Where Were You on June 9, 2022?

 

On the ninth day of the sixth month, in the year of our Lord Two Thousand Twenty-Two, the American House of Representatives convened a television show about a political protest some years earlier.  The clips from this show will be used as “facts” for elections in 2022 and 2024.  These clips will be used by Democrat campaigns, of course, but more to the point, they will be used by the state-run media to condition voters and vote managers.  The more people in on the next steal, the less work each plotter involved must do.

I cannot rate the show very highly.  It has terrible pacing and features weak performances from the usual crew of identical new faces who for some reason keep showing up on our screens.  It wasn’t like this in the old days.  It used to be that a show needed some strong performances and tight writing to get popular.  There was a kind of platinum age of television heralded by the beloved but now-unwatchable “Babylon 5,” which was a watershed in long-arc, multi-season plotting of a broadcast series.  Shows followed in different genres: “The Sopranos,” “Battlestar Galactica,” “Dexter,” “Game of Thrones,” “Breaking Bad,” “Better Call Saul.”  This current offering from the House is poorly done.  It’s amazing it got greenlit.

I never watched the Sopranos until these days.  I’m midway through the fourth Season.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 271 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):
    and how successful he was, says he knows that history will treat him more kindly than his contemporaries), and gracefully steps aside.

    This made me LOL. I don’t think “grace” is in Trump’s vocabulary.

    What makes us think DeSantis can win with the margin of fraud seen in 2020?

    I doubt the Republican Party will be asleep at the switch as they were in 2024.   That could make a big difference.

    • #211
  2. Headedwest Coolidge
    Headedwest
    @Headedwest

    Justin Other Lawyer (View Comment):

     

    As I noted previously, the evidence (yet to be presented) suggests several types of groups. First, an organized contingent that breached the Capitol while Trump was still talking.

    Let’s call that the Ray Epps cadre.

    • #212
  3. Stina Member
    Stina
    @CM

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    My main beef with Rick Scott is his support for another quagmire in Ukraine.

    Rick Scott I’m convinced is a self-interested GOPe. He’s been pretty good at knowing which way the wind blows, so the very split support for the Ukraine War may have given him the permission to default to the norm.

    • #213
  4. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    Justin Other Lawyer (View Comment):

    Dbroussa (View Comment):

    Justin Other Lawyer (View Comment):
    I agree with this generally. But it does not make Trump’s behavior on the 6th any more palatable.

    Palatable or criminal? There is a massive difference. Bill Clinton having an affair with an intern is unpalatable. Bill Clinton obstructing justice is criminal.

    I went short-hand in light of my previous comments. I find it VERY unlikely Trump committed crimes. I could be wrong, but I find it doubtful.

    Yet his dereliction of duty (my words) on the 6th I believe to have been impeachable. I don’t think impeachable offenses need to be criminal, and that there appears to be clear evidence that Trump refused to act on the 6th and that he approved of the mob’s actions. To me, this is sufficient for removal from office.

    You don’t have to commit crimes to be charged, found guilty and jailed

    • #214
  5. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    She (View Comment):

    I’d like that rank of younger future leaders to have some time to establish a footing, and show themselves before the last-minute scrum that often occurs. But I don’t think any of them is going to step forward and make himself or herself a target, if there’s still a likelihood that Trump himself will run.  After all, the specter of being labeled forever as something like “Pencil-Neck Tom,” “Pirate Dan,” or  “Dot-Head Nikki” probably doesn’t appeal.  DeSantis is, perhaps, the only person with a high-enough profile to render himself immune from such epithets, or at least the only one able to shrug them off.

    All of this assumes that the enemy (and I use the term advisedly) is playing by the rules. They’re not. They’re fighting for total victory and either we’ll submit or die — figuratively and literally. It’s the totalizing part of totalitarianism. 

     

    • #215
  6. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    Justin Other Lawyer (View Comment):

    Dbroussa (View Comment):

    Justin Other Lawyer (View Comment):
    I agree with this generally. But it does not make Trump’s behavior on the 6th any more palatable.

    Palatable or criminal? There is a massive difference. Bill Clinton having an affair with an intern is unpalatable. Bill Clinton obstructing justice is criminal.

    I went short-hand in light of my previous comments. I find it VERY unlikely Trump committed crimes. I could be wrong, but I find it doubtful.

    Yet his dereliction of duty (my words) on the 6th I believe to have been impeachable. I don’t think impeachable offenses need to be criminal, and that there appears to be clear evidence that Trump refused to act on the 6th and that he approved of the mob’s actions. To me, this is sufficient for removal from office.

    You don’t have to commit crimes to be charged, found guilty and jailed

    Mark Levin had an interview with Julie Kelly yesterday that supports your point completely. 

    • #216
  7. I Walton Member
    I Walton
    @IWalton

    Republicans have a good sized number of outstanding potential candidates.  The Democrats have none, but they are masters at cheating and they have helped create a large contingent of highly schooled uneducated fools.  I simply can’t see the future but there are two things that are clear.  The Democrats will plant millions of votes which I call phony but they don’t because they collect them more or less straightforwardly from old people and others who don’t know or care.  Secondly, the Democrats in the middle don’t understand our history or that of the world and the folks who run matters may understand that they are destroying the country but they’ll make so much in the short run it won’t matter, especially if they don’t have kids or grand kids they care about. 

    • #217
  8. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    I Walton (View Comment):

    Republicans have a good sized number of outstanding potential candidates. The Democrats have none, but they are masters at cheating and they have helped create a large contingent of highly schooled uneducated fools. I simply can’t see the future but there are two things that are clear. The Democrats will plant millions of votes which I call phony but they don’t because they collect them more or less straightforwardly from old people and others who don’t know or care. Secondly, the Democrats in the middle don’t understand our history or that of the world and the folks who run matters may understand that they are destroying the country but they’ll make so much in the short run it won’t matter, especially if they don’t have kids or grand kids they care about.

    I can personally vouch for this. It’s unbelievably bad.

    • #218
  9. She Member
    She
    @She

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):

    I’d like that rank of younger future leaders to have some time to establish a footing, and show themselves before the last-minute scrum that often occurs. But I don’t think any of them is going to step forward and make himself or herself a target, if there’s still a likelihood that Trump himself will run. After all, the specter of being labeled forever as something like “Pencil-Neck Tom,” “Pirate Dan,” or “Dot-Head Nikki” probably doesn’t appeal. DeSantis is, perhaps, the only person with a high-enough profile to render himself immune from such epithets, or at least the only one able to shrug them off.

    All of this assumes that the enemy (and I use the term advisedly) is playing by the rules. They’re not. They’re fighting for total victory and either we’ll submit or die — figuratively and literally. It’s the totalizing part of totalitarianism.

    I agree that–above all else–it is necessary to read the tea leaves and strategize.  That’s why I don’t have much time for the “I’m turning my eyes away and not paying attention” contingent.  Those who don’t know what the opposition is up to or what they are capable of, get what they deserve.

    It’s possible that the Republicans will lose the White House in 2024. But if so, I hope they–all of them–go down swinging, united and together, rather than in what appears to be their current state of disorganization, timid befuddlement, and circular-firing-squadism.  

    • #219
  10. DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) Coolidge
    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax)
    @DonG

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    He appears not to have cared if Pence had been captured and killed by the mob.

    And that’s disgusting enough.

    I am late to the party here after a nice day in PA, but the part about not caring if Pence was “killed” by the mob has driven me to comment.  I’ll leave “captured” alone and go for the low hanging fruit.  Such an accusation is beyond the pale.  Period.

    I am going to let y’all in on a secret.  When a group of dudes get together in private, sometimes they make offensive jokes.  Trump is a comedian at heart and when he is in private, he is the guy that will make the jokes.  Jokes include things like satire and hyperbole that look bad when taken out of context.   So, when you hear that Trump (or some other guy) said something that you find offensive, remember that the original meaning is probably the opposite of what you are being told. 

    • #220
  11. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    He appears not to have cared if Pence had been captured and killed by the mob.

    And that’s disgusting enough.

    I am late to the party here after a nice day in PA, but the part about not caring if Pence was “killed” by the mob has driven me to comment. I’ll leave “captured” alone and go for the low hanging fruit. Such an accusation is beyond the pale. Period.

    I am going to let y’all in on a secret. When a group of dudes get together in private, sometimes they make offensive jokes. Trump is a comedian at heart and when he is in private, he is the guy that will make the jokes. Jokes include things like satire and hyperbole that look bad when taken out of context. So, when you hear that Trump (or some other guy) said something that you find offensive, remember that the original meaning is probably the opposite of what you are being told.

    That certainly has been the case with him whenever I compared “what the media said he said” to “what he actually said.”

    • #221
  12. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    If you can, listen to the latest Adam Carolla reasonable doubt podcast. Geragos who is a Democrat is completely in the Republican’s camp.

    They also cover executive privilege and Peter Navarro. Total GOP point of view, and I think it’s hard to argue with.

    • #222
  13. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Need Gary’s response to all the great points being brought up about this unconstitutional show trial.

    Really?  I don’t think we do.  Especially since we probably already know what it is.

    • #223
  14. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    She (View Comment):

    I did say it was a ‘fever dream.’ However, I think it’s the one thing that would completely upend the current situation, wrong-foot the Democrats, and give Republicans the best chance of keeping the White House in 2024.  But he needs to do it now.  Hedging his bets, playing coy in the run-up to the primaries, putting a stranglehold on any but the most anti-Trump candidates from running while they wait for him to show his hand and then–if he doesn’t run–leading to a last-minute scramble and scrum, is another recipe for failure.  If he does run, I think he’ll get the Republican nomination, but I think he’ll lose in November, with, or without, the margin of fraud.  

    Otherwise, I think we should not be distracted by the squalid antics of partisan political hacks; nor should we allow their manufactured and pretended outrage to distract our gaze from their patently-clear hypocrisy, the current parlous state of the country, and their part in its dismantling.

    I like your comment, but it seems that in your reckoning there’s no way Trump can win “with, or without, the margin of fraud” — so anything he does to impede the established flow of candidates queueing up to represent the Republicans in the general election insures defeat.

    But I have not seen any margin of fraud that wasn’t purely conjecture.  I recently read the margin of fraud is 25%, or would necessitate a vote total of a landslide of 25% (or I guess 75% of the popular vote — or perhaps 25% over the 50+% needed for victory, which is 62.5+%) is the only way that Trump can win.  If this is so, what Republican could ever win?

    Frankly, I think let Trump be Trump.  If anyone can win at the ballot box and still be as effective in office as Trump was, it’s Trump.

    • #224
  15. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Don’t even think about missing this. 

    Victor Davis Hanson and cohost Sami Winc start this episode with some thoughts on the very antithesis of American life: Israel. Then they explore all the ways that American life is beginning to resemble aspects of the Soviet Union or Mao’s China.

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-gpdnx-14000319?utm_campaign=w_share_ep&utm_medium=dlink&utm_source=w_share

     

    @garyrobbins

     

     

    • #225
  16. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Also, Babylon 5 has Zathras!

    Wrong tool.   

    • #226
  17. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Also, Babylon 5 has Zathras!

    Wrong tool.

    No, never use this!

    • #227
  18. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Zathras has had very sad life, probably have very sad death, but at least there is symmetry!

    • #228
  19. She Member
    She
    @She

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    I like your comment, but it seems that in your reckoning there’s no way Trump can win “with, or without, the margin of fraud” — so anything he does to impede the established flow of candidates queueing up to represent the Republicans in the general election insures defeat.

