Post New

Trump can still win this election despite Establishment, Liberals and their NeoCon brothers lined up against him. It should be a done deal in the bag win today.

But it's not.

Why this guy had to publicly alienate a Republican Governor, in arguably THEE swing state (Kemp, Georgia) and then preside over a GOP in Georgia that is not organized to say the least is beyond me.

It's just another reason I can't vote for President this year.

I always vote. Sometimes I vote for someone or something. Sometimes I vote against, even if I'm not wild about the opponent.

In this case, I think a clear case can be made to vote against the convict. If elected, he would do far more damage through maliciousness and incompetence, than Harris would. Harris will be more-or-less status quo. The status quo is job creation, reasonable foreign policy, strengthened bonds with allies, relatively low inflation (2.5% now), and projections of debt growth that are less than would result if the convict enacts his ideas. I can live with that.

My ideal candidate would be me. Except I wouldn't want the job. But everyone else is a compromise because they don't agree with me about everything. Harris is a compromise. The convict would be like voting for cancer.

OnePoorGuy thanks for the post.

Obviously, you, I, the fella down the street - all may have their reasons as to why vote for someone. And it's perfectly logical if someone doesn't want Trump - go Harris and I fully understand that.

The only other time I didn't vote was 2008. I drove to the library, got in line, got my voter card thingy - and I left. I didn't want War War McCain nor Blame America Obama. (I've since come to warm to Obama in SOME aspects of foreign policy)

Convict? Sure. Mind you Bill Clinton is a perjurer and I'd kiss his ass to have a 3rd term even with the China giveaways. The convictions have little to do with why I can't vote Trump.

Decency - has none. Chaos - has only that. Ok all Presidents have patronage, or put their buddies in post. Trump's problem is he has no buddies and frankly, I can't trust the people he puts in key positions to have knowledge on their portfolio's subject matter.

On the other side is someone who was #1 and huge fundraising and was #5 in her home state in 2020 primaries and her campaign fizzled out. Her drama is nasty behind the scenes and I won't get into whose drama is worse. She was GIVEN the primary like a poodle or a child and it was the result of Biden - whose I like a lot - being knifed in the back by people who never respected him in the first place.

I'm content to sit this one out. Just like "convict" is understandably important to you - to me - long game is important.

Meaning - in weak moments when I want what's good for America, I see Democrats Governor Shapiro, AND especially Governor Beshear. People like that, and their teams at he helm for things like Automation worker displacement, entitlement reform ---I'm comforted by that thought.

In the end - both of these nominees are lightweights and putzes not qualified to hold the coats of previous Presidents. The punishment and structure troubles will not change 1% under either of their regimes.

I'd have loved to vote Biden again.

to me - long game is important.

OK. I can respect that choice. Frankly, I agree with it. We have way too much short term thinking both in politics and business.

Sure, there may be less than ideal circumstances that brought these two candidates to us. They both have some baggage. But these are the choices we have. (Well, you could always vote for a 3rd party candidate, I suppose, if you wanted to.)

Since the long game is important to you, what are the potential long term impacts of the two candidates?

Harris: Fundraising? That's short term. 2020 campaign fizzled? That happens all the time. Plenty of past winners ran a previous campaign that fizzled - even Biden (a couple if I'm not mistaken). Drama? You've called that a push. In sum total, no real long term impact - just politics as usual.

You mentioned Trump's problems: No decency, chaos agent, poor choices for key positions.

But you missed the big one. He is the only candidate who has a non-zero chance of upending our democratic processes during his term. That's the big long-term issue with him.

If you sit this one out, it may not matter who you vote for in 2028. The choice of winner may be made for you before the election campaigns even begin. Don't forget that Putin wins re-election every few years.

If you aren't against Trump, you are for him. If he doesn't lose by insurmountable margins, he may find a way to be more successful in throwing several monkey wrenches into the gears of US democracy. The monkey wrenches are a given, of course. But with close enough margins, those monkey wrenches might work this time.

So get out of your pity party that neither candidate is ideal and vote for one of them. Withholding your vote can't make things better. It can only make them worse.

--Peter

I think Peter addressed most of this.

Bill Clinton wasn't convicted of anything. Which is why he wasn't penalized in any way. Having consensual sex (oral or otherwise) with another adult doesn't interest me. The convict had sex with a porn star. Don't care. That's between him, the porn star, and his wife. I think it's in poor taste to cheat on a spouse, but not disqualifying.

Committing fraud is another matter.

Obviously, you are free not to vote. However, I think Peter made an excellent case for voting against the convict precisely because it is to the long-term benefit of the country. I also made a few of those points in my previous post.

PT appreciate the reply very much. I truly do and I respect every word you wrote.

And believe me I've never ever wanted 100% purity from *any* candidate or party.

