I don’t like any of that either. Trump is no good. Sadly we have two Americas and it is what it is.
One conservative’s argument for a Harris vote
- Thread starter BradStevens
- Start date
His post-election conduct will again be fascist-like. He’ll declare victory on Election Night, before the polls have closed in many locations and days before the winner is actually determined. Baseless allegations of voter fraud, advanced by both him personally and his surrogates, will begin before Election Day. That will be just the beginning of a blizzard of lies. Don the Con’s Post-Election Shitshow - Part 2.
And then if he wins, he won't backtrack. He'll say the fraud was real and they overcame it. His followers will demand prosecution of the fraudsters.
Last edited:
Yikes… Kamala is sitting her pants
www.realclearpolling.com
2024 National: Trump vs. Harris | RealClearPolling
2024 National: Trump vs. Harris | RealClearPolling
Oooh...Rasmussen has Kamala leading. Interesting.Yikes… Kamala is sitting her pants
2024 National: Trump vs. Harris | RealClearPolling
2024 National: Trump vs. Harris | RealClearPolling
Her two point lead has vanished and she’s now even with Trump. He was -5 and -6 going into the last two and outperformed significantly.
The only thing she offers is that she's not Trump.
That is what concerns me. I don't know why so many Rs that are not voting for Trump are so sure that the Rs will win the senate and/or the house. They were suppose to win big the last election. Have the forgotten what happened?
Exactly, if Trump all of a sudden started being a nice person would you believe that's really who he is? I sure wouldn't because he has a hstory and it doesn't jive with the new personality.
I’m voting Republican for House and Senate, despite (a) not voting for Trump, and (b) not being a huge fan of Jim Banks.
But I’m hoping for divided government, whoever wins the presidential race.
Elon Musk took the stage at a Trump rally to talk about taxes and the 'Department of Government Efficiency'
Musk did not elaborate on policy changes or spending cuts he would implement if he were to join a hypothetical second Trump administration.
Here ya go. F it let’s see. Gov efficiency
Someone else who was great at efficiency, Stockton Rush. He didn't let things get in his way, a doer and not a talker.
Elon Musk took the stage at a Trump rally to talk about taxes and the 'Department of Government Efficiency'
Musk did not elaborate on policy changes or spending cuts he would implement if he were to join a hypothetical second Trump administration.www.yahoo.com
Here ya go. F it let’s see. Gov efficiency
I think there is a belief that several R candidates (Lake excluded) are not as crazy or polarizing as Trump, so that even if you are a Liz Cheney Never Trumper-type, you still may vote R for Senate and House.
But, I agree with you that it is risky and seems unlikely that they will go different directions (Executive vs. Legislative).
Few examples. We have a product that would be good for the military. There’s no way to describe how overly cumbersome the process is to sell to the gov. Marv falls on his way to the dog park. Disabled. You’re looking at 3 years to get a check from social security. Harris just let in ten million immigrants. There’s also a massive backlog already. How on earth are they going to adjudicate those claims. On and on. Maybe Musk isn’t the guy but hell if he thinks he is let’s hear the ideas. Why wouldn’t we want to hear them?
We long lament our brightest don’t go to gov. Well now we have someone interested
Last edited:
But they were rational people back then, There's not any today. You only have to go back to Reagan's presidency to see some rational people. Reagan and Tip O'Neill were political opposites but they could make a deal.
That is true but when your whole arguement is that you aren't the other candidate then that is a very weak argument to me.
A conservative’s case for a write-in vote:
Opinion: I'm a conservative who can't vote Trump. I choose an actual Republican leader.
My write-in vote for president will be for Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp. He is a successful Republican who has stood up to Trump and MAGA.
www.usatoday.com
The turn off is stood up to maga. I stopped there. That opens the door for a progressive. I’m not okay with that.A conservative’s case for a write-in vote:
Opinion: I'm a conservative who can't vote Trump. I choose an actual Republican leader.
My write-in vote for president will be for Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp. He is a successful Republican who has stood up to Trump and MAGA.www.usatoday.com
The other thing these people need to come to terms with is maga isn’t going anywhere. It represents a platform that is different from the war machine etc. so the party either needs to come together or just split. But again it’ll be almost 30 years since the old guard won by next election. What they sell people aren’t buying
If you read it you’d see that he agrees that MAGA isn’t going away with a Trump loss.
They don't? If you were dependent on Medicare for your healthcare, massive cuts might make a huge difference to you? If you depended on TANF?
I would argue that this is not a strength of those programs. It's a weakness. People are directed to arrange their lives and/or future lives around the promised benefit structure -- of programs that are fiscally unsustainable. That's not really the case with TANF. But it very clearly is the case with Medicare -- and Social Security.
And a big part of their selling point is that they're guaranteed. People can count on them being there. And, yet, here we are about 10 or so years away from the exhaustion of the Social Security Trust Fund and lawmakers haven't done a single thing to ensure the funding of benefits after that happens.
To the best of their ability, nobody should plan their lives/futures around any public entitlement programs. The people who run them are wholly irresponsible. If these were private programs, the fiduciaries would likely be in prison.
Nor should it. MAGA is policy, not personality. It’s personality for never Trumpers because they have no convincing policy argument.
It's because what they sell, they weren't delivering.
That's the problem. That's why MAGA exists. People were buying it -- they just weren't getting what they bought. And I think that Trump noticed this and capitalized on it. There was a huge disconnect between Republican voters and Republican politicians.
Again, this is not just my opinion. Some of the most notable Never Trumpers (like Stuart Stevens) have bluntly said that they would make empty promises to voters just to win elections. Here's Mac Stipanovich (former Florida GOP operative, and stalwart Never Trumper) saying it:
Until and unless OG Republicans come to grips with this and clean up the mess they created, MAGA will continue dominating the Republican Party. But, to date, they have steadfastly refused to do that. Maybe they will once Trump himself is in the rearview mirror.
MAGA has some policies, some OK and some not OK (isolationism, anti-NATO, etc.), but it's also a culture. The culture is toxic and unsustainable.
I'll give you one thought on a way that OG Republicans could've started to address this, but didn't:
The Lankford bill in the Senate.
Now, a lot of people were angry at Lankford for simply sitting down with Democrats to hammer out a bipartisan bill. I didn't have any issue with it at all. At the end of the day, border policy is probably going to need to get bipartisan support if they're ever going to get their arms around it.
But here's the thing: the Democrats are on their heels on this issue right now. And they know it. Anybody who follows the issue knows it. When that's the broader political context of something and they're looking for a way out of it, you don't need to make many compromises to get them on board. Maybe a few little things, just so they can sell it to their base. But, on the big things, you've got them.
So why did Lankford agree to the thresholds? Either he's weak and stupid...or else he generally agrees with them. Either way, it was a big missed opportunity to start getting the Republican establishment back in the good graces of its voters.
I'll give you a hypothetical analogy. Let's say Republican lawmakers wanted to craft a bipartisan abortion bill with Democrats. We all know that, in most places, abortion is a strength of Democrats and a vulnerability for Republicans. Do you think Democrats would be open to making some big concession to Republicans on the issue, in order to help them politically with an issue that is giving them problems in elections?
I don't. If I was the Democrats, I'd say....here's the bill, if you want to sign on, this is what you sign on to. We can give you a couple little things to help you save face, but you're not getting anything big.
If Sen. Lankford had taken a similar approach with border security, it would've done wonders for the Republican establishment and their MAGA problem. Maybe the Democrats would've refused to take part. But, if so, that's on them -- because they'd be choosing to stay mired in a terrible place with the electorate on a top issue facing the country.
It’s largely a cult of personality. That’s why post 343 is ridiculously stupid.
And, to your point…
Trump is “cultural heroin.” -JD Vance
This is so damn stupid. Just fcking vote for Harris. Quit the damn games and fcking vote for Harris.A conservative’s case for a write-in vote:
Opinion: I'm a conservative who can't vote Trump. I choose an actual Republican leader.
My write-in vote for president will be for Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp. He is a successful Republican who has stood up to Trump and MAGA.www.usatoday.com
The issue about crossover votes is noise. It gets magnified in the media -- because, naturally, they're hoping to find as many votes as they can that go in Harris' column, come off of Trump's column, or (ideally) both.
But we have actual data from two prior national elections where Trump was a candidate. In those elections, there was the same noise about prominent Republicans voting for the Democrat. So what did the data show? Did this convince lots of self-identified Republicans to vote Democrat?
No. In 2020, Biden got 6% of the Republican vote. That was merely 1% higher than the 5% of the Democratic vote that Trump got.
Learn to spot the noise and tune it out.
Not on Rasmussen. Several of my conservative compatriots here have long regaled me with tales of how Rasmussen is by far the most accurate.
Stoll, Is Mike Pence now a RINO? Why?
Seems like most people who know Trump best want no part of him afterwards
Not just Pence, but 100+ others
But by now we know what Pence stands for, what are his principles, where he is ideologically. Do you think he has become "woke"???
Seems like most people who know Trump best want no part of him afterwards
Not just Pence, but 100+ others
But by now we know what Pence stands for, what are his principles, where he is ideologically. Do you think he has become "woke"???
Last edited:
Not on Rasmussen. Several of my conservative compatriots here have long regaled me with tales of how Rasmussen is by far the most accurate.
If you don't believe RCP, that's on you.
They and Rasmussen have told different stories the last two elections. Each are 1-1 from what I can tell. Will be interesting to see who is right this time around.
i couldn’t give two shits about Rasmussen. RCP is an aggregator of polls. It has been 1-1 but in both cases, it was projecting an easy Dem win (meaning most of the underlying polls were as well). As such, with now a neck and neck race and Trump having significantly outperformed polls in prior races, Dems should be very worried.
Seems to be a lot of herding in polls... Not many firms posting many outliers which makes me think they are all full of shit.
Regarding arguments directed at Trump’s character, criminality, narcissism, or bullying nature, I just listed to this about LBJ, and wow, you can make a good argument LBJ was worse:
Polymarket has Trump up 66-34 to win and Harris’s lead on the popular vote is down to 58-42. Putting that another way, it’s more likely Trump wins the popular vote than Harris wins the election. Also, Bitcoin might make a run at all times highs this week, which I think might be an indicator of who is up. Unless, the betting markets shift, it looks like she is in trouble.
They may be, but the trend change over the past month has been significant. If the trends have any validity, it won't be that close given the changes in the battleground states.
Oh yeah. He was horrible. Not sure that's a great argument for Trump, but LBJ was a total ahole.
I had no clue about some of this stuff. If he wanted your vote or get you to do something, he'd basically extort you with information about your private life he dug up, shove money in your pockets, not take no for an answer, all while pawing you. Including women. And he loved to just hang his dick out, even among reporters, to intimidate them!
I guess it's also confirmed he actually stole his first election to the senate!
AP WAS THERE: Uncovering Lyndon B Johnson's stolen election
In 1977, Associated Press reporter James W. Mangan had an exclusive interview with a South Texas election judge who detailed certifying false votes for Lyndon B. Johnson nearly three decades earlier. The story made headlines across the country. Johnson had won by an 87-vote margin in the 1948...
apnews.com
Similar threads
