“It’s a trap!” – Admiral Ackbar
by Rob Roper
We are just over a week away from the first Republican primary debate, and Donald Trump was out there bragging how he’ll thrash Joe Biden this time around. Candidate Nikki Haley is waving the flag that the real opponent they’re all running against is Vice President Kamala Harris as Biden is likely to drop dead early second term. Respectfully, both are going after the wrong targets.
I’m going to veer away from Vermont politics for a moment and make an observation/prediction about the U.S. presidential election: Joe Biden is not going to be – and was never intended to be — the Democrats’ nominee for president in 2024. So why is he there? To keep Kamala Harris, and perhaps some others, from being able to run at all, and to allow a small group of far-left elites to hand pick the next President of the United States.
Everybody knows Joe Biden is no longer mentally with it (if he ever was). He’s clearly not capable of being president. The Obama cabal is running the White House, and while Biden has been a useful puppet for the extreme Left, they know he’ll be a terrible candidate in 2024. Another run against Trump is a crapshoot at best, and if a different Republican wins the nomination Biden will lose to a fresh face/fresh start candidate for sure. There’s only one possible choice worse than he is: his vice president.
Harris has even lower poll numbers than Biden. She is annoying. Confusing. Incompetent. People don’t like her. She’s associated with the unpopular Biden. And she got blown out of the 2020 primary after garnering about one percent in the polls. She doesn’t have the excuse for gaffs that she’s 138 years old. But as the sitting vice president, in a primary she would be a presumptive nominee, and as a Black woman, the Democrats denying her that spot would look, well, kinda racist and sexist at the same time. Rock/Hard Place.
Moreover a long, open primary could get ugly and unpredictable. There would be debates flush with fringy candidates reminding voters of all the crackpot policies that have destroyed blue states/cities and the country as a whole. Even worse from a Leftist perspective, a moderate like Joe Manchin could emerge as the front runner. Can’t have that!
But as long as Biden is the declared nominee, neither Harris, Manchin nor anybody else who might be taken seriously (sorry RFK Jr.) can begin to build a real campaign. Can’t make speeches about how you’d lead the nation, raise money, hire a campaign team, etc. That would run contrary to etiquette.
Instead, Biden’s fake run sets up a late-game “bait and switch” that will allow a small group of far-left elites to hand-pick the next President. No presumptive nominees. No real primary. Not even a campaign for the candidate; just for the dark money superPACs who will pick (have already picked?) the winner. It’s basically a repeat of The Basement Strategy that worked so well in 2020, but this time for, I’m guessing, California Governor Gavin Newsom.
Here’s the mass-psychological game I think the Democrats are playing….
The national electorate is dreading an inevitable rematch between Biden and Trump. Except for a small minority of hard-core Trump supporters who are salivating for a revenge do-over, voters are looking forward to this about as much as opening day for the Broadway musical version of the movie Ishtar. (Not really a thing, thank God, but given recent theater history you never know.)
An Economist/YouGov poll conducted June 10-13 found 59 percent of voters don’t want Biden to seek reelection, with only 26 percent favoring a run for a second term. Similarly, 56 percent don’t want Trump to run again with just 33 percent in favor. Independents came in with 64 percent against Biden and 59 percent against Trump. Nobody wants this.
The first party to break that sense of impending doom, which will only get more frustrating and intense as time goes on, by putting up someone credible who is not one of the two above mentioned political versions of microwaved leftover fish from last week is going to be rewarded at the ballot box.
So, at some point probably in the summer of 2024, Joe Biden will withdraw from the race for health reasons, or if the charges against Hunter get too hot, maybe citing the legal distractions as being not good for the country or some such thing. Point is he’ll be gone, off eating ice cream and shaking hands with invisible ambassadors in a closet somewhere. The Democrats will “scramble” to find a replacement. “Oh no, what shall we ever do? Who will save us?” The back room elites will push forward their anointed one, and a majority of voters will breathe a collective sigh of relief that election day is no longer a political Sophie’s Choice.
It won’t matter that Newsom (or whomever the Dems put forward, but I’m betting Newsom) has destroyed his state with a litany of inane woke policies. Yes, housing costs in California may be through the roof, homelessness out of control, crime is riddling the state’s cities, there’s an app telling pedestrians where all the human excrement is on the sidewalks, rolling blackouts are a thing, and taxpaying/law abiding citizens are fleeing to other states mostly run by Republicans. But the late bait and switch guarantees a campaign so short none of this has time to get out – and that’s the point — especially with a complicit press running interference.
