dfitzo53 Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 (edited) 4 hours ago, tshile said: i should be a good representation of someone shes trying to appeal to. im not a fan of the dems platform, but i refuse to support someone like trump. but when i hear her say that, all i can think is "what a stupid thing to say, you sound like a moron" The problem is there aren't enough tshiles out there to get her elected. Broadly speaking, Democratic policies are supported by a good chunk of the population. Then there are the 25-30% of people who are some combination of willfully ignorant, actually stupid, or wealthy and unethical who will never stop supporting Trump. That doesn't leave many votes for Haley to try to win with some kind of "I'm reasonable but not a Democrat" pitch. She has no choice but to tiptoe towards the looney bin if she wants any hope of beating Biden. Just to be clear, I think we need ethical, responsible conservative voices in government. I don't think it *should* be a problem for a moderate Republican to find votes in a national election. I'm saying currently it *is* a problem. Edited February 22 by dfitzo53 3 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins24 Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 (edited) 19 hours ago, PokerPacker said: Who's not letting you decide? There's a primary. Biden won in a state that he wasn't even on the ballot in. lol, technically correct. But remember, it's career suicide to challenge the incumbent. As an example - Joe Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt wins in 2064, from then until 2068, no other person presents themselves, or even attempts to be a legitimate alternative candidate because it was already decided once he won in 2064, just go with Joe. Yes, you can technically write someone in during the Primary and say you're deciding to vote for someone else. But your vote is absolutely meaningless as no other real options have been put forth. 16 hours ago, PeterMP said: So when that person did something you didn't like or was close to Trump in the polls you could complain how the party picked Biden's possible replacements and how it wasn't good fair and the people should pick? (I'm a little confused about the Trump conversation. People did win against Trump. They've lost. People didn't run against Biden because they likely made the calculation that if they did they would lose. The people that ran against Trump likely did so because they actually thought they could win (i.e. that Trump would be weak enough with his history and court cases to be beaten, and it appears they were wrong.) I do believe that maybe the wrong post was quoted? Sincerest apologies if I'm missing something. For the first part, I'm not seeing how that matches up. What I said in that post was that there shouldn't be an all or nothing approach when it come to the incumbent. This is irrespective of party. There should always be quality, knowledgeable, inspiring leaders in the pipeline. In the case with Biden, it was known 10 years ago he was old. It would have been wise to have someone under his wing, or just in general, learning the ropes. Developing the relationships. Becoming that inspiring leader who could step up and step in with no lag in the quality that is presented. For the second part, I'm a little confused as well, lol. I talked about Trump in 2020, as an example of how atrocious it was that no other legitimate alternative candidate was available. 1) Because again, once they win, it's basically hands off for the next 8 years (no matter how bad they are.) and 2) There was the fear of alienating a chunk of the base, putting the party above the well-being of the people. Edited February 22 by Skins24 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted February 22 Author Share Posted February 22 2 hours ago, tshile said: I am not convinced of this. first - I’m not even sure Trump will do those debates? second - who wins in debates is not always the person with the best answers. Trump is a bully. Remember what he did to Clinton on stage. I’m concerned what the general optics will be to the general public. I have no doubt Biden can run circles around Trump on any topic, any day. unfortunately the American public has shown intelligence and thoughtfulness and understanding isn’t what drives them. There’s no need for any debates. It would just be a clown show because Trump is too stupid to actually have a real debate on the issues. It would be better for Joe to do town halls in those key states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 I agree that Trump won't do debates. He'll claim they are rigged and, in a sense, they are. The debate format is rigged against stupid people. He's also lazy and debates take a lot of work to prepare for properly. 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted February 22 Author Share Posted February 22 33 minutes ago, Skins24 said: lol, technically correct. But remember, it's career suicide to challenge the incumbent. As an example - Joe Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt wins in 2064, from then until 2068, no other person presents themselves, or even attempts to be a legitimate alternative candidate because it was already decided once he won in 2064, just go with Joe. Yes, you can technically write someone in during the Primary and say you're deciding to vote for someone else. But your vote is absolutely meaningless as no other real options have been put forth. I do believe that maybe the wrong post was quoted? Sincerest apologies if I'm missing something. For the first part, I'm not seeing how that matches up. What I said in that post was that there shouldn't be an all or nothing approach when it come to the incumbent. This is irrespective of party. There should always be quality, knowledgeable, inspiring leaders in the pipeline. In the case with Biden, it was known 10 years ago he was old. It would have been wise to have someone under his wing, or just in general, learning the ropes. Developing the relationships. Becoming that inspiring leader who could step up and step in with no lag in the quality that is presented. For the second part, I'm a little confused as well, lol. I talked about Trump in 2020, as an example of how atrocious it was that no other legitimate alternative candidate was available. 1) Because again, once they win, it's basically hands off for the next 8 years (no matter how bad they are.) and 2) There was the fear of alienating a chunk of the base, putting the party above the well-being of the people. Simple solution, amend the constitution to where the president serves only one term of 5 years. Then that way you will get different people in government. 5 years is enough for a president to do what they want. Rarely does anything significant get done in a president’s second term; especially in the modern era of politics. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 3 minutes ago, 88Comrade2000 said: Simple solution, amend the constitution LOL. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 (edited) I'd rather we all hold parties responsible for nominating and electing the worst president in American history. Even worse than the guy who served 30 days or the one who allowed the confederacy to rise by ignoring slavery. Much more so than age restrictions or amending something that can't reasonably be amended anymore. Edited February 22 by The Evil Genius 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins24 Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 6 minutes ago, 88Comrade2000 said: Simple solution, amend the constitution to where the president serves only one term of 5 years. Then that way you will get different people in government. 5 years is enough for a president to do what they want. Rarely does anything significant get done in a president’s second term; especially in the modern era of politics. I'd have to further digest the ramifications, but I think I'd even be down for 6 years. Since you're not inaugurated until after the new year anyway. But yeah, it's insanely difficult to pass a constitutional amendment under normal circumstances. Could you imagine trying in the modern political environment 😄 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmirOfShmo Posted February 22 Share Posted February 22 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 He's trying to get some of the Taylor Swift voters. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Wiggles Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 I'm conflicted. My traverse only has AM radio. 🤣 Hmmm.... Authoritarianism vs No AM radio? Tough choice. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 I'm positive this was already posted several months ago but don't really feel like spending any of whatever time I still have on this earth searching to see if it was lol...but I hope there are more campaign ads like this one moving forward (and this one could have been even better, but not gonna nitpick).. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 39 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said: And of course none of the Republican voters who voted to enshrine reproductive rights into the Ohio constitution will let this effect who they vote for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 Well, the voters blocked us from doing it at the state level. (And we tried like hell to just ignore that, too.) So. Guess we just have to dictate the agenda we want to impose at a different level. Maybe SCOTUS can do it, again. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ball Security Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 11 hours ago, Califan007 The Constipated said: I love the pro capitalist Trump platform which would have the government dictate which amenities car manufacturers would be required to provide. Make Tape Cassette Players Great Again. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 2 minutes ago, Ball Security said: I love the pro capitalist Trump platform which would have the government dictate which amenities car manufacturers would be required to provide. Make Tape Cassette Players Great Again. I was drinking coffee when I read this and almost choked lol... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now