxes on wealth/unrealized capital gains, packing the court, etc.

Some say "Well, Harris hasn't adopted these policies. She's moved away from them." Has she? She's had subordinates go out and disavow them...like Mark Cuban saying that she doesn't really intend to tax unrealized cap gains.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
I can't disagree with this.

I discussed it in the thread about David Frum and his case for voting for Kamala Harris. One of the premises he had was that the left-wing has lost their influence within the Democratic Party.

No, the Dems neutralized the electoral threat Sanders posed by embracing a number of his priorities -- including moving the student debt burden over onto the shoulders of taxpayers, taxes on wealth/unrealized capital gains, packing the court, etc.

Some say "Well, Harris hasn't adopted these policies. She's moved away from them." Has she? She's had subordinates go out and disavow them...like Mark Cuban saying that she doesn't really intend to tax unrealized cap gains.
Kind of like how Joe was going to be a moderate.

I remember Bernie actually being interviewed on Fox when he wasn't given the time of day by MSNBC. Strange bedfellows.

If the American electorate plays Charlie Brown to Kamala's Lucy, they deserve anything they get, because it's clear, before she was the Democrat nominee, what her positions were.
 
It's a competitive state. But Doug Ducey was able to win a couple elections as governor. And Katie Hobbs was generally seen as a lightweight -- but was still able to beat Lake, because Lake was just that bad. And now she's about to lose again, using the same schtick that failed for her two years ago.

But many on the right adore her -- she's always fencing with the press and saying things that sound "edgy." She highlights the problem the GOP is beginning to have: primary voters are coming out to nominate candidates who are very appealing to them, but unappealing to the electorate in a general election.
Yeah, I don’t agree. The GOP use to be further to the right 30 years ago. This is the boring answer, but I think the explanation for why the GOP is the minority party nationally has more to do with changing demographics. The GOP does poorly with women and Hispanics. Those voters want a larger government on average. The GOP changing its stance would help some with single women, but not sure it would gain more votes overall. As for Hispanics, hopefully, 3rd and 4th generation become more conservative.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Maybe. However, Arizona has seen a major shift in their demographics and population recently. There population is up almost 20% the past 15 years. So, not sure how much is Lake and how much is from the shift in demographic/population.
And where did they come from?
That's what dumbass 'progressives' do. Elect politicians who screw up so badly that 'progressives' move out...then elect politicians who screw up their new state....

Brilliant!
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Pro immigration? Hardly. He got snookered by Tip O'Neal, on the idea that forgiving those illegally in the country would mean we'd get tougher on the border.

Trump rebuilt the military and gave them everything they asked for. He's just not finding an excuse to use them.

All Republicans are for free trade, but Reagan and others are for fair trade. Trump is the only one willing to enforce the 'fair' part.
Saying Trump "rebuilt" the Military is contradictory to the point about bashing Liz Cheney and other neocons as a war mongers' who just want to pad the Defense industries pocket, is it not?

Military Spending, per year, and as a % of GDP:

2022 $876.94B 3.45%
2021 $806.23B 3.46%
2020 $778.40B 3.70%
2019 $734.34B 3.43%
2018 $682.49B 3.32%
2017 $646.75B 3.32%
2016 $639.86B 3.42%
 
  • Like
Reactions: larsIU
Saying Trump "rebuilt" the Military is contradictory to the point about bashing Liz Cheney and other neocons as a war mongers' who just want to pad the Defense industries pocket, is it not?

Military Spending, per year, and as a % of GDP:

2022 $876.94B 3.45%
2021 $806.23B 3.46%
2020 $778.40B 3.70%
2019 $734.34B 3.43%
2018 $682.49B 3.32%
2017 $646.75B 3.32%
2016 $639.86B 3.42%
My point was, he's not against a strong military, but he's not chomping at the bit to use it.
 
My fear is that the ship has sailed. The establishment Rs lack the power to do it. Look at the reply in this thread trashing Lugar.
I'm as liberal as they come but I voted for Lugar. I didn't agree with him politically but thought him to be an honest and principled man. He genuinely cared for and sought to better all Hoosiers. Not just ones that agreed with him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: larsIU
My point was, he's not against a strong military, but he's not chomping at the bit to use it.
True... but I'd argue he complicates that with his rhetoric. Just the other day he suggested he might have the military "handle" the enemies from within.

He seems eager to use them domestically.
 
Saying Trump "rebuilt" the Military is contradictory to the point about bashing Liz Cheney and other neocons as a war mongers' who just want to pad the Defense industries pocket, is it not?

Military Spending, per year, and as a % of GDP:

2022 $876.94B 3.45%
2021 $806.23B 3.46%
2020 $778.40B 3.70%
2019 $734.34B 3.43%
2018 $682.49B 3.32%
2017 $646.75B 3.32%
2016 $639.86B 3.42%
So $240 billion increase in 6 years? All fvcking borrowed?

You left off the Ukraine and Israel adventures. Wonder why?

What could be wrong with that?

We're told SS is running out of money!

Yet we're chartering jets to fly unvetted illegals by the tens of thousands into 70 different locations in the US, handing them free iPhones and fat balance debit cards...and FEMA is broke.

I'm sure you're very happy with the situation.

Some of us aren't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC and mcmurtry66
Pro immigration? Hardly. He got snookered by Tip O'Neal, on the idea that forgiving those illegally in the country would mean we'd get tougher on the border.