Newsom (or whoever) will simply be the none-of-the-above option that spared the average, not-very-political voter from having to hold their nose and cast a ballot for one of two octogenarian re-treads facing criminal charges they didn’t like much the first time around. That’s the trap being set, at least as I see it. The question for the debates is, will Republicans step into it?
Rob Roper is a freelance writer who has been involved with Vermont politics and policy for over 20 years. This article reprinted with permission from Behind the Lines: Rob Roper on Vermont Politics, robertroper.substack.com
Categories: Commentary, National News
I agree. The switch will create news headlines, and attention getting excitement. The quality and record of the candidate won’t matter…just the excitement. It’s worrisome.
Rob I think your right that they will come up with something but I believe your missing the fact that our country is being invaded by millions of illegals, which most cannot speak English or have any understanding of the country or the government and how it is run. All they do know is that because of Biden and the Democrats they are here and being given food, clothing, shelter and money! This alone, will prove the Republicans are not worth voting for by them when they are given the vote. I know this because when the borders were opened I called and left a message with our Senators to please do something to close the borders. One of them, I think, was Welch, I say that because I was so mad after reading it that I burnt it, replied that basically they were working on a fast track for citizenship for illegals which will mean they will have the right to vote! If this happens they have already bought their vote, which will determine our elections. I deeply regret not saving the letter and wish there was a way to prove it, but it is the truth!
The DemocRATs will kick this senile old man to the curb, as soon as they think
they have DJT locked in a corner with all these sham charges !!
If you read all the charges against DJT, hell over half of all politicians should be
locked up and leading the pack should be Joseph Robinette Biden Jr…………
Wake up people, you could be next.
I will vote but im not convinced elections or Presidents matter anymore. Global forces dont want representative democracies or Constitutional Republics. They want totalitarian rule. In many places, like vermont and the United States, they already have it. The fact we’re still pretending to be something we no longer are is sad. I pray we can return.
Biden is nominally running for re-election to avoid being a lame duck so early in the game. If he bowed out the press would have no choice but to admit how deeply unpopular and unqualified Kamala is. So the plan needs to be to wait until Biden has all of the delegates wrapped up for the Democrats convention next year and have a (rigged) open floor vote for Newsome at the convention. This strategy seems obvious but none of the talking heads on TV speak about it. I think that’s because they are in on the play and don’t want it to be exposed, because just as Mr Roper writes, the only way for it to work is for it to seem like a surprise when Biden decides to step aside. Just like many of the recent policies that have been rolled out, they think people are too stupid (or at least distracted) to figure this stuff out.
“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
I didn’t get the memo indicating that the lamp is out and the door is now shut. Somebody, please put me on that mailing list.
The door is still open… the ‘lamp’ is still lit, JD. But there is a sign over the door saying ‘please register here’, as there has been for decades. But apparently, some can’t read.
Or they would rather cheat – and traffic kids and drugs in the processes. Are you sure you want to be on that mailing list?
My people came here in the early 1900’s as asylum seekers to escape the pogroms in Russia and they didn’t have to “register” first. All they had to do on Ellis Island to gain entry was to not be carrying any diseases. How about yours?
I have been making the same argument for months. Good job, Rob. Now, can we start the “PICK THE DATE AND TIME BIDEN OFFICIALLY DROPS OUT OF THE RACE” pool? The winner gets an autographed copy of KJP’s forthcoming biography, “I Won’t Talk About That in this Book.”
Yeah, this one is too obvious to me, The Demonrats will go with Gruesome Newsom for president. The vice-presidential pick will be Michael, er, Michelle Obama. They do need to rid themselves of Kamala, but who would argue if they replaced her on the ticket with Big Mike?
I disagree with your opinion of RFK Jr. Although I don’t always agree with his positions being a conservative, the man has an encyclopedic knowledge of the history of this country and its roles (positive and negative) in world affairs over the last 250 years. Therefore, he knows how to go about fixing things. I wouldn’t cringe if somehow he got the nomination. Same with Tulsi Gabbard. Yeah, I know she’s not running, but both she and RFK Jr make a LOT of sense when they speak.
Or maybe Bernie could try again, who knows? Is he in the market for another high-dollar house at a bargain basement price?
Rob, your scenario is the one that make the most sense to me. However could the R’s do the same with a Dump Trump campaign and a good candidate?