    I don’t think he can win a general election again.  And I think it’s time to move beyond the available pool of octogenarian candidates who–no matter how robust (or not) they appear today, are a dicey proposition, even just healthwise, going forward.

    But I have not seen any margin of fraud that wasn’t purely conjecture.  I recently read the margin of fraud is 25%, or would necessitate a vote total of a landslide of 25% (or I guess 75% of the popular vote — or perhaps 25% over the 50+% needed for victory, which is 62.5+%) is the only way that Trump can win.  If this is so, what Republican could ever win?

    I think there are lots of folks who believe it will be impossible for any Republican to win the White House again.  I’m not so pessimistic.  I do agree that much this talk about the “margin of fraud” is so much hot air and conjecture, largely because it’s impossible to have a rational conversation about it, because, even exclusive of the immovable objects on both ends of the spectrum, even broaching the subject sends the majority of Democrats off into shrieks of “voter suppression!” and “racism!!”  I hope (I know, hope is not a strategy) that the state GOP are paying a little more attention to what’s going on in their own states this time around and into the future.

    Frankly, I think let Trump be Trump.  If anyone can win at the ballot box and still be as effective in office as Trump was, it’s Trump.

    I guess time will tell, and we’ll see.  Not long to go.

    • #229
  20. Headedwest Coolidge
    Headedwest
    @Headedwest

    kedavis (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Need Gary’s response to all the great points being brought up about this unconstitutional show trial.

    Really? I don’t think we do. Especially since we probably already know what it is.

    Yes. There is no need for another repeat post. If only there were an “ignore user” button.

    • #230
  21. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Justin Other Lawyer (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Justin Other Lawyer (View Comment):

    I agree with this generally. But it does not make Trump’s behavior on the 6th any more palatable.

    Palatable? This show trial is because of unpalatable behavior?

    This was heck of a tame insurrection then. :)

    I say let’s wait to see what testimony comes forth. I’m focusing on one aspect–Trump’s behavior–because many on this site seem dead set on ignoring his (allegedly, but probably provable) egregious behavior and statements from the 6th.

    It’s also worth knowing who and why an organized group breached the Capitol building. It appears that the vanguard of the breach was organized, while much of the rest was more spontaneous. This is worth knowing about, and defense of Trump or hatred for Democrats should not impede that.

    I get it–it’s a show, a production. I hate that part too. I also don’t trust the Democrats to honestly want to seek the full truth. But to be honest, I wouldn’t trust diehard Trump supporters to desire the full truth either.

    Much appears to have gone wrong on the 6th, and if it turns out Trump was one of the malefactors, so be it. We shouldn’t put confidence in “princes”, as the psalmist puts it. Trump is a very flawed man whose flaws especially stood out in the waning days of his administration.

    I may not even mind Trump being in prison as long as Pelosi, Biden, and several others go first and for longer sentences.

    To say you wouldn’t mind Trump being in prison is a surprising statement, to say the very least. For @justinanotherlawyer, Kash Patel has a videocast just out on Epoch Times where he states unequivocally that President Trump authorized the mobilization of 20K National Guard for January 6. However, the law specifically states that a request must be made from either the Capitol police or the Mayor of D.C. Muriel Bowser. The request was never made. What else do you have to hang on Trump?

    • #231
  22. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):

    I did say it was a ‘fever dream.’ However, I think it’s the one thing that would completely upend the current situation, wrong-foot the Democrats, and give Republicans the best chance of keeping the White House in 2024. But he needs to do it now. Hedging his bets, playing coy in the run-up to the primaries, putting a stranglehold on any but the most anti-Trump candidates from running while they wait for him to show his hand and then–if he doesn’t run–leading to a last-minute scramble and scrum, is another recipe for failure. If he does run, I think he’ll get the Republican nomination, but I think he’ll lose in November, with, or without, the margin of fraud.

    Otherwise, I think we should not be distracted by the squalid antics of partisan political hacks; nor should we allow their manufactured and pretended outrage to distract our gaze from their patently-clear hypocrisy, the current parlous state of the country, and their part in its dismantling.

    I like your comment, but it seems that in your reckoning there’s no way Trump can win “with, or without, the margin of fraud” — so anything he does to impede the established flow of candidates queueing up to represent the Republicans in the general election insures defeat.

    But I have not seen any margin of fraud that wasn’t purely conjecture. I recently read the margin of fraud is 25%, or would necessitate a vote total of a landslide of 25% (or I guess 75% of the popular vote — or perhaps 25% over the 50+% needed for victory, which is 62.5+%) is the only way that Trump can win. If this is so, what Republican could ever win?

    Frankly, I think let Trump be Trump. If anyone can win at the ballot box and still be as effective in office as Trump was, it’s Trump.

    I often think the way @she is describing. Trump is so divisive…etc. But then I remember waking up the morning after the 2016 election to my wife calling up to me, “You will never believe it!” I knew immediately that Trump had won. Ecstasy overcame me as I jumped out of bed and ran naked down the street shouting Hallelujah, Hallelujah. Well, maybe that’s a bit of an exaggeration, but the point is, don’t count Trump out. 

    • #232
  23. She Member
    She
    @She

    cdor (View Comment):
    I often think the way @she is describing. Trump is so divisive…etc. But then I remember waking up the morning after the 2016 election to my wife calling up to me, “You will never believe it!” I knew immediately that Trump had won. Ecstasy overcame me as I jumped out of bed and ran naked down the street shouting Hallelujah, Hallelujah. Well, maybe that’s a bit of an exaggeration, but the point is, don’t count Trump out. 

    I sat up all night in November of 2016, and saw Trump crush and drive his enemies before him, and saw and heard, the lamentations of the women on the mainstream media.

    It was glorious.

    However, I think the United States of 2022 isn’t the United States of 2016.  Perhaps there’ll be such a radical reboot over the next 12 months that I may think differently in a year, but I don’t expect to.  And I want the Republican candidate in 2024 to have the best chance of winning.  I just don’t think Trump will be the guy.

    • #233
  24. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Zathras has had very sad life, probably have very sad death, but at least there is symmetry!

    My favorite Zathras line.

    • #234
  25. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    She (View Comment):

    cdor (View Comment):
    I often think the way @ she is describing. Trump is so divisive…etc. But then I remember waking up the morning after the 2016 election to my wife calling up to me, “You will never believe it!” I knew immediately that Trump had won. Ecstasy overcame me as I jumped out of bed and ran naked down the street shouting Hallelujah, Hallelujah. Well, maybe that’s a bit of an exaggeration, but the point is, don’t count Trump out.

    I sat up all night in November of 2016, and saw Trump crush and drive his enemies before him, and saw and heard, the lamentations of the women on the mainstream media.

    It was glorious.

    However, I think the United States of 2022 isn’t the United States of 2016. Perhaps there’ll be such a radical reboot over the next 12 months that I may think differently in a year, but I don’t expect to. And I want the Republican candidate in 2024 to have the best chance of winning. I just don’t think Trump will be the guy.

    Well, I totally understand what you are thinking. Not to mention, Trump will be 78 years old. Even for him, that’s getting to be a stretch!

    • #235
  26. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    cdor (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Justin Other Lawyer (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Justin Other Lawyer (View Comment):

    I agree with this generally. But it does not make Trump’s behavior on the 6th any more palatable.

    Palatable? This show trial is because of unpalatable behavior?

    This was heck of a tame insurrection then. :)

    I say let’s wait to see what testimony comes forth. I’m focusing on one aspect–Trump’s behavior–because many on this site seem dead set on ignoring his (allegedly, but probably provable) egregious behavior and statements from the 6th.

    It’s also worth knowing who and why an organized group breached the Capitol building. It appears that the vanguard of the breach was organized, while much of the rest was more spontaneous. This is worth knowing about, and defense of Trump or hatred for Democrats should not impede that.

    I get it–it’s a show, a production. I hate that part too. I also don’t trust the Democrats to honestly want to seek the full truth. But to be honest, I wouldn’t trust diehard Trump supporters to desire the full truth either.

    Much appears to have gone wrong on the 6th, and if it turns out Trump was one of the malefactors, so be it. We shouldn’t put confidence in “princes”, as the psalmist puts it. Trump is a very flawed man whose flaws especially stood out in the waning days of his administration.

    I may not even mind Trump being in prison as long as Pelosi, Biden, and several others go first and for longer sentences.

    To say you wouldn’t mind Trump being in prison is a surprising statement, to say the very least. For @ justinanotherlawyer, Kash Patel has a videocast just out on Epoch Times where he states unequivocally that President Trump authorized the mobilization of 20K National Guard for January 6. However, the law specifically states that a request must be made from either the Capitol police or the Mayor of D.C. Muriel Bowser. The request was never made. What else do you have to hang on Trump?

    The point isn’t about wanting to see Trump in prison, the point is that they continue to say Trump should be locked up for many of the same things Pelosi and Obama and the Clintons have done far more of, as well as far worse.  But THEIR side never gets the opprobrium.  So it’s more like “you first.”

    • #236
  27. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    cdor (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):

    I did say it was a ‘fever dream.’ However, I think it’s the one thing that would completely upend the current situation, wrong-foot the Democrats, and give Republicans the best chance of keeping the White House in 2024. But he needs to do it now. Hedging his bets, playing coy in the run-up to the primaries, putting a stranglehold on any but the most anti-Trump candidates from running while they wait for him to show his hand and then–if he doesn’t run–leading to a last-minute scramble and scrum, is another recipe for failure. If he does run, I think he’ll get the Republican nomination, but I think he’ll lose in November, with, or without, the margin of fraud.

    Otherwise, I think we should not be distracted by the squalid antics of partisan political hacks; nor should we allow their manufactured and pretended outrage to distract our gaze from their patently-clear hypocrisy, the current parlous state of the country, and their part in its dismantling.

    I like your comment, but it seems that in your reckoning there’s no way Trump can win “with, or without, the margin of fraud” — so anything he does to impede the established flow of candidates queueing up to represent the Republicans in the general election insures defeat.

    But I have not seen any margin of fraud that wasn’t purely conjecture. I recently read the margin of fraud is 25%, or would necessitate a vote total of a landslide of 25% (or I guess 75% of the popular vote — or perhaps 25% over the 50+% needed for victory, which is 62.5+%) is the only way that Trump can win. If this is so, what Republican could ever win?

    Frankly, I think let Trump be Trump. If anyone can win at the ballot box and still be as effective in office as Trump was, it’s Trump.

    I often think the way @ she is describing. Trump is so divisive…etc. But then I remember waking up the morning after the 2016 election to my wife calling up to me, “You will never believe it!” I knew immediately that Trump had won. Ecstasy overcame me as I jumped out of bed and ran naked down the street shouting Hallelujah, Hallelujah. Well, maybe that’s a bit of an exaggeration, but the point is, don’t count Trump out.

    Exaggeration, eh?  You were running around naked outside your house, but not down the street?  

    • #237
  28. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    kedavis (View Comment):

    cdor (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):

    I did say it was a ‘fever dream.’ However, I think it’s the one thing that would completely upend the current situation, wrong-foot the Democrats, and give Republicans the best chance of keeping the White House in 2024. But he needs to do it now. Hedging his bets, playing coy in the run-up to the primaries, putting a stranglehold on any but the most anti-Trump candidates from running while they wait for him to show his hand and then–if he doesn’t run–leading to a last-minute scramble and scrum, is another recipe for failure. If he does run, I think he’ll get the Republican nomination, but I think he’ll lose in November, with, or without, the margin of fraud.

