Message to GOPers: Words Are Not Actions

 

DeSantis wrote in a Wednesday post on X that “it is absurd that anyone, much less someone running for President, would choose now to attack our friend and ally, Israel, much less praise Hezbollah terrorists as ‘very smart.'”

In a recent BDB post (who is on fire of late) crystallized a vague concept I had about the legacy GOP and their over-reliance on political debate as a substitute for achieving results. I mean that quite literally.

It doesn’t really matter what we do, it only matters what we say out loud, lest someone get the wrong ideas in their pretty little heads. 

I have often read on these very pages on Ricochet and elsewhere, how Trump should be more careful about how he says things because the media and Democrats will pounce on the wrong interpretation.

This in itself is laughable because these people are entirely capable of making any statement into any absurd meaning they wish.

Further, the fear GOP candidates have of being misconstrued (usually with deliberate intent) turns their statements into mild pablum, full of platitudes and devoid of strength and impact.

This is why Romney lost, and why so many GOPers fail.

Then, these very same pols who have failed to gain higher office, or failed to keep their weasel-ly promises while serving in office, gleefully join the attacks on DJT for being insufficiently vague and nuanced in his speech.

The statement from Ron DeSantis is despicable and clearly desperate. But desperation should not mitigate the reprehensible conclusion that Trump is “attack(ing) Israel” by saying these words.

Apparently Trumps actions are to be completely ignored, and his latest ‘words’, badly misinterpreted, should define his entire being.

(This, by the way, dismisses the amazing accomplishments Trump made on behalf of Israel to include the bold action to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem, the Abraham accords, and granting his Jewish son-in-law  close advisory position and more)

As to the substance, or lack thereof, to the charge that referring to someone being “smart” is ‘praise’ well, I fail to see that logic, and it scares me if DeSantis actually believes we should never regard our mortal enemies as being smart, cunning or resilient. He wants to be Commander-in Chief?

On the second level, does DeSantis believe this absurd attack will help his chances?

That’s not very smart, Ron.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed 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 285 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Franco 🚫 Banned
    Franco
    @Franco

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):

    Reagan was not constantly vilified unfairly and impeached twice and falsely charged with scores of accusations. Then you would have seen people start defending him and taking it personally.

    I was politically engaged and lived trough Reagan.

    Aside from the “impeached twice”, I have a hard time believing you were politically engaged during Reagan’s Presidency if you really believe that he wasn’t “constantly vilified unfairly” and “falsely charged with scores of accusations.”

     

    Reagan and Tip were buddies? There may have been moments when i wasn’t looking when Tip was polite to him. But buddies? Are you sure you remember the 80s?

    Yes I do. Search Reagan Tip O’Niell and look at the first results. Here’s one from the Reagan library. That should be a pretty authoritative source…

    Or are you just nitpicking?

    I’ve glanced at that and tried to google for it, but see nothing so far to show that they were buddies. Maybe I’ll still come up with something substantive. Maybe when their careers were about over Reagan and O’Neill acknowledged each other respectfully. Reagan would have been decent at any time. They did say nice things about the other when the situation called for it (which is not the same as being buddies) but one of my main memories of Tip O’Neil was his disrespectful yucking it up behind Reagan’s back when the man was giving a SOTU. During his presidency the media and the Democrats were hating Reagan 24/7. After Reagan was safely out of the picture there were lots of RINOs and Democrats who tried re-inventing history and saying, “why can’t we be civil with each other like Reagan and Tip O’Neill were.” I expect they’ll do the same about Trump when DeSantis is president.

    I don’t think the Democrats sent the state security agencies after Reagan the way they did against Trump, so in that sense things were different in those days. But when Howard Metzenbaum’s office told a black university woman (I think a professor) who had flown to Washington to testify for one of Reagan’s judicial nominees (I think Bork) that if she knew what was good for her career she would get right back on a plane and go home, we were dealing with stuff in the same ballpark as we’ve been seeing against Trump. So maybe if the level of railroading and attack against Trump is rated as 90 on a scale of 1-100, they only did an 80 against Reagan. Against DeSantis it’ll probably be a 95.

    So I’m arguing against your larger point, but when people post nits I’m going to feel free to pick them.

    Did you mean *not* arguing against my central point as context implies?

    • #121
  2. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Franco (View Comment):
    Reagan was not constantly vilified unfairly and impeached twice and falsely charged with scores of accusations. Then you would have seen people start defending him and taking it personally.

    Franco (View Comment):

    So I’m arguing against your larger point, but when people post nits I’m going to feel free to pick them.

    Did you mean *not* arguing against my central point as context implies?

    Reagan was not impeached twice, but he was constantly vilified unfairly, although it started to let up somewhat towards the end of his 2nd term when it was obvious that it was doing no good.  He was not formally charged with scores of false accusations by our state security services, but you couldn’t walk down a university hallway without hearing false accusations against him. 

    So, I don’t know, am I arguing against your central point or not?  

    • #122
  3. Franco 🚫 Banned
    Franco
    @Franco

    Duck Duck go:

    Of course Tip was entirely disingenuous and RR something of a dupe in that regard, but the point is that no Democrat Speaker would be caught dead consorting with Trump off hours.

    Remember the charge is that I wasn’t present in the 80’s or I wasn’t paying attention. Both completely false.

    So I’m doing all the work and you’re just making uninformed spurious charges. Picking nits while agreeing it seems with my basic points? Thanks, pal.

    ( if you really mean you are arguing with my basic points you’re not doing a very good job…)

    • #123
  4. Franco 🚫 Banned
    Franco
    @Franco

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):
    Reagan was not constantly vilified unfairly and impeached twice and falsely charged with scores of accusations. Then you would have seen people start defending him and taking it personally.

    Franco (View Comment):

    So I’m arguing against your larger point, but when people post nits I’m going to feel free to pick them.

    Did you mean *not* arguing against my central point as context implies?

    Reagan was not impeached twice, but he was constantly vilified unfairly, although it started to let up somewhat towards the end of his 2nd term when it was obvious that it was doing no good. He was not formally charged with scores of false accusations by our state security services, but you couldn’t walk down a university hallway without hearing false accusations against him.

    So, I don’t know, am I arguing against your central point or not?

    Maybe just not getting my point. 
    To capsulize… the sentiment was quite the same, but the effect– the power the exponential impact of 24/7 openly hostile media channels with the rest pretending they are unbiased. 

    And an unprecedented attack. You’re using the words… two impeachments …but ….but well… two ( entirely ridiculous) impeachments is enough right there, daddio!

    Again I’m not saying people didn’t hate Reagan, but it was a completely different environment. They weren’t screaming bloody murder 24/7

    Also since Reagan the DOJ changed dramatically. This law fare didn’t exist back then. 
    I can’t believe I have to argue this point. But it seems mostly a misunderstanding 

    • #124
  5. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Franco: I don’t recall Trump ever contorting other politicians positions, including DeSantis.

    Trump and his surrogates began this campaign by insinuating that DeSantis was in the pocket of George Soros and that Andrew Cuomo was a better governor on Covid “because he said nice things about me.”

    Franco: Trump is the de facto incumbent…

    No, he lost. (If I could figure out another way to emphasize that I would.) He is not the incumbent. He lost. He is no longer the president of the United States because he lost the election.

     

    I would thinks his lead in the polls (and the shady 2000) make him an incumbent, just the rare kind. 

    • #125
  6. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Gossamer Cat (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):
    This is why I abhor the MSM, and lose respect for those who believe citing some reporter’s perspective, characterizations and conclusions means anything.

    Alright then, here is the full transcript: https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speaks-at-campaign-event-in-derry-new-hampshire-transcript.

    Franco (View Comment):

    killed an Iranian military leader.” … “In the speech, Trump boasted of his efforts to support Israel. But he also criticized Netanyahu, saying the Israeli leader “let us down” in a U.S. mission that killed Iranian military leader Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani.”

    As per usual, it was Trump being Trump. Trump is a firm supporter of Israel, and I agree that actions speak louder than words, but to be critical at that point was ill-timed. So the remarks were fair game for political opponents, in my opinion.

    This is why I abhor the MSM, and lose respect for those who believe citing some reporter’s perspective, characterizations and conclusions means anything.

    I always check sources but Trump’s speeches are so long and rambling that it isn’t always easy. But I listened to the part of the speech (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JGZoA3nr5U at 42 min approximately) that the reporter quotes and he is accurate. Trump did say that Netanyahu let us down by backing out of the strike on Soleimani at the last minute and that it was a very terrible thing – and then went on to say that Netanyahu then took credit for it which didn’t make him feel too good.

    Yes, it was a small part of a very long speech, but the rest of the speech was similar: all about Trump. But the attack was so horrific, it wasn’t the time for making it all about him.

    His remark about Hezbollah being smart earlier in the speech didn’t bother me – adversaries can be smart. But neither did it bother me that his political rivals pounced on it. Because he did say it and he acknowledged that people would get upset about it. And they did.

     

    I have always been a Netanyahu fan but if he did that, I could also understand why Trump would be mad at him. Also, it would have made Netanyahu look weak.

    • #126
  7. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Modus Ponens (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):
    That’s fair. If you aren’t an Only Trumper, and you have actual, sound reasons for your decisions, great.

    What is meant by Only Trumper? I’m not being intentionally obtuse here. If Only Trumper means that the person will only vote for Trump regardless of anything he could possibly do, the definition quickly becomes absurd. No one would vote for Trump if he, for example, promised to execute their family once elected. If the definition is, all other things being equal, the person will only consider voting for Trump in the primaries then it’s no different than saying Only Bush, Only DeSantis, or Only Christie. How would you define it?

    Well, at least one possibility is they wouldn’t vote for anyone other than Trump, in the general election. So if Trump isn’t the nominee, they stay home. Or something.

    But unlike at least some Never Trumpers we’ve known, they wouldn’t actually vote for the Democrat.

    But those NTs have already told us through words and actions that voting for a Dem, staying home, or voting for an independent or all honorable things to do. They set the bar. 

    • #127
  8. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Ekosj (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Demagogue (View Comment):

    Ekosj (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Demagogue (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):
    and then he actually encouraged Republicans to NOT VOTE in the Georgia runoffs. We have a Senate Democratic majority, and all the spending and bad policy that came from it, SOLELY because of Donald Trump.

    This isn’t true. But it’s an article of faith among Trump haters.

     

    Here’s what is absolutely true…fewer people voted for the Republican candidate in the runoffs than voted for Trump in the General just a short time before. That’s fact.

    Now speculation … if you tell people over and over and over and over that elections – especially in their State – are rigged and their votes don’t count do you really think they are going to show up to vote? The more people tend to believe you the less likely they are to vote. No? You are turning your biggest fans into non voters.

    So you agree that the narrative that Trump told people not to vote — a narrative promoted by way too many so-called “conservatives” — is false. Correct?

    I didn’t say that. I have no evidence he told people not to vote. And I don’t make that assertion.
    But…
    His constant drumbeat about stolen elections certainly could result in fewer people voting. Especially those who believe him most. If it’s rigged like he says, why bother?

    Telling people elections are stolen convinces people to stay home and causes us to lose? – Denying elections are full of corruption allows corruption to continue so we lose….seems to be a problem here. Perhaps Georgian and other voters should have made better decisions to give themselves a fighting chance. 

    • #128
  9. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Franco (View Comment):

    I’m not so sure there are many Only Trumpers out there. What annoys me is when Trump skeptics and Nevers characterize Trump supporters as being in the thrall of the man’s personality or are somehow cultish. This is quite insulting, and may I say reveals the same kind of cluelessness that created the rise of Trump as a backlash.

    The cult accusations have been used and abused so much anyone who has even a mild affinity for Trump’s policies or who utters any defense of the man has been accused of near worship of the man and everything about him. All I have to do at this point is smell a mild whiff of that and it’s immediate loss of respect in the political realm.

    The issue of ‘only Trump’ is that almost everyone in the primary contest is a generic old-fashioned Republican. Vivek is the exception but he’s not going anywhere. If like me, you can’t see a path for DeSantis to win the general, much less the nomination then the last man standing is Trump.

    After what I’ve witnessed the last 8 years from our Intel agencies’ manipulation, along with incessant war-mongering from the Uniparty, I want my candidate to address those issues directly. Rand Paul is not running. Tulsi Gabbard is not running. DeSantis does not satisfy those priorities for me. So I’m ‘only’ Trump by default.

    Painter Jean seems to believe those who advocate for Trump are not doing so with a political calculation but with an emotional attachment. Not so.

    If I am presented with the choice between DeSantis and a Democrat I will have to see how that plays out. I will not vote for the Democrat however.

    All of this – ditto.

    • #129
  10. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Modus Ponens (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):
    No, not all Trump advocates. Some have reasons that are political calculations, not emotional rationalizations.

    The more we delve into it, the more Trump supporters appear to be the same as supporters of any other candidate. You have some who support him based on political calculations, some who support him based on emotion, some who are fiercely loyal to him, some who can take him or leave him, etc.

    People who vote against him are almost always doing so for emotional reasons ergo they don’t convince Trump supporters they are wrong to support him. Even if both sides are acting out of emotion, which emotion is more justifiable? I contend the Trump supporters’ emotions are more valid. Salena Zito did a good job laying out those emotions in her book.

    • #130
  11. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Franco (View Comment):

    The crux of the matter here is whether one thinks our government ( not Democrats) has treated or is treating Trump and his core supporters alongside the Jan 6 trespassers, fairly and constitutionally.

    I support our Constitution basic fairness equal protection and the law evenly applied, and desire an uninfiltrated-by-Intel-agencies media. It has nothing to do with Trump as a man or as a President.

    Those who are whistling by this travesty are not getting my respect or vote.

    Exactly, and they are overlooking a very important reason why we want Trump to win – it seems to be the only way we can defeat this dangerous tactic of the left. The Republican Party seems to have no interest in doing so. And if voters have no interest in undoing this evil behavior, I see no reason I should vote for anyone else to save them from the evil they intentionally ignore because they hate Trump so much. 

    • #131
  12. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    Modus Ponens (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):
    Hate to be the policeman here, but PJ’s reply still implies that “some” are supporting a political calculation leaving open ‘most’ being emotion-driven.

    My point was that as we keep adding more qualifiers, “Only-Trump” looks more and more like the supporters of any other political candidate. If we keep digging down, I think that will become increasingly clear.

    In case you didn’t see my comment that addressed this on the last page, I’ll repeat it here, as I think it is unique to Trump (and to Obama):

    There is one difference: I don’t recall there being such loyal fans for other Republican presidents, such elevating onto a pedestal. I take your point – not every Trump supporter falls into the “Only Trump” camp – but the only other president that I have seen such emotional attachment to by some is Obama. I don’t think it’s a healthy impulse for Americans to put any politician on a pedestal. One of the aspects of my friend John’s being an “Only Trumper” is that he reacts to criticism of Trump as if were directed at him – he takes it personally. I don’t get that.

     

    People see their country and their future slipping away. They don’t like the path the country is going down. Trump read their feelings and talked to them in a way no other candidate has and in a time when the left had crossed the red line. Rather than learn from Trump, the party instead insulted them for their feelings. No wonder they don’t listen to the Trump haters…they don’t get it.

    There is no comparison with this and the Obama lovers. Some were moral preeners. Others like his message of blaming others for their failures. Many fell for his slick talking or promises to be Santa Claus. Obama was more of an antichrist than a wise man. You can’t say that about Trump. 

    • #132
  13. Chuck Coolidge
    Chuck
    @Chuckles

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Modus Ponens (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):
    That’s fair. If you aren’t an Only Trumper, and you have actual, sound reasons for your decisions, great.

    What is meant by Only Trumper? I’m not being intentionally obtuse here. If Only Trumper means that the person will only vote for Trump regardless of anything he could possibly do, the definition quickly becomes absurd. No one would vote for Trump if he, for example, promised to execute their family once elected. If the definition is, all other things being equal, the person will only consider voting for Trump in the primaries then it’s no different than saying Only Bush, Only DeSantis, or Only Christie. How would you define it?

    Well, at least one possibility is they wouldn’t vote for anyone other than Trump, in the general election. So if Trump isn’t the nominee, they stay home. Or something.

    But unlike at least some Never Trumpers we’ve known, they wouldn’t actually vote for the Democrat.

    But those NTs have already told us through words and actions that voting for a Dem, staying home, or voting for an independent or all honorable things to do. They set the bar.

    Ones state of residence might possibly make a bit of difference. 

    • #133
  14. DrewInWisconsin, Demagogue 🚫 Banned
    DrewInWisconsin, Demagogue
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Chuck (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    But those NTs have already told us through words and actions that voting for a Dem, staying home, or voting for an independent or all honorable things to do. They set the bar.

    Ones state of residence might possibly make a bit of difference.

    I have argued against the mindset “My vote doesn’t matter because I live in California” or wherever.

    First, for the people who want to beat us over the head with popular vote totals, which we know don’t matter, it’s good to show them that we can beat them in both the Electoral College and the Popular Vote. It gives them less ammunition for pushing Nationwide Popular Vote on us.

    Second, it shows your friends and neighbors who might be secret conservatives that, no, they’re not alone. And even if the Dem is going to win anyway, the smaller the margin by which they win, the more they see control slipping away (and again, the more your friends and neighbors see that there’s a chance to flip the state in the future.

    Never let the fact that you live in a blue state determine your vote. If it’s Trump vs. Biden and you call yourself a conservative, but just sit home on election day because you find Trump too icky, you’ve just given Biden a vote. And I will blame you for when the world goes to hell.

    • #134
  15. Chuck Coolidge
    Chuck
    @Chuckles

    DrewInWisconsin, Demagogue (View Comment):

    Chuck (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    But those NTs have already told us through words and actions that voting for a Dem, staying home, or voting for an independent or all honorable things to do. They set the bar.

    Ones state of residence might possibly make a bit of difference.

    I have argued against the mindset “My vote doesn’t matter because I live in California” or wherever.

    First, for the people who want to beat us over the head with popular vote totals, which we know don’t matter, it’s good to show them that we can beat them in both the Electoral College and the Popular Vote. It gives them less ammunition for pushing Nationwide Popular Vote on us.

    Second, it shows your friends and neighbors who might be secret conservatives that, no, they’re not alone. And even if the Dem is going to win anyway, the smaller the margin by which they win, the more they see control slipping away (and again, the more your friends and neighbors see that there’s a chance to flip the state in the future.

    Never let the fact that you live in a blue state determine your vote. If it’s Trump vs. Biden and you call yourself a conservative, but just sit home on election day because you find Trump too icky, you’ve just given Biden a vote. And I will blame you for when the world goes to hell.

    Somehow I lost what I was writing, so let me summarize:  All good comments, and I endorse all of them. 

    Nevertheless, right or wrong, in 2016 I quietly voted 3rd party.  Was unsurprised that the state went like 35% Hillary and over 60% Trump.  My own county was 6-1 for Trump.  2020 Trump no question.

    • #135
  16. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Chuck (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Demagogue (View Comment):

    Chuck (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    But those NTs have already told us through words and actions that voting for a Dem, staying home, or voting for an independent or all honorable things to do. They set the bar.

    Ones state of residence might possibly make a bit of difference.

    I have argued against the mindset “My vote doesn’t matter because I live in California” or wherever.

    First, for the people who want to beat us over the head with popular vote totals, which we know don’t matter, it’s good to show them that we can beat them in both the Electoral College and the Popular Vote. It gives them less ammunition for pushing Nationwide Popular Vote on us.

    Second, it shows your friends and neighbors who might be secret conservatives that, no, they’re not alone. And even if the Dem is going to win anyway, the smaller the margin by which they win, the more they see control slipping away (and again, the more your friends and neighbors see that there’s a chance to flip the state in the future.

    Never let the fact that you live in a blue state determine your vote. If it’s Trump vs. Biden and you call yourself a conservative, but just sit home on election day because you find Trump too icky, you’ve just given Biden a vote. And I will blame you for when the world goes to hell.

    Somehow I lost what I was writing, so let me summarize: All good comments, and I endorse all of them.

    Nevertheless, right or wrong, in 2016 I quietly voted 3rd party. Was unsurprised that the state went like 35% Hillary and over 60% Trump. My own county was 6-1 for Trump. 2020 Trump no question.

    But are you saying that if you expected your state to be closer in 2016, you would have voted for Trump?

    Because otherwise, don’t overlook the possibility that if Trump hadn’t won in 2016, President Hillary could have been partly your fault if you still voted 3rd party.

    • #136
  17. Chuck Coolidge
    Chuck
    @Chuckles

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Chuck (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Demagogue (View Comment):

    Chuck (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    But those NTs have already told us through words and actions that voting for a Dem, staying home, or voting for an independent or all honorable things to do. They set the bar.

    Ones state of residence might possibly make a bit of difference.

    I have argued against the mindset “My vote doesn’t matter because I live in California” or wherever.

    First, for the people who want to beat us over the head with popular vote totals, which we know don’t matter, it’s good to show them that we can beat them in both the Electoral College and the Popular Vote. It gives them less ammunition for pushing Nationwide Popular Vote on us.

    Second, it shows your friends and neighbors who might be secret conservatives that, no, they’re not alone. And even if the Dem is going to win anyway, the smaller the margin by which they win, the more they see control slipping away (and again, the more your friends and neighbors see that there’s a chance to flip the state in the future.

    Never let the fact that you live in a blue state determine your vote. If it’s Trump vs. Biden and you call yourself a conservative, but just sit home on election day because you find Trump too icky, you’ve just given Biden a vote. And I will blame you for when the world goes to hell.

    Somehow I lost what I was writing, so let me summarize: All good comments, and I endorse all of them.

    Nevertheless, right or wrong, in 2016 I quietly voted 3rd party. Was unsurprised that the state went like 35% Hillary and over 60% Trump. My own county was 6-1 for Trump. 2020 Trump no question.

    But are you saying that if you expected your state to be closer in 2016, you would have voted for Trump?

    Because otherwise, don’t overlook the possibility that if Trump hadn’t won in 2016, President Hillary could have been partly your fault if you still voted 3rd party.

    No, I’m not saying that at all.  Had there been any significant possibility – like for example had I lived in Texas or Florida (I used to and where my children lived at the time)- Trump would have gotten my vote, hands down.

    • #137
  18. DrewInWisconsin, Demagogue 🚫 Banned
    DrewInWisconsin, Demagogue
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Chuck (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Demagogue (View Comment):

    Chuck (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    But those NTs have already told us through words and actions that voting for a Dem, staying home, or voting for an independent or all honorable things to do. They set the bar.

    Ones state of residence might possibly make a bit of difference.

    I have argued against the mindset “My vote doesn’t matter because I live in California” or wherever.

    First, for the people who want to beat us over the head with popular vote totals, which we know don’t matter, it’s good to show them that we can beat them in both the Electoral College and the Popular Vote. It gives them less ammunition for pushing Nationwide Popular Vote on us.

    Second, it shows your friends and neighbors who might be secret conservatives that, no, they’re not alone. And even if the Dem is going to win anyway, the smaller the margin by which they win, the more they see control slipping away (and again, the more your friends and neighbors see that there’s a chance to flip the state in the future.

    Never let the fact that you live in a blue state determine your vote. If it’s Trump vs. Biden and you call yourself a conservative, but just sit home on election day because you find Trump too icky, you’ve just given Biden a vote. And I will blame you for when the world goes to hell.

    Somehow I lost what I was writing, so let me summarize: All good comments, and I endorse all of them.

    Nevertheless, right or wrong, in 2016 I quietly voted 3rd party. Was unsurprised that the state went like 35% Hillary and over 60% Trump. My own county was 6-1 for Trump. 2020 Trump no question.

    Of course the real reason our votes don’t matter, particularly in swing states, is because ballots are what matter. And Democrats can produce tens of thousands out of thin air.

    (You still vote, because you want to make it harder for them to steal it. The harder they have to work, the more opportunities to catch ’em in the act. We caught ’em in the act in dozens of ways in 2020, but we still have “conservatives” who refuse to believe it and “Republicans” who won’t do a thing about it.)

    • #138
  19. David C. Broussard Inactive
    David C. Broussard
    @Dbroussa

    DrewInWisconsin, Demagogue (View Comment):
    We caught ’em in the act in dozens of ways in 202, but we still have “conservatives” who refuse to believe it and “Republicans” who won’t do a thing about it.)

    This is why I am not bothering to vote for the GOP anymore above the State level, and honestly the Texas GOP is fairly messed up as well (just look at the Dade Phelan and Paxton impeachment as examples.

    • #139
  20. DrewInWisconsin, Demagogue 🚫 Banned
    DrewInWisconsin, Demagogue
    @DrewInWisconsin

    And now, this:

    National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) chairman Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) is calling on everyone but former President Donald Trump to drop out of the 2024 GOP presidential primary and coalesce behind Trump.

    Sure to trigger many.

    “I was surprised, but I think that’s the right move,” Daines said, according to Politico, when former Vice President Mike Pence dropped out of the race on Saturday at the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) event in Las Vegas, Nevada.

    “Because it’s clear President Trump is going to be the nominee for Republicans for president, and the sooner we coalesce around him the better it’s going to be,” Daines added.

    Daines has already endorsed Trump, but this is a significant escalation from one of the party’s top leaders in the Senate. As NRSC chairman, Daines oversees party spending and resources decisions on U.S. Senate races—and has been very active in recruiting key Senate candidates nationwide as Republicans embark on an effort to retake the majority in the upper chamber of Congress.

    Calling for the other Republicans like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC), businessman Vivek Ramaswamy, and more to drop out of the race and coalesce behind Trump—and predicting Trump will be the GOP nominee—is an even bigger move than just endorsing Trump. It’s a party heavyweight aiming to steer the conversation towards what almost everyone believes to be inevitable, but many in donor-connected circles and establishment consultant enclaves refuse to thus far admit: Trump will be the GOP nominee for president again for the third straight presidential election.

    He sees the writing on the wall.

    • #140
  21. Chuck Coolidge
    Chuck
    @Chuckles

    DrewInWisconsin, Demagogue (View Comment):

    And now, this:

    National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) chairman Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) is calling on everyone but former President Donald Trump to drop out of the 2024 GOP presidential primary and coalesce behind Trump.

    Sure to trigger many.

    “I was surprised, but I think that’s the right move,” Daines said, according to Politico, when former Vice President Mike Pence dropped out of the race on Saturday at the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) event in Las Vegas, Nevada.

    “Because it’s clear President Trump is going to be the nominee for Republicans for president, and the sooner we coalesce around him the better it’s going to be,” Daines added.

    Daines has already endorsed Trump, but this is a significant escalation from one of the party’s top leaders in the Senate. As NRSC chairman, Daines oversees party spending and resources decisions on U.S. Senate races—and has been very active in recruiting key Senate candidates nationwide as Republicans embark on an effort to retake the majority in the upper chamber of Congress.

    Calling for the other Republicans like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC), businessman Vivek Ramaswamy, and more to drop out of the race and coalesce behind Trump—and predicting Trump will be the GOP nominee—is an even bigger move than just endorsing Trump. It’s a party heavyweight aiming to steer the conversation towards what almost everyone believes to be inevitable, but many in donor-connected circles and establishment consultant enclaves refuse to thus far admit: Trump will be the GOP nominee for president again for the third straight presidential election.

    He sees the writing on the wall.

    Just asking:  What are the mechanics of a Republican Party Presidential Candidate having the Party itself officially nominate Trump?

    • #141
  22. Steven Seward Member
    Steven Seward
    @StevenSeward

    I don’t find the point of this post convincing.  You are bringing up a fairly benign criticism of Trump by DeSantis, yet you go on to persuade that actions are more important than words, it is even in the title  of your  post.   You  cite the cases of Trump’s words being overly criticized, but seem  to be unaware that you are doing the same thing to DeSantis’s words, while ignoring his solid actions as Governor.

    I know you don’t like the idea of Trump as a cult, but most of your reasons for supporting Trump seem to be of the cultish variety.  You  denigrate every other Republican candidate, especially DeSantis (presumably because he represents the biggest threat to Trump), as if Trump were the lone figure in the republican party that can be our savior.  I don’t subscribe to that.  I would probably be happy with at least six or seven of the candidates if they were the nominee, and I don’t even know much about the rest of them.  However, you treat them as enemies.  I would expect a typical conservative to embrace the wonderfully deep bench we have rather than fight against them.   I hear conservatives complain all the time that the democrats are united while the republicans are not (which may or may not be true).  Well, this  is  one of the reasons for not being united.  We shouldn’t be fighting against the people in our own party, especially if they are staunch conservatives.

    This reminds me too much of communist politics (I know somebody’s going to think I’m over the top, but this  is true).  In communism, all other rivals for the top spot are brutally eliminated in favor of the top  guy.   There is no “from the ground up” support.  It is all “top down.”  And actual issues don’t matter, only power matters.  And you are mostly not bringing up substantive issues, you are citing things like charisma, who the candidate’s donors are,  the enthusiasm a candidate generates, or  how much flak a candidate receives from the press.  This does not inspire me to vote for anybody based on those qualities.

    • #142
  23. Steven Seward Member
    Steven Seward
    @StevenSeward

    DrewInWisconsin, Demagogue (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Demagogue (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    Modus Ponens (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    Because they’re Only Trumpers. It doesn’t matter who the other options are.

    I’d invite you to consider other explanations. I, for one, have reasons for thinking DeSantis’ Presidential Run was mistimed and ill-advised. Your explanation certainly does not reflect my position.

    That’s fair. If you aren’t an Only Trumper, and you have actual, sound reasons for your decisions, great.

    The more you express your hate for Trump voters, the more I want to become one of these “Only Trumpers” just to spite you. I keep trying to find grace for you but you keep making these stupid insults. Maybe dial your hate down a few notches? Or should I just stop expecting better?

    Drew, you frequently use the word “hate” to describe the motives and/or emotional state of people you disagree with. I don’t know why.

    You don’t? Maybe consider how your nasty comments come across.

    I have never seen Jean make nasty comments toward people.  Can you cite a specific one?

     

    • #143
  24. Steven Seward Member
    Steven Seward
    @StevenSeward

    Franco (View Comment):

    Yes, there was. And it was significant.
    Moreover, the unfair attacks from all quarters throughout his Presidency along with bogus assertions f from the 51 Intel “patriots” should have been enough to rally EVERY Republican around him for the sake of our Constitution.

    DeSantis ignores this by his actions of running against him. It takes this egregious behavior off the table as though nothing happened, and further empowers the March to totalitarianism. It makes DeSantis and his supporters complicit. There’s no way around it. DeSantis cannot defend Trump on these issues without people wondering why he’s running, but on principle , which he seems to lack, he should. That’s what is needed now, Republicans standing up – not for Trump the man or the President – but for our very system of government and democracy.

    It is preposterous to assume that by simply running against Trump, DeSantis and his supporters are empowering the “March to  totalitarianism.”  This is another cultish fetish.  Why does Trump deserve special status, that no other candidate should dare run against him?

    If you really wanted people to stand up for our very system of government and democracy, not just for Trump, then you wouldn’t criticize any candidate simply for running against him.

    • #144
  25. Steven Seward Member
    Steven Seward
    @StevenSeward

    Franco (View Comment):

    What I mean is that the election wasn’t fair. Whether it was stolen or not we will never know. You don’t know, and neither do I.

    I suspect it was. Regardless, there was manipulation, organized propaganda and lies from our government and censorship also from our government! That much we know for a fact, and that’s enough for me.

    DeSantis is running against Trump as though none of this ever happened.

    I agree with your first two paragraphs, but the third does not make sense.  Does that mean that everybody in the republican field is ignoring the election problems based on the fact that they are running for President?

     

     

    • #145
  26. Steven Seward Member
    Steven Seward
    @StevenSeward

    Globalitarian Misanthropist (View Comment):

    But Trump inherited what? A million? Some say 10 million? And he turned it into a Billion. Some say 2.9 million. Trump says 10 billion.

    The semi-official estimate is that Trump got $413 Million from his dad (only a small portion of that was inheritance.  Most of it was gifted to him before elder Trump died).  Forbes Magazine did an analysis on whether or not the oft-repeated line by detractors was true that “Trump would have made more money just investing in the stock market than building his business empire.”   They came up  with kind of mixed results:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2021/10/11/its-official-trump-would-be-richer-if-he-had-just-invested-his-inheritance-into-the-sp500/?sh=74bcb8751c48

     

    • #146
  27. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    Globalitarian Misanthropist (View Comment):

    But Trump inherited what? A million? Some say 10 million? And he turned it into a Billion. Some say 2.9 million. Trump says 10 billion.

    The semi-official estimate is that Trump got $413 Million from his dad (only a small portion of that was inheritance. Most of it was gifted to him before elder Trump died). Forbes Magazine did an analysis on whether or not the oft-repeated line by detractors was true that “Trump would have made more money just investing in the stock market than building his business empire.” They came up with kind of mixed results:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2021/10/11/its-official-trump-would-be-richer-if-he-had-just-invested-his-inheritance-into-the-sp500/?sh=74bcb8751c48

    But wouldn’t it actually make him – or anyone – MORE admirable that they wanted to actually get stuff built, not just sit on money and wait for it to increase?

    What’s next, Elon Musk is a chump for actually building rockets and stuff?

    • #147
  28. Steven Seward Member
    Steven Seward
    @StevenSeward

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    Globalitarian Misanthropist (View Comment):

    But Trump inherited what? A million? Some say 10 million? And he turned it into a Billion. Some say 2.9 million. Trump says 10 billion.

    The semi-official estimate is that Trump got $413 Million from his dad (only a small portion of that was inheritance. Most of it was gifted to him before elder Trump died). Forbes Magazine did an analysis on whether or not the oft-repeated line by detractors was true that “Trump would have made more money just investing in the stock market than building his business empire.” They came up with kind of mixed results:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2021/10/11/its-official-trump-would-be-richer-if-he-had-just-invested-his-inheritance-into-the-sp500/?sh=74bcb8751c48

    But wouldn’t it actually make him – or anyone – MORE admirable that they wanted to actually get stuff built, not just sit on money and wait for it to increase?

    What’s next, Elon Musk is a chump for actually building rockets and stuff?

    Well, I’m glad he went out and worked instead of just living off his father’s toil.

    • #148
  29. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    I don’t find the point of this post convincing. You are bringing up a fairly benign criticism of Trump by DeSantis, yet you go on to persuade that actions are more important than words, it is even in the title of your post. You cite the cases of Trump’s words being overly criticized, but seem to be unaware that you are doing the same thing to DeSantis’s words, while ignoring his solid actions as Governor.

    I know you don’t like the idea of Trump as a cult, but most of your reasons for supporting Trump seem to be of the cultish variety. You denigrate every other Republican candidate, especially DeSantis (presumably because he represents the biggest threat to Trump), as if Trump were the lone figure in the republican party that can be our savior. I don’t subscribe to that. I would probably be happy with at least six or seven of the candidates if they were the nominee, and I don’t even know much about the rest of them. However, you treat them as enemies. I would expect a typical conservative to embrace the wonderfully deep bench we have rather than fight against them. I hear conservatives complain all the time that the democrats are united while the republicans are not (which may or may not be true). Well, this is one of the reasons for not being united. We shouldn’t be fighting against the people in our own party, especially if they are staunch conservatives.

    This reminds me too much of communist politics (I know somebody’s going to think I’m over the top, but this is true). In communism, all other rivals for the top spot are brutally eliminated in favor of the top guy. There is no “from the ground up” support. It is all “top down.” And actual issues don’t matter, only power matters. And you are mostly not bringing up substantive issues, you are citing things like charisma, who the candidate’s donors are, the enthusiasm a candidate generates, or how much flak a candidate receives from the press. This does not inspire me to vote for anybody based on those qualities.

    This is a little over the top. People have been disappointed by too many politicians. They fee they are losing the country. Nobody listened to them until Trump came along. That is neither a cult nor communism.

    • #149
  30. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):

    Yes, there was. And it was significant.
    Moreover, the unfair attacks from all quarters throughout his Presidency along with bogus assertions f from the 51 Intel “patriots” should have been enough to rally EVERY Republican around him for the sake of our Constitution.

    DeSantis ignores this by his actions of running against him. It takes this egregious behavior off the table as though nothing happened, and further empowers the March to totalitarianism. It makes DeSantis and his supporters complicit. There’s no way around it. DeSantis cannot defend Trump on these issues without people wondering why he’s running, but on principle , which he seems to lack, he should. That’s what is needed now, Republicans standing up – not for Trump the man or the President – but for our very system of government and democracy.

    It is preposterous to assume that by simply running against Trump, DeSantis and his supporters are empowering the “March to totalitarianism.” This is another cultish fetish. Why does Trump deserve special status, that no other candidate should dare run against him?

    If you really wanted people to stand up for our very system of government and democracy, not just for Trump, then you wouldn’t criticize any candidate simply for running against him.

    This post illustrates the problem. They stick with Trump because he recognizes the problem. Why aren’t DeSantis and the other Republicans running against what the corrupt government is doing to Trump? Of course we stick up for Trump. We fear what out country is becoming and only Trump gets it. The others seem content to let the corrupt DOJ take out their rival.

    • #150
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.