Most of the themes you stated - I agree, or somewhat agree. Here's the stuff I know we won't agree (which is cool! Makes world go round)


""But you missed the big one. He is the only candidate who has a non-zero chance of upending our democratic processes during his term. That's the big long-term issue with him.""

Sorry, he's not competent enough to screw up our democracy. NO way. This guy can't focus on ONE thing and has NO idea who his counsellors are. He has NO loyal allies. They are users just like he is. He was there - President 2016-2020. Biden won. We've had elections. We're about to have another one. Democracy- intact. To me, WE THE PEOPLE, short attention spans, lack of critical thinking skills, and tribalism are the bigger threats to Democracy.......because those traits will beckon us to VOLUNTARILY cede rights, and eventually democracy. I'm in no way saying Trump is guardian of democracy---just saying, the man can't plan, be diligent, and get much done. Never has.
***********

"If you sit this one out, it may not matter who you vote for in 2028. The choice of winner may be made for you before the election campaigns even begin. Don't forget that Putin wins re-election every few year"

FWIW Wifey is voting Harris - here in Pennsylvania in the swingiest county there is lol. I told her I'd stay home and not vote trump, she can stay home and relax and my non-vote would cancel out hers. She said "Stop it I remember all that Karl Rove stuff you used to love to brag about" lolololol.

On Putin..... Putin doesn't have the checks and balances we do. Trump does - starting with his OWN VP who didn't go along with him. Then there's a senate, a house, courts, all sorts of stuff. Putin doesn't have to deal with that. Him and a few oligarchs and generals - and he's good.
*************


"If you aren't against Trump, you are for him. If he doesn't lose by insurmountable margins, he may find a way to be more successful in throwing several monkey wrenches into the gears of US democracy. The monkey wrenches are a given, of course. But with close enough margins, those monkey wrenches might work this time. "

On TMF I remember, the Left was not fan of "you're with us or against us" and all that black n white stuff :) No, I voted Biden in 2020 so I'm not sure if I'm for Trump. I won't vote for him - that's one less *75% Republican* vote he loses.

Her? I can't. I just can't. I couldn't stand her in 2012 when on TMF I warned and said "watch out, Obama adopted her - she's coming". And to me given the nomination like a baby on Christmas getting a tricycle - I just can't and wanna know something? In my early-retired lifestyle - SHE'D actually guard ObamaCare more than he would. But I just can't bring myself. I won't even watch her inauguration, I won't watch SOTU. Yes. she'll be my President but it'll be the first time in my life where I"m deep down - ill - over the Presidency.


Again appreciate your post and I don't want to patronize you and say "awww shucks ok I'll vote".

Also please note - I've adopted "burn baby burn" ever since circa 2005-ish partially due to the TMF Liberals. I guess I'm a bit 'radicalized' -- NO not to hurt or bomb or that crap lol. But I'm too far gone into that philosophy. Mind you a Harris win + Democrat Senate would be marvelous in that respect but still I cant get there.


I'm reminded how much I "liked" and respected previous presidents - even ones I trashed. I will miss that sentiment for 4-8 years depending on who wins.

In weak moments PT, when I can come out of the "punish these smug Liberals and bad culture" motif..... I hold hope that within .....2-3 cycles, the grown-ups will take over. Catalyst? I hope not mass Cheney-Northrom-Goldman wars like we're trying to do in Ukraine. But SOCIAL SECURITY and MEDICARE. The specter of those going bust, or even being cut *might* be enough to give political courage and cover - to men of goodwill on BOTH sides.

Hence my obsession with Shapiro (D) and Beshear (D). In the right environment, where it's *ok* not to hate the opposition - these men have shown they can GOVERN. Not only that they can govern in PURPLE and even RED environments.

Side note : Your "monkey wrenches" comment....I used to write on TMF - that the MAGA "sweet spot" is LOSING election, but having enough pull where they can blame and stymie, but NOT have to take blame for anything. *giggle* sound familiar? Look at England. France. Just to name a few examples.

Want to crush Trump - not just in an election to come here and say "WE WON!" - and then figure out that 49.9% of your country is against you? It's simple and what I used to say on TMF (when I was patriotic a decade ago):

1.)Common culture, common language.

2.)Appreciate and knowledge of, CIVICS and American history - not 24/7 slavery but the good stuff also.

3.)MultiCulturalism run amok needs to be curtailed. (Like it or not, it pushes people to MAGA - all around the world)

4.)"Get a green job" don't cut it. "SP 500!" don't cut it. Throngs of people used to work in pre-NAFTA pre CHINA WTO jobs, raised families, and weren't as susceptible to Trumpy movements. NOW those people have a mullet, a tattoo, dope to smoke, illegitimate kids, and check-to-check desperation and guess what? The fun hasn't started yet. IMAGINE throngs of drivers, messengers, TRUCK DRIVERS losing jobs to automation----heck the future 1/6 will have overflowing recruits!


You and I may not have that life BUT, when people get told "Ok, no more fuddy-duddy man working and supporting a family Family structure is gonna be subject to a zillion interpretations. So enjoy the gig economy. OH btw, stop with that Christmas and Pledge of Allegiance crap but your kids need to learn Cinco de Mayo and Ramadan and yes, press 1 for Spanish. PT --that stuff in totality is what causes Wade, Burt, Kayleigh, and Chad to gravitate to MAGA type movements. BTW if you look at polls. Dante is more sympathetic to MAGA now also. In America, Sweden, England, France, India, Spain, Italy, Austria - just to name a few this is the case.

Trump is not cause of any of this. He was a Manhattan Liberal who rightly heard these cries, and figured out how to harness it.

Look - you beat Trump in 2020 yet here you are worried about MAGA. Trump can lose 2024...... do you really think his flock will say 'yawn, ok, let's go back to McCain and Romney. We're happy we give up". NO - it'll get worse and worse and worse.

Future Trumps will come. America's White Working Class needs and NAACP and Sharpton - they just dont want to admit it. For now, that is Trump and MAGA and in coming years, I'll be someone else.

Imagine the fun! MAGA vs Establishment vs Christian Right. 401K Liberals versus Union voters versus AOC Leftists vs Clintonites.

Oh - and in the mean time one day, 20% of your country - won't be able to speak in the same language with the other 80%. Look at some ancient democracies....you'll see that separate customs, colors, languages - it most often leads to internal war, political violence, more corruption and more prone to being divided from outside (Bibi and Vladdy know that - don't they)

Anyhow, appreciate your post and please take no umbrage personally on anything I said here.


Thanks!

I think a clear case can be made to vote against the convict.

The Atlantic today endorsed a presidential candidate for the fifth time in its 150+ year history. The editorial made clear, however that four of those five times were a recommendation against voting for the other candidate:

- In 1860, they recommended voting for Abraham Lincoln.

(104 years of silence followed)

- In 1964, they recommended voting against Barry Goldwater

- In 2016, they recommended voting against DJT

- In 2020, they recommended voting against DJT

- In 2024, they are recommending voting against DJT

Here's to hoping they have another 100 year hiatus ahead*.

-- sutton
*(In a good, First Amendment way, I mean)

In 1860, they recommended voting for Abraham Lincoln.
(104 years of silence followed)
- In 1964, they recommended voting against Barry Goldwater
- In 2016, they recommended voting against DJT
- In 2020, they recommended voting against DJT
- In 2024, they are recommending voting against DJT


I have to say, that’s an enviable record.

I want to rebut just one point there. (Not that I agree with the others, but this is one I believe to be important.)

Sorry, he's not competent enough to screw up our democracy. NO way. This guy can't focus on ONE thing and has NO idea who his counsellors are.

There's no doubt Trump is incompetent at running a country. We have 4 years of history to prove that. But he IS competent at being selfish and surrounding himself with Yes-men (who he will toss under the bus as needed - so pay attention all you potential yes-men) who will do his bidding in a more competent way than he can.

Look back at his 4 years in office. He did accomplish a few things - all with help from others who knew what they were doing.
-He managed to stack the USSC with 3 very conservative justices. He didn't do this alone - he had help, mainly from Mitch McConnell.
-He got a big tax cut for the wealthy through Congress. Again with help from the leaders in Congress.

Importantly, he did come pretty close to overturning an election. That was a well organized effort to get a mob together and send them to the Capitol. And don't give me any of this "peaceful" garbage. He is very competent at giving mob boss style instructions - telling folks what he wants done without giving direct orders, and even contradicting them in public speech. He knows exactly how to put a layer of insulation between himself and his instructions for illegal activity.

Given a second term, he will again surround himself with people who are competent at doing what Trump wants, although not necessarily the historical description of the job. Just look at his first selection, Vance. Several years ago, Vance could correctly be described as an anti-Trumper. But once Trump gained power, he kissed the ring like all of the other sycophants in his circle. Vance has publicly said he would have no problem doing the illegal job that Pence refused to do.

Even though Trump claims to be disassociated with Project 2025, you can bet that they would be in his ear, (or kissing his posterior) to convince him to do the things in that playbook. They'd compliment him to get what they want. And they have competent people ready and willing to accomplish those goals.

So the issue isn't Trump's incompetence. It is that he will bring in the competent people needed - not to do the job of governing, but to do the job of giving Trump what he wants: the power of the Presidency to do with it as he wishes. In exchange, he's allow those competent people to do what they want with governance, as long as Trump remains at the top and showered with praise and adoration.

--Peter

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.