I think if the Republicans nominate someone other than Trump, dumping Biden will look like a desperate move rather than a “sad but necessary” one. Having two unknowns in the race will put voters in the position of having to make an active choice between two alternatives rather than a known (don’t like) v. unknown (couldn’t be worse) dynamic, which would ultimately benefit Republicans IMHO.
Wonder if Newsom planted that baggie of coke in the White House when he visited there during Joe’s absences?
Have we all forgotten that Newsome visited the White House back last year when Joe was off begging the Saudis for more oil?? Newsome could maybe beat Trump, but he’d have a much harder time with Desantis or….Kristi Noem/ Candice Owens! What would the libs be able to say about that ticket??
Rob, glad to see your incisive brain turning to national events. Do it more often.
Not to worry. Biden waited 12 long and lonely years to become President and that job will have to be pried out of his cold, dead hands.
Ageism coupled with wishful thinking that Biden certainly must die in office if re-elected. I remember that same mentality when Ronald Reagan was running for president. Not having made it in ’68 or ’76 when he ran again in ’80, people would say because of his age – Reagan in ’80, Bush in ’81. He showed them. “Leftist elites” are going to pick Biden’s successor to run when he dies prior to election day, ’24? The odds aren’t very high at all that he won’t make it to election day in less than 15 months. The leftist elites certainly didn’t pick Biden to run in the first place, but maybe not count the old man out just yet. But I have to ask, is it because the Republican field is in such a shambles that a writer here is forced to resort to speculation as to when an otherwise health human being will die? At Biden’s current age, both my grandfathers could work me under the table.
I didn’t speculate that Biden will die. I predicted that the Democrats will remove a mentally incapacitated person with an approval rating in the 30s before he has a chance to lose the 2024 election, and that they will do so in a manner (according the Dem party rules) that allows the DNC to hand-pick who the ultimate candidate on the ballot is, thus subverting the democratic process.
Re: “Except for a small minority of hard-core Trump supporters who are salivating for a revenge do-over,…”
Mr. Roper, whether your predictions are accurate or not, you’re not only misunderstanding the motivation of the Trump supporters I know, you mis-characterize them as ‘Pavlovian’ miscreants. Frankly, your perspectives are as patrician as those that led to the fall of Greece and Rome.
Our government has become as totalitarian as was the case when the Republic of Rome morphed into the Roman Empire with its Ceasars. The FBI, CIA, and DOJ are now the U.S. equivalent to the Praetorian Guard.
What’s happening in the U.S. right now is far more profound than mere election strategies. It is the encroachment of an anti-constitutional ‘new world order’. Life on earth is unfair and brutal in most places. And that brutality is not only on our doorstep, it’s crossing our threshold as we speak. And it’s extremely complicated.
We are, after all, not electing a high school senior class president or prom king or queen. Quite frankly, I see only one person at this time with the stones, the independence, and the know-how to take on the world’s financial oligarchs and the Administrative State that enables them.
So, speculate as you will. But, as the saying goes, if you just want a friend in Washington D.C., get a puppy.
Jay, I did not characterize Trump supporters as pavlovian miscreants. I merely pointed out that the only demographic group in the US today excited for a Trump v Biden election is Trump supporters (and perhaps the Left wing media). Do you dispute that reality? If so, who am I missing? I agree with you about the stakes of this election. But to say only “one candidate” has the qualifications to meet the challenges of the world today seems to me highly emotional and not at all rational. Trump would certainly be a better president than Biden. But, his track record is one of being undisciplined, easily distracted, getting in his own way, poor team selection, and poor team management. So, I’m willing to look at the other candidates to see if we have a better option to A) win the election in the first place, and then B) focus on actually hiring the right people to implement the right policies necessary to move our country back in the right direction. To not consider the possibility that there is a better option is just plain foolish. Maybe Trump is the best option, but we have a year to test that theory, and we should take advantage of the opportunity.
I enjoy your writing, but I think you are missing a couple points. First, no matter who the republicans put up, the media will tear into them with the usual lies. Second, Tramp got bad advice from party insiders that he thought could be trusted. As an outsider and not an establishment chosen candidate he was deceived by the old guard, what choice did he have? Third, he knows where all the snakes and cockroaches are hiding. No other candidate has the national support to fix broken DC than DJT. His rallies across the country prove that. And finally, one of the most important reasons for his return is to show the political class that Americans will pick the candidates, not the establishment. Trump needs to have the 4-year term that was stolen from him in two ways. His first term was interfered with by the DNC/Hillary lies that kicked off the Russian connection and election theft lies that the leftwing media dragged on for 3 years. Then the fake impeachments to hurt his presidency and to stop him from being allowed to run again. And now, the continued illegal lawfare currently being used against him. Hillary, Obama, Biden and all their minions walked free from all their proven crimes and their criminal acts were ignored and covered up by the media and those in power. Trump should be granted his revenge term because without major change in DC and if all the corruption is ignored again, our country is history. This needs to be settled in this election. Trump needs to be vindicated the those responsible need to be prosecuted.
