Trump 2024 ???

[ditcherman]

". . . argue he’s well past being electable by a majority." -- Wasn't a similar argument made before he was elected the first time?

Sure it was. But this thread kinda started out with “we must have trump and no other, no resistance at all” vibe, and I think there’s room for argument on that.

I don't disagree with what you're writing. You are especially right in pointing out that the flip side of TDS are the people frothing at the mouth screaming Trump. Isn't that Newton's Third Law?

I said very early on that TDS goes both ways. It didn’t really catch on but I see it beginning to. People can be deranged (out of their mind, can’t see straight) both ways.

I am firmly in support of President Trump. Having said that I acknowledge that his personality will be off-putting to many. Having said that, you cannot fight the media, big tech, other nations' politicians, the extreme liberals, the world establishment, status quo, etc. without having a seemingly large ego, and be willing to fight back without engaging in behavior that (non-fighters) will find distasteful. He may not be what many want, but he is what our country needs.

It is sad to see so many people unable to separate their emotions from making an important decision. It just supports my theory that people are primarily ruled by emotions and unable to engage in any intellectual functions when engaged in emotions. Sam Harris' melt down is a perfect example of this.

I don't think I could ever live in the same house as Trump. It's a good thing I am looking for someone to get the country financially stable and nationally secure, not a house mate.

He’s off-putting to me, but I would vote for him.
But we don’t even get to see what Desantis or others have to say?
We don’t even get to see how he may conduct himself?
We don’t even give the chance for some moderates that may be inclined to possibly vote against the crazy here now to do so, and all we have to do if let trump go and pick ‘second best’?

 

[J Galt]

@KG1

If you would have stuck with this argument:
"I think it's detrimental in the sense that it would probably turn off pretty much everyone that is not in his hardcore base. Including moderate Trump supporters that have voted for him in the past. One of which I am. I had a similar reaction like you did."

Then added something to the effect of:

The trading cards gives mainstream media ammunition to use against him. They will show this and completely ignore the actual announcement he made, which covered important topics. This will, unfortunately, make it very easy to manipulate low information voters against him.​

Then I would have agreed with you completely. In fact, if this is what you were trying to say when you wrote "SAVVY Baby!!!" then I would agree.

 

[jamil]

Trump’s Enemies Underestimate Him — Again - The American Spectator | USA News and PoliticsThe American Spectator | USA News and Politics

The election was a disaster.

spectator.org

Unwavering support of his base will likely get him nominated again. But, are there enough people who will hold their noses in 2024 in key states? Indiana isn't in doubt. Deep red states aren't in doubt. Can he win in MI, WI, OH, PA, AZ?

Better get that GOP ballot harvesting machine started now.

 

[Ingomike]

Washington chewed him up and spit him out.

BS, No they did not. The swamp has spent 6 years, first trying to stop his election, then 4 years trying to remove him from office, followed by 2 years trying to keep him from being able to run, but have not succeeded in any of it.

 

[jamil]

". . . argue he’s well past being electable by a majority." -- Wasn't a similar argument made before he was elected the first time?

I don't disagree with what you're writing. You are especially right in pointing out that the flip side of TDS are the people frothing at the mouth screaming Trump. Isn't that Newton's Third Law? I am firmly in support of President Trump. Having said that I acknowledge that his personality will be off-putting to many. Having said that, you cannot fight the media, big tech, other nations' politicians, the extreme liberals, the world establishment, status quo, etc. without having a seemingly large ego, and be willing to fight back without engaging in behavior that (non-fighters) will find distasteful. He may not be what many want, but he is what our country needs.

It is sad to see so many people unable to separate their emotions from making an important decision. It just supports my theory that people are primarily ruled by emotions and unable to engage in any intellectual functions when engaged in emotions. Sam Harris' melt down is a perfect example of this.

I don't think I could ever live in the same house as Trump. It's a good thing I am looking for someone to get the country financially stable and nationally secure, not a house mate.

Just a comment about getting the country financially stable and nationally secure. I agree that he would secure the nation. I have no faith that Trump gives a flying **** about becoming financially stable in all that phrase implies. Maybe ending inflation. Getting the economy going. But to me, becoming financially stable has to address deficit spending and debt. Trump did not demonstrate during his term that this was a priority or ever would be.

 

[jamil]

BS, No they did not. The swamp has spent 6 years, first trying to stop his election, then 4 years trying to remove him from office, followed by 2 years trying to keep him from being able to run, but have not succeeded in any of it.

Is Trump still President now? Do you seriously think (at least as it looks from today's vantage point) that Trump will win in 2024?

By hook or crook. chewed up. spit out.

 

[KG1]

@KG1

If you would have stuck with this argument:
"I think it's detrimental in the sense that it would probably turn off pretty much everyone that is not in his hardcore base. Including moderate Trump supporters that have voted for him in the past. One of which I am. I had a similar reaction like you did."

Then added something to the effect of:

The trading cards gives mainstream media ammunition to use against him. They will show this and completely ignore the actual announcement he made, which covered important topics. This will, unfortunately, make it very easy to manipulate low information voters against him.​

Then I would have agreed with you completely. In fact, if this is what you were trying to say when you wrote "SAVVY Baby!!!" then I would agree.

That's pretty much what I was getting at. I don't think Trump gained anything that was beneficial. I'm sure his hardcore dedicated base just loved it but he already has them in his back pocket.

IMO it would've been more beneficial if he would've just stuck with his policy speech without the hokum opening act.

 

[J Galt]

Sure it was. But this thread kinda started out with “we must have trump and no other, no resistance at all” vibe, and I think there’s room for argument on that. - No disagreement

I said very early on that TDS goes both ways. It didn’t really catch on but I see it beginning to. People can be deranged (out of their mind, can’t see straight) both ways. - I admit I saw this (opposite of TDS) but never thought about it more until I read your post.

He’s off-putting to me, but I would vote for him. - I respect being able to decide without emotion clouding that. I think you're wired to be able to do that, or you are not. (Not "you" specifically". "You" in the general sense.)

But we don’t even get to see what Desantis or others have to say? - They will have a chance to decide of they want to run. If they do decide to run then we will have the opportunity to hear what they have to say.

We don’t even get to see how he may conduct himself? - "He" meaning a different person than Trump? To be able to see how they conduct themselves would mean they hold that office. Then it is too late to change. I think Desantis, Noem, and others are amazing governors that are truly representing the best interest of their respective states. That does not mean they will be able to be as effective on the international stage. We need strong governors in states to give people a place to go that is aligned with their beliefs and have politicians that are acting in the interest of their constituents. #NoemIsLegend

We don’t even give the chance for some moderates that may be inclined to possibly vote against the crazy here now to do so, and all we have to do if let trump go and pick ‘second best’? - I am not sure what you mean. There will be an election to decide on who the candidate from the respective parties are. I don't think Trump is not moderate. All he wants is for America to be the most important thing when it comes to international trade and security and success for all Americans domestically. I call this pretty moderate. Frankly I think there are too many important things at stake here. I also believe that we are literally playing for keeps. There is no one better qualified and able to steer the country to economic prosperity and international security other than Trump. Remember, you won't have to work directly under him or live with him. He is the Pitbull that will crush anyone seeking to take advantage of the United States, including domestic career politicians.

I'll reply in Blue to the points you made. No disrespect is intended in any of my answers. Typed words don't have the same nuance as a conversation.

 

[J Galt]

That's pretty much what I was getting at. I don't think Trump gained anything that was beneficial. I'm sure his hardcore dedicated base just loved it but he already has them in his back pocket.

IMO it would've been more beneficial if he would've just stuck with his policy speech without the hokum opening act.

"SAVVY Baby!!!" is a long way from that. In fact, it had the opposite effect and makes you seem like "a word that would be censored here."

Having said that, I actually also meant what I typed. If he made his announcement then, a week later, released the trading cards, that would probably have been a better move.

I do not consider myself "in his back pocket" but I am firmly in support of him. I'm not sure if you're taking cheap shots to try and start an argument. Arguing online is pointless.

 

[jamil]

I'll reply in Blue to the points you made. No disrespect is intended in any of my answers. Typed words don't have the same nuance as a conversation.

I think generally that if you oppose the woke nonsense, the irrational policies of Biden, but can't vote for Trump against a bat **** crazy Democrat like Biden, I think that may be a sign of delusional thinking. I also don't think Trump can win, regardless.

Also, Blue is so outdated.

 

[KG1]

"SAVVY Baby!!!" is a long way from that. In fact, it had the opposite effect and makes you seem like "a word that would be censored here."

Having said that, I actually also meant what I typed. If he made his announcement then, a week later, released the trading cards, that would probably have been a better move.

I do not consider myself "in his back pocket" but I am firmly in support of him. I'm not sure if you're taking cheap shots to try and start an argument. Arguing online is pointless.

Just for a point of refence I wasn't directing the "in his back pocket" directly to you and I'm not trying to start any argument. Just giving my opinion that it was not a particular savvy move and it took the attention away from a speech that would otherwise have resonated with a far greater number on it's own accord.

Like I said before this whole Trading Card thing overshadowed his policy speech and that is what is gaining the most attention and is the reason why more people other than his hardcore base don't take him seriously. I'm sure you would agree with that.

 

[J Galt]

Just for a point of refence I wasn't directing the "in his back pocket" directly to you and I'm not trying to start any argument. Just giving my opinion that it was not a particular savvy move and it took the attention away from a speech that would otherwise have resonated with a far greater number on it's own accord.

Like I said before this whole Trading Card thing overshadowed his policy speech and that is what is gaining the most attention and is the reason why more people other than his hardcore base don't take him seriously. I'm sure you would agree with that.

Actually, I do agree with everything you typed above.

I'm a bit pissed he made the 2 announcements in the order and timing he did. This is assuming the tech companies didn't manipulate the timing. I think I'll sign up for Truth Social now so I get the un-adultized version of what he says.

I wasn't sure on the argument. It can be hard to read intent behind typed words. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[KG1]

Actually, I do agree with everything you typed above.

I'm a bit pissed he made the 2 announcements in the order and timing he did. This is assuming the tech companies didn't manipulate the timing. I think I'll sign up for Truth Social now so I get the un-adultized version of what he says.

I wasn't sure on the argument. It can be hard to read intent behind typed words. Thanks for the clarification.

Well I am one who has supported Trump for his policies that have been beneficial. I just didn't care for the Trading Card thing that IMO is the kind of thing that overshadows those policies and makes him look needlessly foolish and egotistical in the eyes of a lot of people.

I don't think that kind of nonsense is beneficial in the broader sense. I would rather the focus be on policy.

That's all I'm saying. Nothing personal was intended and I apologize if it came off that way.

 

[ditcherman]

I'll reply in Blue to the points you made. No disrespect is intended in any of my answers. Typed words don't have the same nuance as a conversation.

No offense taken, this is a good conversation imo.

My “he” referred to Desantis, sorry I wasn’t clear.

If given the chance, many moderates and D’s would vote against the crazy that is in power now. Combine that with the fact that many conservatives, many who can not make an unemotional decision to vote for trump, won’t, and I think that trump can’t win the election when Desantis has a better chance. Just my opinion, and I’m as jaded in my thinking as anyone else. It’s when people come out with such full confidence, 2 years early, that I know they are likely wrong.

We may call it moderate, but his image has been cast and there is nothing that can be done to change many minds.

 

[J Galt]

No offense taken, this is a good conversation imo.

My “he” referred to Desantis, sorry I wasn’t clear.

If given the chance, many moderates and D’s would vote against the crazy that is in power now. Combine that with the fact that many conservatives, many who can not make an unemotional decision to vote for trump, won’t, and I think that trump can’t win the election when Desantis has a better chance. Just my opinion, and I’m as jaded in my thinking as anyone else. It’s when people come out with such full confidence, 2 years early, that I know they are likely wrong.

We may call it moderate, but his image has been cast and there is nothing that can be done to change many minds.

Desantis is likely more appealing to people's emotions. He is doing an incredible job as governor (almost as good as Gov Kristi Noem). I do not think this will necessarily translate to the international stage. He is too much of a politician and I see him as willing to play along with the establishment.

DJT is more of a wild card that does not need to play anyone's games. I like what I have seen with respect to international politics and DJT. No one has called out other NATO nations in paying their fair share. No one has done anything effective in bringing manufacturing back to the US. No living president has entered N Korea (albeit symbolically). No new wars were started under his administration. We (the United States) were respected. More importantly, we treated our allies fairly while placing all Americans at the forefront of domestic and international policies.

 

[J Galt]

It is truly a shame that Elon Musk and Donald Trump have egos too large to enable them to work together. It is also a shame that Mike Rowe is not interested in getting involved in politics to even serve as an advisor.

 

[Ingomike]

Is Trump still President now? Do you seriously think (at least as it looks from today's vantage point) that Trump will win in 2024?

By hook or crook. chewed up. spit out.

I don’t think any republican likely to beat the machine. Trump has the best shot IMHO…

 

[Twangbanger]

Would be nice if INGO could navigate this disagreement without making it a pro-trump/anti-trump binary. One's thinking about Trump is more nuanced than Trump cult vs TDS cult. There's a lot of nuance in between. At the end of the day, who is on the ballot to face Democrats? What are your priorities for America? Do you vote for the person opposing the Democrat or not. That's the real binary. That's where the nuance doesn't matter. We can disagree on who the best person is to run. But we divide ourselves into these pigeonholes, even though we all might agree that not-democrat is the first-priority consensus.

That's the real issue here. I don't know if that consensus is as solid as we might assume. There are a lot who believe that _who_ the Republican Party nominates is as important, if not more important, than who wins the general election. Because, the thinking goes: if the Republicans nominate someone who's not significantly different from Democrats, then what's the point? The key distinction is, not significantly different on which issues? Because not everybody cares about the same issues the same way.

Bugnupe14 seems to believe who the Republicans pick is more important than the general election. Because if the Republican Party is controlled by the CoC, its differences from the Democrat platform don't matter, in the end...the old "90mph vs. 60mph" argument.

I will admit I see some merit in his point. If the Republican party loses the will to fight, then tweedledum vs. tweedledee eventually doesn't matter. Interestingly, it's not just those on the Right who take a keen interest in who the GOP nominates. Read the following article:

https://newrepublic.com/article/169435/case-gop-nominate-donald-trump-2024

The crystallizing line from that article is the following:

"...there’s something else we need if the republic is to survive: a sane and reasonable conservative party...Replacing this neofascist party with a reasonable conservative party is our country’s only hope for survival. In my estimation, Trump’s nomination would hasten that day’s arrival..."

That comes from the pen of a raging leftist, but it can be interpreted a lot of ways. The writer thinks nominating Trump actually hastens the downfall of "America First." I'm not so sure he isn't correct. Bug seems to think nominating Trump is AF's only hope. So there's a difference of opinion there. But, regardless of your views, there seems to be a realization on both sides, that how you effectively neuter the Conservative voice in America, is to make sure the Party responsible for nominating Conservative Candidates is controlled by players who are aligned with the Chamber of Commerce's interests.

Ultimately, I don't think Bug is crazy or even wrong. I think he just overestimates DJT's ability to win. Hence my question: if DJT needed 3 blue state flips to win in 2016 - when America hadn't been radicalized against him yet - how many does he need, and where does he get them, once Arizona and Georgia are "pink" and unreliable, and 2 of the 3 blue state flips from 2016 (MI and PA) have made ballot harvesting a permanent feature of their election law?

I'm convinced the "Powers That Be" are in pseudo-conspiratorial alignment against Trump.

What nobody is explaining is: how, exactly, does Trump beat that?

The answer is it requires DJT to be a different human being. To adapt, change his tactics not his viewpoints, and "be like water, my friend." He has no capability to do that.

 

[ditcherman]

Desantis is likely more appealing to people's emotions. He is doing an incredible job as governor (almost as good as Gov Kristi Noem). I do not think this will necessarily translate to the international stage. He is too much of a politician and I see him as willing to play along with the establishment.

DJT is more of a wild card that does not need to play anyone's games. I like what I have seen with respect to international politics and DJT. No one has called out other NATO nations in paying their fair share. No one has done anything effective in bringing manufacturing back to the US. No living president has entered N Korea (albeit symbolically). No new wars were started under his administration. We (the United States) were respected. More importantly, we treated our allies fairly while placing all Americans at the forefront of domestic and international policies.

I hope you’re right and I’m wrong, that he’s electable and makes it.

I know that’s not how the mods make their money around here, but it’s true.

 

[BugI02]

Would be nice if INGO could navigate this disagreement without making it a pro-trump/anti-trump binary. One's thinking about Trump is more nuanced than Trump cult vs TDS cult. There's a lot of nuance in between. At the end of the day, who is on the ballot to face Democrats? What are your priorities for America? Do you vote for the person opposing the Democrat or not. That's the real binary. That's where the nuance doesn't matter. We can disagree on who the best person is to run. But we divide ourselves into these pigeonholes, even though we all might agree that not-democrat is the first-priority consensus.

Dude, I used to believe that one should vote for whoever wins the primary even if it isn't your guy, but after reading how so many INGOers are never going to vote for Trump no matter what because; feelings I'm starting to feel more like **** it, if I can't have Trump then burn it down

IMO it may be headed there anyway. DeSantis could turn out to be Crenshaw with two good eyes and start giving McConnell a reach around as soon as he gets in office and we're back to business as usual