Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
What If Dems Succeed in Keeping Trump Off the 2024 Ballot?
One theory about the J6 Committee is that its goal is to render President Trump ineligible for the 2024 ballot. Like the lawsuits brought against Republican Congressional Representatives Marjory Taylor Green, Madison Cawthorn, Tom Tiffany and Scott Fitzgerald, and Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, the objective is to disqualify Donald John Trump under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution:
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Although this is laughable on its face (no “insurrection” took place much less was there any action on the part of any Republican officer accused to engage in such) let’s just imagine that the Democrats put on their “show trial” and create a record to be presented to a court. Let us further suppose that said court actually issues a decision, upheld on appeal, that President Trump is disqualified from running for President in 2024. Will this be a victory for the Democrats?
I would argue that this is the last thing they should want. Why? Because President Trump was a reaction to the Progressive takeover of the Democratic Party, not the cause of Progressive setbacks in 2016-2020. President Trump personified and articulated the concern of millions of patriotic Americans who felt abandoned by politicians of both parties. So when GOPe candidates in 2016 brought out all the bromides that had brought in campaign funds but never stopped and hardly slowed the progressive march through our institutions and government it is unsurprising to the “uninformed” and ordinary folks that Trump got the nomination. Since I was “informed” and expected him to fail in the electoral contest and was reluctant for his candidacy since I was so well “informed” I didn’t think he could win.
But I was delighted he did. His policies delighted me. His pre-pandemic economic moves were masterful. The country, even with the drag of the Russia hoax, was regaining its footing as a democratic republic. And then came the pandemic and the vultures swooped in and took away a slam-dunk reelection. The V-shaped economic dip was such that in November it was not all that surprising that the election day returns before the voting “pauses” were definitely favoring President Trump. And then things went south under what remain murky conditions. GOPe had their revenge and it was time to move on.
Just as the voters who supported President Trump did so for their own reasons distinct from his posturing and personality, so too did they (mostly) wander into the Capitol on January 6, 2021, for their own reasons and not at the command of President Trump. But suppose the Democrats succeed with the courts in their bit of theatre?
The people who voted for Trump will not change their minds or their political inclinations. They have watched as the levers of power have been turned against citizens. They will not come “home”, although it remains to be seen whether they can be tamed. They are ready to rally another politician who will champion their cause.
If he is no longer in the way, the problem doesn’t go away for the Democrats. It only becomes more obvious that it was never about Trump.
Published in General
I think that is one of the few affirmations that truly constitutes a phobia.
I am terrified of the deep state and the fact that every institution is failing from a conservative and libertarian point of view.
Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.
Fox News fawned all over Matthew McConaughey’s press conference. I’m not exaggerating including Bret Baer saying the whole staff thought it was the most awesome presentation from that podium ever. Did you watch it? I don’t see how it added a damn thing to the policy discussion.
Seb Gorka is on Breitbart news daily every week. Today he was saying that Paul Ryan and the owner’s kid forced it. I totally believe it. Embarrassing.
Time to cancel Matthew McConaughey
He’ll claim that he doesn’t, and then vote to support it.
Some may like this. The part specifically about Matthew McConaughey is at 3:00. Before that, they were talking about how bad both Harris and Biden are at political rhetoric.
He’s not cogent and he doesn’t move the ball forward except maybe emotionally for some people.
The problem is, they don’t need new laws which is what everybody wants. The guy in New York could have been completely stopped with their overwrought red flag laws. Nobody did anything. Broadly speaking everything is like that.
“When people are out to get you, paranoia is just good thinking!” – Dr Johnny Fever, WKRP.
Folks here accept Gary Robbins claim that he is a life long Republican, that he voted for Reagan etc. Can anyone here confirm that he is and has been a Republican conservative. I’ll accept it. Trump was my last choice, but proved me wrong. Maybe it’s just that Robbins like so many in both parties doesn’t understand what the Democrat party has become and what centralization of the US will do.
He very conspicuously and specifically claims to be a “registered Republican” which means exactly squat. He also very clearly ignores every challenge from RufusRJones to pick any policy topic he wants and state an original thought on the matter. There are terms, both derogatory and accurate, for that…
And a lot of Democrats voted for Reagan too, so there is that.
Look. You hold a very high standard. I have always considered my year to be a success if I have just one original thought (I have been averaging closer to two). Holding any member to any higher standard would be to add pressure, cramp the style, and stifle the flow of creative humours. For the sake of organic intellectually creative conversation, let him be. Then something may pop up.
I don’t think it needs to be anything spectacular, I think he’s just asking for anything that isn’t simply regurgitating some nonsense from “Principles First” or the like.
Well, maybe Rufus just meant credible personal interpretations based on a winnowing of the facts. That’s easier.
This isn’t my day to write, but I will take a shot at this.
I was against Trump because
You knew he wasn’t intellectually curious about the constitution and civics.
He couldn’t possibly be able to deal with the foreign policy establishment. That stuff is too complicated. I would say I was pretty much wrong about that.
He was completely the wrong guy to stop with the inflationism and spending. I changed my mind about this because it’s just too late to do anything about it. Probably 25 years too late and 2004 was the last chance.
I preferred Cruise but the set up is so bad I think Trump was better. Trump exposed the media, China, and the deep state. He’s not Hitler or a South American Kleptocrat. The Democrats are actually closer to that.
Socialism and populism are an issue today because of bad policy from 30 years ago at least. It has to be dealt with directly, not with GOPe boilerplate.
Every institution is failing from a conservative and libertarian point of view. John McCain etc. is just going to make it worse.
Why on earth didn’t they help him get rid of the ACA?
Enabling Democrats is not going to make anything better.
The time for idealism was right after the Soviet union fell and it just didn’t happen. Personally I think it’s the structure of the Fed and the financial system that creates the wrong incentives. They never did anything about that and then Greenspan started blowing bubbles. Than you are going to get Socialism, populism, and a government that can only improve through collapse. It also creates the cultural problems, but I get that people don’t get it.
I have posted speeches and interviews over and over that back up my point of view.
It seems likely that the best hope for people who can, is to own rather than rent, and try to make it through. Seems to me it’s going to be much harder on people who rent, especially.
When you force interest rates below inflation the only thing to do to survive is speculation and somehow using government to steal from your fellow man. Greenspan started this in 1987 or LTCM at the latest.
Nobody’s going to do this, but the interview on Grant Williams with Judy Shelton is spectacular in this sense.
You mean interest received, or interest paid?
Both. If you have natural interest rates, saving money, prudence, intelligent risk-taking, productive entrepreneurship actually make everybody’s life better.
What we are doing now is making communism look intelligent.
Well about all I can do is own my home rather than rent. As it happens, I have a fixed interest rate of 2.5% on a small remaining balance, so in a way inflation is “good” for me since I will be paying the remainder with money that’s worth less and will be a smaller portion of my increasing income. But I wouldn’t be surprised if other prices go up more than enough to make the difference.
The problem is, there is terrible CPI inflation and we have asset bubbles all over the place. On top of that two more interest points on the five year and every single western government goes broke. It’s better to be wealthy and have professional management.
Comunism > inflationism
Sure I’d rather be wealthy too, but it’s probably the people in the middle who will really get squeezed and squashed.
That is the point I’m making.
It’s a stupid system.
Then people whine about Socialism and populism.
I don’t mean to be a killjoy, but the threat to private home ownership is not inflation but rising taxes. If the powers that be really want to make you own nothing and be happy, what better way to do this than by convincing individual property tax districts to double or triple property taxes. They can do it slowly over two or three years or perhaps more, and they can do it in a staggered way here and there in any given state, so that no one sees it come in a big wave everywhere all at once, but I’ve seen the effect on gentrifying neighborhoods and raising taxes really sets homeowners up to be willing to sell. The trouble is that — very generally, from what I’ve seen in the past — anything comparable within commuting distance goes up in price as well.
But since taxes are included in rent, rent goes up too. So maybe people won’t be able to own anything, but they won’t be able to rent anything either.
Actually I have the option to defer property taxes until my death. Something to think about, if they get too high.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Y-youwCKP0&t=785s
Government Is How We Steal From Each Other™
You can’t shrink government unless you keep interest rates above inflation. The government literally cannot meet its tax needs unless there is constant CPI or asset inflation. Then you get videos like that one.
Nobody ever says this, but I have always thought that property taxes were weird. It’s wealth taxation which is nonsense, except that theoretically if it generates just the right public goods it actually buoys the value of the property and your quality of life.
You mean that money has no stored value? Yeah, that’s so weird I that I can’t immediately accept it. Technically, money is a store of work. I guess if you can’t store up work, you constantly have to stay working, like a shark needs to always swim. I haven’t finished the video, but it’s very interesting.