    Otherwise, I think we should not be distracted by the squalid antics of partisan political hacks; nor should we allow their manufactured and pretended outrage to distract our gaze from their patently-clear hypocrisy, the current parlous state of the country, and their part in its dismantling.

    I like your comment, but it seems that in your reckoning there’s no way Trump can win “with, or without, the margin of fraud” — so anything he does to impede the established flow of candidates queueing up to represent the Republicans in the general election insures defeat.

    But I have not seen any margin of fraud that wasn’t purely conjecture. I recently read the margin of fraud is 25%, or would necessitate a vote total of a landslide of 25% (or I guess 75% of the popular vote — or perhaps 25% over the 50+% needed for victory, which is 62.5+%) is the only way that Trump can win. If this is so, what Republican could ever win?

    Frankly, I think let Trump be Trump. If anyone can win at the ballot box and still be as effective in office as Trump was, it’s Trump.

    I often think the way @ she is describing. Trump is so divisive…etc. But then I remember waking up the morning after the 2016 election to my wife calling up to me, “You will never believe it!” I knew immediately that Trump had won. Ecstasy overcame me as I jumped out of bed and ran naked down the street shouting Hallelujah, Hallelujah. Well, maybe that’s a bit of an exaggeration, but the point is, don’t count Trump out.

    Exaggeration, eh? You were running around naked outside your house, but not down the street?

    That’s it.  I checked his Ring camera.

    • #238
  29. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    kedavis (View Comment):

    cdor (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):

    I did say it was a ‘fever dream.’ However, I think it’s the one thing that would completely upend the current situation, wrong-foot the Democrats, and give Republicans the best chance of keeping the White House in 2024. But he needs to do it now. Hedging his bets, playing coy in the run-up to the primaries, putting a stranglehold on any but the most anti-Trump candidates from running while they wait for him to show his hand and then–if he doesn’t run–leading to a last-minute scramble and scrum, is another recipe for failure. If he does run, I think he’ll get the Republican nomination, but I think he’ll lose in November, with, or without, the margin of fraud.

    Otherwise, I think we should not be distracted by the squalid antics of partisan political hacks; nor should we allow their manufactured and pretended outrage to distract our gaze from their patently-clear hypocrisy, the current parlous state of the country, and their part in its dismantling.

    I like your comment, but it seems that in your reckoning there’s no way Trump can win “with, or without, the margin of fraud” — so anything he does to impede the established flow of candidates queueing up to represent the Republicans in the general election insures defeat.

    But I have not seen any margin of fraud that wasn’t purely conjecture. I recently read the margin of fraud is 25%, or would necessitate a vote total of a landslide of 25% (or I guess 75% of the popular vote — or perhaps 25% over the 50+% needed for victory, which is 62.5+%) is the only way that Trump can win. If this is so, what Republican could ever win?

    Frankly, I think let Trump be Trump. If anyone can win at the ballot box and still be as effective in office as Trump was, it’s Trump.

    I often think the way @ she is describing. Trump is so divisive…etc. But then I remember waking up the morning after the 2016 election to my wife calling up to me, “You will never believe it!” I knew immediately that Trump had won. Ecstasy overcame me as I jumped out of bed and ran naked down the street shouting Hallelujah, Hallelujah. Well, maybe that’s a bit of an exaggeration, but the point is, don’t count Trump out.

    Exaggeration, eh? You were running around naked outside your house, but not down the street?

    Sure thing, and shortly thereafter I received the divorce papers. Ha!

    • #239
  30. Bishop Wash Member
    Bishop Wash
    @BishopWash

    cdor (View Comment):
    Well, I totally understand what you are thinking. Not to mention, Trump will be 78 years old. Even for him, that’s getting to be a stretch!

    As Gary constantly reminded us, Trump’s father had Alzheimer’s so he shouldn’t be president. Which is why Gary voted for a guy displaying signs of dementia. 

    • #240
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.