Thank you, Rob, for engaging.
Re: “I did not characterize Trump supporters as pavlovian miscreants.”
What you said, Rob, – your words – was “…hard-core Trump supporters who are salivating for a revenge do-over,…”.
Do you know what a ‘Pavlovian Response’ refers to? Do you know the definition of ‘miscreant’? Look it up folks.
I’m an independent voter, Rob. Always have been. Your characterization of me, and the Trump supporters I know, couldn’t be less accurate. And changing the subject is mere equivocation.
Re: “I merely pointed out that the only demographic group in the US today excited for a Trump v Biden election is Trump supporters (and perhaps the Left wing media).”
‘Merely’?? First, you didn’t point that out. You inaccurately characterized the Trump supporters I know as “salivating for a revenge do-over,…”. You own it.
Do I dispute the reality that the ‘only demographic group in the US today excited for a Trump v Biden election is Trump supporters (and perhaps the Left wing media)’?
Of course, I dispute it. How can you or anyone else know the state of mind of every voter in the U.S.? I can tell you what the people I know tell me. But I can’t be any more presumptuous than that. And neither can you – try as you might to convince us otherwise.
Re: “But to say only “one candidate” has the qualifications to meet the challenges of the world today seems to me highly emotional and not at all rational.”
Fine. Your observation seems to me to be a projection (my opinion, not a formal psychoanalysis). And you’re entitled to your point of view. But keep in mind that I called you out for a fact about this matter. For what you said. Not for my understanding of your emotional or irrational projections.
On the other hand, your subtle mincing of words doesn’t escape me. That I don’t see anyone else qualified – ‘at this time’ – isn’t an illegitimate observation on my part. We can disagree on this point. But that doesn’t make me ‘salivate for a revenge do-over’.
Re: “But, his [Trump’s] track record is one of being undisciplined, easily distracted, getting in his own way, poor team selection, and poor team management.”
‘Undisciplined’? What do you mean? This is a typical progressive and, dare I say it, undisciplined talking-point.
‘Easily distracted’? Ya think? Do I really have to list the sequence of events with which the man has had to cope over the last six years. I’m amazed he still has the strength and motivation to continue.
‘Getting his own way”? Isn’t that what Trump was elected to do?
‘Poor team selection”? Says who? Compared to who? Where’s your evidence? What policies did Trump and his ‘team’ push through that you disagree with?
Re: “I’m willing to look at the other candidates to see if we have a better option…”
Fine. Go for it. I’m still looking too. But that you’re willing to look at other candidates has nothing to do with my criticism of your remarks. It’s the inaccuracy and innuendo inherent in your characterizations that concerns me. There’s not one specific example of a circumstance or an issue in your citations. It’s all innuendo. Pure sophistry.
If you want to discuss specific issues, candidate by candidate, bring it on. But enough with the name calling.
Jay,
Pavlov showed that you can create reactions through associations — ring a bell when a dog is fed and soon it will associate the bell with food and thus begin salivating. But “salivating” in and of itself is not Pavlovian. I used the term per its actual definition as a characteristic of showing an appetite for something.
“Miscreant” means troublemaker/lawbreaker. Again, I neither used that word nor made any such an assertion. You made this up out of whole cloth.
Do I have insight into every voter’s mind? No. But I can read polling and polling shows that most Americans do not want either Trump or Biden to run again. Maybe that will change, but I doubt it. I personally think that sentiment will only deepen as time goes on.
‘Undisciplined’ It means he has a hard time staying on message, which undermines his ability to get things done. He’d rather talk about what Joe Scarboro said on a little watched television show than discuss and fight for things like why we need a better immigration policy. He never did build that wall. His first debate performance against Biden in 2020 was so undisciplined — rude, interrupting and unlikeable — I think it cost him the election. Worst offense, instead of supporting the two Republican senate candidates in the 2020 Georgia run-off he had a hissy fit and told his voters to stay home. This cost Republicans the senate, which allowed Biden to ram through his agenda with Kamala casting the tie breaking votes (undermining Trump’s own policy legacy), and it robbed Republicans of the opportunity to control committees that could have actually investigated the crimes committed by the Democrats during the 2020 election, etc.
‘Getting his own way”. Not what I said. Go back and re-read. Getting “IN” his own way. See Georgia senate race for best example.
‘Poor team selection.” Um, Anthony Fauci to run the Covid response… Christopher Wray to head the FBI… Rudy Giuliani and Sydney Powell to lead the vote fraud legal fight… Backing Hershel Walker, Dr. Oz, etc because they are “celebrities”. Who were the successful appointments to policy posts, candidates backed, etc and so on? I know there are some, but his batting average is very poor. With Trump as head of the party Republicans lost the House in 2018, lost the senate and the presidency in 2020, and with him pushing his picks for key senate and gubernatorial races in 2022 turned what should have been a red wave year into flame out — salvaged only in part by the work of Lee Zeldin in NY and Ron DeSantis in Florida working to get house members elected.
As for your accusation that I engaged in name calling, I didn’t call anyone a name in my piece, except for calling Kamala Harris annoying and incompetent — which I stand by as sound analysis.
Geesh, Rob. Speaking of staying on message. There’s a lot of left-over meat on this bone. I only hope VDC readers still have an appetite.
You said, ‘salivating for revenge’. I toned it down to ‘Pavlovian miscreant’. No matter the wording, Ring the bell, if you like. it’s unsubstantiated name-calling. And a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
Re: “His first debate performance against Biden in 2020 was so undisciplined — rude, interrupting and unlikeable — I think it cost him the election.”
Never mind that Biden was lying through his teeth at the time – calling the laptop story Russian disinformation without any push-back from the moderator. And 51 U.S. intelligence officers, including former CIA Director Brennan, National Intelligence Director James Clapper, Mike Hayden, former CIA director, signed a letter to that effect. Was that Biden’s ‘Poor team selection”?
Re: “Getting in his own way.” Sorry I missed that. I guess I subliminally thought it might be a typo. After all, I don’t know what it means to get in one’s own way. Is that like falling up the stairs, tripping over a sandbag, falling off a bike, or getting lost on stage?
Re: “Insight into every voter’s mind? No. But I can read polling…”
If that’s what you were referring to, you should have said so. We can all read the polling. All of it if we have the time. Again, no matter. Some polls show Trump ahead in the primary by over 40%. Others don’t. If you want to stake your personal judgement on ‘polls’, be my guest. But again, you didn’t discuss Trump’s polling in your missive. You referenced polls once with regard to Harris’ primary contest 4 years ago. But that was it.
Speaking again of ‘staying on message’. I think a little introspection is in order, Rob. You’re moving the goal posts right now, along with the best of them.
To say, for example, that Trump doesn’t “discuss and fight for things like why we need a better immigration policy” is incomprehensible to me. So much so, I wouldn’t know where to begin except with the instances of his ‘build the wall’ mantra. And you now say “He never did build that wall.” You mean he didn’t finish it, right? And why was that? I mean really.
Re: “Democrats denying her that spot would look, well, kinda racist and sexist at the same time. Rock/Hard Place.”
No argument from me in that regard. What does that have to do with Trump staying on message?
Re: “Moreover a long, open primary could get ugly and unpredictable.”
Ah, ya’ think. How much uglier can it get than it is now?
Re: “Poor team selection.”
Fauci? Fauci was an administrative state lifer. Chris Christie recommended Wray and Trump later called Wray ‘the worst member of my administration’. And what about the 51 intelligence officers who signed the fraudulent letter saying the Biden laptop was Russian misinformation.
‘Et tu Brrute.’
There are more than 23 million full and part-time employees in the federal government. And no one can replace them all – especially not Trump given the constant stream of unwarranted criminal contrivances leveled against him from day one.
And what makes you think Giuliani and Powell are poor choices? Because the mainstream media and other never-Trumpers say so? In my mind the jury is still out. The tip of that iceberg is being exposed as we speak.
And since when is backing a ‘celebrity’ so bad. Ronald Reagan comes to mind.
Re: Holding the Congress: Yes, Trump lost the 2020 election. At least we know Joe Biden is the current president. But Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 election. And Mitt Romney lost the 2012 election. And John McCain lost the 2008 election. This isn’t an everyone gets a trophy contest.
When Trump won the 2016 election, Republicans held both the House and the Senate. Republicans controlled the Senate until that 2020 fiasco, when – who was it that beat Dr. Oz in the Senate? Oh, that’s right, John Fetter’woman’. Go figure. And while Republicans lost the House in 2018, they won the House back in 2022.
The largest congressional turnover losses for the opposing party during the last three presidencies occurred under Obama. So, if you can draw definitive conclusions from those results, you’re a better pundit than I.
Re: “I didn’t call anyone a name in my piece, except for calling Kamala Harris annoying and incompetent.”
Personally, I take offense at being characterized as ‘salivating for revenge’ more than I would being accused of being annoying. But I guess that’s just me.
In the final analysis, Rob, I circle back to my original premise. I’m saying, and I’m sticking to my story, that your assessment, of the Trump supporters I know, is wrong. Period. And I think, as long as we’re casting our opinions, your assessment of Trump is misguided too. Frankly, if I didn’t know better, I’d think you were better equipped to be an MSNBC political analyst.
Okay, I think I get it. You never actually read my original op-ed, at least not with any degree of care….
Your criticism: “But again, you didn’t discuss Trump’s polling in your missive. You referenced polls once with regard to Harris’ primary contest 4 years ago. But that was it.”
Alas, Paragraph 10….
“An Economist/YouGov poll conducted June 10-13 found 59 percent of voters don’t want Biden to seek reelection, with only 26 percent favoring a run for a second term. Similarly, 56 percent don’t want Trump to run again with just 33 percent in favor. Independents came in with 64 percent against Biden and 59 percent against Trump. Nobody wants this.”
If you really want to take offense at this statement, which is in reference to that polling data: “Except for a small minority of hard-core Trump supporters who are salivating for a revenge do-over, voters are looking forward to this [a Biden/Trump rematch] about as much as opening day for the Broadway musical version of the movie Ishtar,” that’s on you, but I think you’re doing a better job of manufacturing an excuse to be triggered than a Berkley student in a Western Civ class.
Your defense of Trump’s hiring/firing practices: “Fauci? Fauci was an administrative state lifer [who Trump could have fired at any time, but didn’t.] Chris Christie [Who Trump hired to run his transition team. Bad choice.] recommended Wray [Who Trump nominated. Bad choice.] and Trump later called Wray ‘the worst member of my administration’ [Who he put there! That’s on Trump.]
You complain about my observation, “Democrats denying her [Harris] that spot would look, well, kinda racist and sexist at the same time. Rock/Hard Place.” saying, No argument from me in that regard. What does that have to do with Trump staying on message?
Nothing. Because the article was about the Democrats eventually replacing Biden on the ticket, not about Trump. You seem to have missed that point entirely.
You ask, “And since when is backing a ‘celebrity’ so bad.” When that’s the primary reason you think they can win and they are otherwise horrible, awful, not very good candidates. Backing Walker and Oz was bad judgement by Trump, and it cost Republicans and the country in a big way.
You cite my comment, “Moreover a long, open primary could get ugly and unpredictable.” and say, Ah, ya’ think. How much uglier can it get than it is now?
You seem to have missed the point that I was discussing a potential Democrat primary and why their strategy is to avoid one by keeping Biden on the ticket — for now. Not the Republican primary.
You ask, “And what makes you think Giuliani and Powell are poor choices?” Because there were so many legitimate issues to attack regarding election interference and those two clowns chose to focus on unsubstantiated conspiracy theories — and lied about the evidence they had to back it up — which not only made them and Trump look like fools, it created an opening for Democrats and the media to redirect from and dismiss legit claims of fraud — like the fact that the Penn Supreme Court had no constitutional authority to rewrite election laws — through guilt by association.
You seem to want to make excuses for Trump’s failures. Okay. There might even be some legitimacy to some of those excuses. (Not for Fauci and Wray, however.) I just don’t want to add the 2024 election to that list.
Rob. You’re right. I missed that reference to polls in, what was it again, the tenth paragraph. My mistake. As I said before, “If you want to stake your personal judgement on ‘polls’, be my guest.”
By the way, your reference to the 41% of polled voters, those who would like Trump to run, doesn’t strike me as justifying a “Nobody wants this’ kind of assessment. But that’s just my opinion.
Could Trump have made a better argument concerning a questionable 2020 election. You bet. That the election was flawed in the first place was the problem. That’s what Trump should have argued. It was impossible, at the time, to prove the election was stolen, as it was impossible to prove that it wasn’t. But the deceptions put forth by the FBI, the media, Biden and the 51 intelligence officers lying about the laptop, alone is reason enough to allege that the election was rigged. The jury, quite literally, is still out on this issue.
Should Trump have fired all of the people around him, as you apparently feel he should have? We can second guess him all day long. Again, if anyone knew Fauci was as corrupt as we now know him to be, or if Christie was as disloyal as he turned out to be, no one would say at the time. I don’t recall having seen you announce that caution. But perhaps I missed that too.
And no one said the buck doesn’t stop with Trump. He was in charge. But the depth of the corruption with which Trump has had to contend astounds me. Fool me once, as the saying goes.
But I would be remiss if I didn’t note that you still avoid addressing the depth and pervasiveness of that corruption.
Instead, you make an incongruous claim that Trump’s immigration and border policy was flawed.
Or that celebrities “…are otherwise horrible, awful, not very good candidates”. Again, what about Ronald Reagan?
If your ‘article was only about the Democrats eventually replacing Biden on the ticket, not about Trump’, why did you characterize Trump supporters as you did? Are Biden supporters off-limits to your characterizations?
And why would you think I missed your point with regard to “…an ugly and unpredictable primary”? I didn’t refer to the Republican primary in my retort.
You’re obfuscating, Rob. And your attempt to justify your characterization of the Trump supporters I know as ‘salivating for revenge’, as being reasonably based on polls, is a case in point. But I’ll leave that deduction for other reasonable VDC readers to judge, … if they’re still with us. Suffice it to say that while you remain a never-Trumper, your justifications are dubious, and your reliance on ad hominem fallacies to make your points are unbecoming.
Jay,
I am not and have never been a “never Trumper.” I voted for him twice. But at the same time, I am not a cult worshiper of the guy either. And I don’t think he offers the party the best opportunity to win in 2024 or the country the best option for fixing what must be fixed beyond that. I’m happy to hear arguments to the contrary, but if you want to persuade me they will have to be based on some sort of factual evaluation of the political landscape — how he gets to victory in the electoral college, and who he’s going to bring onto his team this time implement policy.
I am glad you admit that Trump could have made a better argument following the elections, but didn’t…. Should have hired better people to begin with, or fired the ones that weren’t working. But he didn’t. Etc and so on. These are failures on his part.
At some point after making excuse after excuse for why a great player is failing to deliver time after time you have to come to the conclusion that that player may not be so great after all.
I agree with you about the level of corruption he had to deal with, but in the end he was incapable of coping with it. This is now a known quantity about his capabilities, and the are observably not up to the job. He may have been cheated, but he let himself be cheated, and the way he reacted to being cheated made it easier for the cheaters to get away with it. As one who wants to see those folks brought to justice, I don’t appreciate this.
And if you really want to compare Hershel Walker and Dr. Oz to Ronald Reagan, that’s your right. And if you honestly want to defend Trump’s choice to back them over other candidates, I’ll take this as a good indicator of your overall political judgement and leave it at that.
Re: “I am not and have never been a “never Trumper.” I voted for him twice. But at the same time, I am not a cult worshiper of the guy either.”
Rob, you continue with logical fallacies – this being the first of several in your current post.
Being a ‘Trump Supporter’ doesn’t mean the only alternative is being a ‘cult worshipper’, or ‘salivating for revenge’.
That you ‘don’t think he offers the party the best opportunity to win in 2024, or the country the best option for fixing what must be fixed’, doesn’t mean Trump isn’t the best opportunity for doing so. That happens to be your current opinion. I see the world differently.
I did not say Trump ‘Should have hired better people to begin with, or fired the ones that weren’t working.’ I said, ‘We can second guess him all day long.’
And I didn’t ‘compare Hershel Walker and Dr. Oz to Ronald Reagan’. I simply pointed out that being a celebrity didn’t preclude one from being a good candidate. The fact of the matter is that we won’t be able to judge Hershel Walker or Dr. Oz because they lost their elections. But we can compare notes on those who ostensibly ‘won’ those elections – the Rev. Raphael Warnock and John Fetterman. Do you honestly believe Fetterman was/is a ‘good candidate’?
So please. Enough with the false dichotomies.
Trump’s foreign, economic (free market), and immigration policies, are better than any other candidate’s policies I’ve seen – by virtually every measure. That’s why the other candidates are mimicking them.
The difference is, Trump is a pit bull. And unless you’ve worked in the NYC real estate and construction markets, as I have for the last 30 years, you won’t understand that culture. Please believe me when I say Trump is mild-mannered compared to many of the NYC construction and union bosses with whom I’ve worked.
In closing I’ll tell you what I see, as I explained in my opening remarks.
This is not the election of a high school student council president. Polls are but snap shots in time. That Trump may, from time to time, be ‘rude, interrupting and unlikeable’ is a character flaw I’m willing to accept. It’s going to take a pit bull to save this country from the corruption that has clearly been in place now for decades. And if Trump’s legacy is only that he was able to expose that corruption and neutralize it, we’re better off with him as president than anyone else currently running. Trump is our modern-day Gen. Patton. And I suspect he will end his career similarly. I hope not. But history has a nasty habit of repeating itself.
Yes, the other candidates have some good ideas. And they’re all nice people. But I don’t see any of them with the temperament to take on the ‘Deep State’. So, while others prefer labradoodles, I’m inclined to support the pit bull. But again, if Trump’s only remaining achievement is his ability to exorcise the political elitist patricians with mutually assured destruction, I’m afraid he’s our only recourse.
Again, call them what you will. The Deep State, the World Economic Forum, the Marxist Left. They are in ruthless pursuit of destroying our Constitutional Republic, and we had better fight fire with fire. When the smoke clears, we’ll rebuild, as we have in the past.
Postscript: This has been an excellent discussion, in my humble opinion. I hope all VDC readers have had the stamina to stay abreast of it. After all, we have the most serious political considerations in my lifetime with which to contend. I hope everyone keeps an open mind – and their powder dry.
Right, enough with the name-calling, innuendo and sophistry (new word for me).
Why is it okay for you to say it, but not me?
Hey, JD. You know, you’re right. I should have said unsubstantiated name-calling.
Thank you for making that point.
Re: “I am not and have never been a “never Trumper.” I voted for him twice. But at the same time, I am not a cult worshiper of the guy either.”
Rob, you continue with logical fallacies – this being the first of several in your current post.
Being a ‘Trump Supporter’ doesn’t mean the only alternative is being a ‘cult worshipper’, or ‘salivating for revenge’.
That you ‘don’t think he offers the party the best opportunity to win in 2024, or the country the best option for fixing what must be fixed’, doesn’t mean Trump isn’t the best opportunity for doing so. That happens to be your current opinion. I see the world differently.
I did not say Trump ‘Should have hired better people to begin with, or fired the ones that weren’t working.’ I said, ‘We can second guess him all day long.’
And I didn’t ‘compare Hershel Walker and Dr. Oz to Ronald Reagan’. I simply pointed out that being a celebrity didn’t preclude one from being a good candidate. The fact of the matter is that we won’t be able to judge Hershel Walker or Dr. Oz because they lost their elections. But we can compare notes on those who ostensibly ‘won’ those elections – the Rev. Raphael Warnock and John Fetterman. Do you honestly believe Fetterman was/is a ‘good candidate’?
So please. Enough with the false dichotomies.
Trump’s foreign, economic (free market), and immigration policies, are better than any other candidate’s policies I’ve seen – by virtually every measure. That’s why the other candidates are mimicking them.
The difference is, Trump is a pit bull. And unless you’ve worked in the NYC real estate and construction markets, as I have for the last 30 years, you won’t understand that culture. Please believe me when I say Trump is mild-mannered compared to many of the NYC construction and union bosses with whom I’ve worked.
In closing I’ll tell you what I see, as I explained in my opening remarks.
This is not the election of a high school student council president. Polls are but snap shots in time. That Trump may, from time to time, be ‘rude, interrupting and unlikeable’ is a character flaw I’m willing to accept. It’s going to take a pit bull to save this country from the corruption that has clearly been in place now for decades. And if Trump’s legacy is only that he was able to expose that corruption and neutralize it, we’re better off with him as president than anyone else currently running. Trump is our modern-day Gen. Patton. And I suspect he will end his career similarly. I hope not. But history has a nasty habit of repeating itself.
Yes, the other candidates have some good ideas. And they’re all nice people. But I don’t see any of them with the temperament to take on the ‘Deep State’. So, while others prefer labradoodles, I’m inclined to support the pit bull. But again, if Trump’s only remaining achievement is his ability to exorcise the political elitist patricians with mutually assured destruction, I’m afraid he’s our only recourse.
Again, call them what you will. The Deep State, the World Economic Forum, the Marxist Left. They are in ruthless pursuit of destroying our Constitutional Republic, and we had better fight fire with fire. When the smoke clears, we’ll rebuild, as we have in the past.
Postscript: This has been an excellent discussion, in my humble opinion. I hope all VDC readers have had the stamina to stay abreast of it. After all, we have the most serious political considerations in my lifetime with which to contend. I hope everyone keeps an open mind – and their powder dry.