Trump rebuilt the military and gave them everything they asked for. He's just not finding an excuse to use them.

All Republicans are for free trade, but Reagan and others are for fair trade. Trump is the only one willing to enforce the 'fair' part.
He was hoodwinked, look at the speech he delivered in July of 1981, well before that bill. It included this paragraph:

  • Illegal immigrants in considerable numbers have become productive members of our society and are a basic part of our work force. Those who have established equities in the United States should be recognized and accorded legal status. At the same time, in so doing, we must not encourage illegal immigration.

Look at the rest of the speech. A far cry from Trump.

As to the military/intervention, Beirut, Granada, Libya bombings. We sent troops into Honduras in 87, and used naval against Iran in 88. Mas is who I was responding to, take that into account with this list.
 
He was hoodwinked, look at the speech he delivered in July of 1981, well before that bill. It included this paragraph:

  • Illegal immigrants in considerable numbers have become productive members of our society and are a basic part of our work force. Those who have established equities in the United States should be recognized and accorded legal status. At the same time, in so doing, we must not encourage illegal immigration.

Look at the rest of the speech. A far cry from Trump.

As to the military/intervention, Beirut, Granada, Libya bombings. We sent troops into Honduras in 87, and used naval against Iran in 88. Mas is who I was responding to, take that into account with this list.
He had to say that to justify his actions. And he wasn't faced with the number of illegals crossing the border today, nor the EO's that made many would-be illegals legal.
 
He had to say that to justify his actions. And he wasn't faced with the number of illegals crossing the border today, nor the EO's that made many would-be illegals legal.

He signed the immigration reform act in 1986, he justified it in 1981?
 
I know - poor taste, but when the shot's there, you have to take it.

683a1269-f8fa-47fb-a1c4-b4fcc517ea55_text.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
He was hoodwinked, look at the speech he delivered in July of 1981, well before that bill. It included this paragraph:

  • Illegal immigrants in considerable numbers have become productive members of our society and are a basic part of our work force. Those who have established equities in the United States should be recognized and accorded legal status. At the same time, in so doing, we must not encourage illegal immigration.

Look at the rest of the speech. A far cry from Trump.

As to the military/intervention, Beirut, Granada, Libya bombings. We sent troops into Honduras in 87, and used naval against Iran in 88. Mas is who I was responding to, take that into account with this list.
You forgot Panama..
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
He signed the immigration reform act in 1986, he justified it in 1981?
I thought it was early in his Presidency. I remember illegal immigration being a big issue for him, so I guess I'd have to see that quote in context.
 
What the hell does a Lt Gov even do?
I think the Lt. Gov. is as important to the ticket as the VP is on the top....not very.

I didn't like McCormick in her education position, no flipping way I would put her over the entire state. And frankly, Braun didn't do much for me either but what can you do?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spartans9312
He was hoodwinked, look at the speech he delivered in July of 1981, well before that bill. It included this paragraph:

  • Illegal immigrants in considerable numbers have become productive members of our society and are a basic part of our work force. Those who have established equities in the United States should be recognized and accorded legal status. At the same time, in so doing, we must not encourage illegal immigration.

Look at the rest of the speech. A far cry from Trump.

As to the military/intervention, Beirut, Granada, Libya bombings. We sent troops into Honduras in 87, and used naval against Iran in 88. Mas is who I was responding to, take that into account with this list.
Yeah, even smart guys make mistakes. Amnesty was a terrible mistake.
 
They aren’t exactly Birchers. But it’s a similar idea.

And I’d once again implore the establishment leaders to gain a better understanding of how and why this happened - and their critical role in it. And they need to take steps to correct it.

Just haven’t seen that happen. They still think they can overcome it with brute strength, maneuvering, etc.
Skunks can't change their stripes
 
Both parties had this takeover attempt, Bernie on the left and Trump on the right. Bernie was defeated. Which all goes to the point, there is virtually no difference between a Bernie Bros and MAGA voter. Completely interchangeable.

There has been a long thread of populism in the US, at least since the Know Nothing Party. The name changes every generation or two. It was called Birch at one time, the people in it today are just the successors to that mantle. US on gold, US out of the UN, all the other crazy beliefs (replace gold with fake coin).
This is drivel.

Discount the Christian Nationalist at your own peril.
It will be an avalanche...
Comin' down the mountain..
 
This is drivel.

Discount the Christian Nationalist at your own peril.
It will be an avalanche...
Comin' down the mountain..

I won't discount fascists, count on that. What else would we call right-wing Trotskyists.

The one thing I am certain of, anyone misusing the name of Jesus the way they do will be in a MOST unfortunate circumstance.
 
You always talk about the imminent civil war, true or false? Doesn't it sound like he just jumped the gun.
False.

Like most of your gabble.

I've posted verifiable historical information regarding the two previous civil wars, and numerous times about my anticipation for criminal bad actors in current government employ being held accountable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Trump's polling is up about 15 points. If that many Trump voters vote Trump and McCormick, I would be shocked. I can't help but think the poll that showed it close was an outlier.
I will vote McCormick, as will many like me, but probably not enough. I’m a Jasper resident & know Mike a little. He’s a good guy but his support of the Mid States Corridor is a dq for me. Will be a HUGE conflict of interest & he will use the Governorship to influence….
 
  • Like
Reactions: tunk
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT