ADVERTISEMENT

Trump/Vance 2024

I didn't stay up to watch. I take it she passed the babe test?
It was negated by Guilfoyle, who looks like that record Cappie pic somebody posted the other day, if you had run over the fish few times with a mulching mower
 
I didn't stay up to watch. I take it she passed the babe test?
YKKBHWCILFINBAZ42YRGLGZEJ4.jpg
 
Then it's a scary idea he'd ever have his hands on the levers of power. But what do I know? I still believe the world is supposed to work the way it did in the second half of the 20th Century.
It should be noted that Trump ran on reinvigorating the rust belt in 2016 as well but other than toting a couple new factory openings, I don’t think there were huge tangible results during his term.

Bottom line. Those good paying factory jobs are not coming back en masse without full government control of the means of production. It’s mostly lip service, which is nothing new from either party.
 
It should be noted that Trump ran on reinvigorating the rust belt in 2016 as well but other than toting a couple new factory openings, I don’t think there were huge tangible results during his term.

Bottom line. Those good paying factory jobs are not coming back en masse without full government control of the means of production. It’s mostly lip service, which is nothing new from either party.
What’s the plan for the weekend.
I have a tournament
Seriously? When.
It’s fri night through Sunday night. Depends on how we do
Do you remember in law school. You talked about being a senator one day. Or maybe even president. Bc you wanted to help people
 
Plenty of places where Vance has mentioned him.

But he's just one of several postliberals /new right / alt right that seem to influence Vance's philosophy.

In your link Yarvin said our democracy denigrated into a corrupt oligarchy run by elites. Is there any doubt that there is substantial truth in that? Look how Congress passes legislation if you doubt the point. Money and power control instead of debate and compromise. Important bills are crammed with special perks which are the product of money, special interests and influence peddling.

Vance is a consequential choice because he sees what needs to be seen and addresses it. I don’t think this is new conservatism but instead is pulling conservatism back from the model that has developed in the recent past. Politics, including conservatism, needs to pull back from considering what is beneficial to the money and power in politics and focus, at least in part, on those without money and power.

Established politics of all stripes brought economic policy and trade agreements that left many Americans in the dust, by outsourcing jobs overseas, unfair trade agreements ,hollowing out our manufacturing base, and encouraging skilled and unskilled immigration to provide labor at lower costs. Conservatives supported this in the name of “free markets”. As Vance clearly noted, free markets don’t mean squat to those In small town America who can barely pay for food, shelter, clothes, transportation, and health care with a single paycheck. All of this is overlaid with addictions and drug use which soak up much cash in addition to the social problems.The Democrats want to fix this with more subsidies, more economic controls, more regulations, counterproductive green hogwash, in other words more government. Trump and Vance have a different idea— build the economies of rural America. Trump started with the USMCA, but there is a lot to do. The first thing is to recognize the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
In your link Yarvin said our democracy denigrated into a corrupt oligarchy run by elites. Is there any doubt that there is substantial truth in that? Look how Congress passes legislation if you doubt the point. Money and power control instead of debate and compromise. Important bills are crammed with special perks which are the product of money, special interests and influence peddling.

Vance is a consequential choice because he sees what needs to be seen and addresses it. I don’t think this is new conservatism but instead is pulling conservatism back from the model that has developed in the recent past. Politics, including conservatism, needs to pull back from considering what is beneficial to the money and power in politics and focus, at least in part, on those without money and power.

Established politics of all stripes brought economic policy and trade agreements that left many Americans in the dust, by outsourcing jobs overseas, unfair trade agreements ,hollowing out our manufacturing base, and encouraging skilled and unskilled immigration to provide labor at lower costs. Conservatives supported this in the name of “free markets”. As Vance clearly noted, free markets don’t mean squat to those In small town America who can barely pay for food, shelter, clothes, transportation, and health care with a single paycheck. All of this is overlaid with addictions and drug use which soak up much cash in addition to the social problems.The Democrats want to fix this with more subsidies, more economic controls, more regulations, counterproductive green hogwash, in other words more government. Trump and Vance have a different idea— build the economies of rural America. Trump started with the USMCA, but there is a lot to do. The first thing is to recognize the problem.
Hey, CoH. I hope you saved your "Trump/Pence" signs. They're still good. All you need to do is change two letters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cosmickid
In your link Yarvin said our democracy denigrated into a corrupt oligarchy run by elites. Is there any doubt that there is substantial truth in that? Look how Congress passes legislation if you doubt the point. Money and power control instead of debate and compromise. Important bills are crammed with special perks which are the product of money, special interests and influence peddling.

Vance is a consequential choice because he sees what needs to be seen and addresses it. I don’t think this is new conservatism but instead is pulling conservatism back from the model that has developed in the recent past. Politics, including conservatism, needs to pull back from considering what is beneficial to the money and power in politics and focus, at least in part, on those without money and power.

Established politics of all stripes brought economic policy and trade agreements that left many Americans in the dust, by outsourcing jobs overseas, unfair trade agreements ,hollowing out our manufacturing base, and encouraging skilled and unskilled immigration to provide labor at lower costs. Conservatives supported this in the name of “free markets”. As Vance clearly noted, free markets don’t mean squat to those In small town America who can barely pay for food, shelter, clothes, transportation, and health care with a single paycheck. All of this is overlaid with addictions and drug use which soak up much cash in addition to the social problems.The Democrats want to fix this with more subsidies, more economic controls, more regulations, counterproductive green hogwash, in other words more government. Trump and Vance have a different idea— build the economies of rural America. Trump started with the USMCA, but there is a lot to do. The first thing is to recognize the problem.
Why you want to squish everything like this under the definition of conservatism is again puzzling to me.

Trump and Vance wanting to “build the economies of rural America” via govt policy IS “more government,” by the way. Tariffs, for example, aren’t zero govt.
 
Usha is OK but the Indian women I work with in the Tech sector blow her away.
 
Why is there no gif for pics or pics or gtfo?
I take it you don't work in Corporate america. I am not putting photos of coworkers on the net. Just taking the photo is probably in the harassment 101 portion of yearly compliance training. A couple of them have become good friends. So fo! If you prefer, I'll scour the internet for photos and put their pictures here and say they are co-workers. I can join the fake news craze.
 
Why you want to squish everything like this under the definition of conservatism is again puzzling to me.

Trump and Vance wanting to “build the economies of rural America” via govt policy IS “more government,” by the way. Tariffs, for example, aren’t zero govt.
I don’t think tariffs are inherently liberal or conservative. Conservatives resist government control and planning because both of those inhibit individual control and planning. Tariffs may or may not.

Anyway . . . Economics and politics can never be ideologically pure.
 
The immigration thing is a disaster. when these guys get in office tightened border policies are great but are we going to see Black vans of feds scouring the streets to find immigrants to deport. What could go wrong?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC and UncleMark
I take it you don't work in Corporate america. I am not putting photos of coworkers on the net. Just taking the photo is probably in the harassment 101 portion of yearly compliance training. A couple of them have become good friends. So fo! If you prefer, I'll scour the internet for photos and put their pictures here and say they are co-workers. I can join the fake news craze.
Yeah, I don’t care where you get the photos.
 
In your link Yarvin said our democracy denigrated into a corrupt oligarchy run by elites. Is there any doubt that there is substantial truth in that? Look how Congress passes legislation if you doubt the point. Money and power control instead of debate and compromise. Important bills are crammed with special perks which are the product of money, special interests and influence peddling.

Vance is a consequential choice because he sees what needs to be seen and addresses it. I don’t think this is new conservatism but instead is pulling conservatism back from the model that has developed in the recent past. Politics, including conservatism, needs to pull back from considering what is beneficial to the money and power in politics and focus, at least in part, on those without money and power.

Established politics of all stripes brought economic policy and trade agreements that left many Americans in the dust, by outsourcing jobs overseas, unfair trade agreements ,hollowing out our manufacturing base, and encouraging skilled and unskilled immigration to provide labor at lower costs. Conservatives supported this in the name of “free markets”. As Vance clearly noted, free markets don’t mean squat to those In small town America who can barely pay for food, shelter, clothes, transportation, and health care with a single paycheck. All of this is overlaid with addictions and drug use which soak up much cash in addition to the social problems.The Democrats want to fix this with more subsidies, more economic controls, more regulations, counterproductive green hogwash, in other words more government. Trump and Vance have a different idea— build the economies of rural America. Trump started with the USMCA, but there is a lot to do. The first thing is to recognize the problem.
"Vance is a consequential choice because he sees what needs to be seen and addresses it."

Well here's a ringing endorsement from someone else who echos your opinion and is a huge Vance fan...

“He’s in favor of peace, he’s in favor of ending the assistance that’s being provided [to Ukraine], and we can only welcome that because that’s what we need – to stop pumping Ukraine full of weapons, and then the war will end.”

I'll let people take a stab at guessing who is praising ol' JD here. Anyone want to hazard a guess? (no cheating)...

As for all of your musings about Trump/Vance prioritizing"rural America", some of the provisions in Project 2025 have very negative ramifications for rural citizens. Esp family farms...


 
"Vance is a consequential choice because he sees what needs to be seen and addresses it."

Well here's a ringing endorsement from someone else who echos your opinion and is a huge Vance fan...

“He’s in favor of peace, he’s in favor of ending the assistance that’s being provided [to Ukraine], and we can only welcome that because that’s what we need – to stop pumping Ukraine full of weapons, and then the war will end.”

I'll let people take a stab at guessing who is praising ol' JD here. Anyone want to hazard a guess? (no cheating)...

As for all of your musings about Trump/Vance prioritizing"rural America", some of the provisions in Project 2025 have very negative ramifications for rural citizens. Esp family farms...


Pathetic post.

I don’t give a damn who says what. A worthwhile point is a worthwhile point. Period.

I didn’t comment on Ukraine.

I don’t give a damn about Project 2025 either. If I agree with some or any of it, I might say so.

Vance was not in my top 3 for VP. But that doesn’t disqualify him from making valid points.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ulrey and DANC
Vance reminds me of when I took speech and debate class in school. You are given a topic and a position and you argue for that position, whether you really believe it or not.

Example, nuclear power plants. One person is assigned to argue for it, the other against it. Randomly assigned.

Vance is tasked with arguing for all of Trump's positions on everything. He is bright enough to do it well. But based on his past statements, you know he doesn't believe what he is saying. He's just after power. Like, in class, we were after getting an "A".
Like Kamala calling Joe a racist and then signing on as VP
 
Well..., I don't know much about Vance but I changed my mind about Youngkin after hearing him speak at the convention... His delivery sucked... He wasn't the impassioned firebrand that he had been back in Virginia...

Trump may have made the right move... He kept all his political movers and shakers in play while taking the one guy out of the Senate (who initially will be replaced by another Republican) who couldn't greatly help him there and might have an outside chance of helping him in WI, MI & PA...

It'll be interesting to watch... I just hope they are both able to survive the experience...

I'm still of the opinion that I'd hire my own security if I were Trump to, at minimum, augment the perimeter for the understaffed and evidently under resourced (if they don't have use of even a small camera drone) current Secret Service detail...
I wouldn't have expected Youngkin to be very excited after he lost our as VP.

I still think he'd be a better VP pick, but JD came off pretty well in his speech last night. He has a compelling personal story and I like his wife - not in a hot way, but she seems very grounded and from a solid family.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DDE-6-20-23
Vance was 30 or 31 at the time and reminds me of myself. 8-10 years ago my takes would have been been drastically different than they are today. I voted straight Democratic ticket in 2012 and believed MSM. I now consider a good percentage of Democrats are communists.

People’s opinions evolve over time and change. He’s able to recognize errors and correct them. It’s refreshing and makes me like him more.

SC, why do you say Dems are communists and not socialists?

Do you think they are the same?
 
Why you want to squish everything like this under the definition of conservatism is again puzzling to me.

Trump and Vance wanting to “build the economies of rural America” via govt policy IS “more government,” by the way. Tariffs, for example, aren’t zero govt.

At the convention stage of an election both Trump and Biden will be focused on winning the election.

IMO the selection of Vance and rhetoric about rebuilding small towns is primarily to put the electoral votes of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michian, Wisconsin, and maybe Minnesota in the Trump win column.

Does anyone really believe Trump or anyone else can somehow alter the factors which have the economic demise of the rust belt small towns? Heck, I read a book predicting this some sixty years ago and it happened. Gradually but surely.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcmurtry66
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT