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.
On a website devoted to debate (civil, mind you), we can all agree that politics is not the arena for shrinking violets. Who better to remind us of this fact than the former governor of the Garden State, Chris Christie? He gives us the lowdown on his successes in a Blue State and his thoughts on how Republicans need to keep their eye on the prize. Even with the mention of “Christie Porn,” we promise listeners a PG-rated podcast.
Also, the regular gang go from the economic blockage to “Let’s Go Brandon,” from intellectuals talking about third parties to Captain Kirk back in space. (Well, kinda-space if you wanna get technical.)
Music from this week’s podcast: Man At The Top by Bruce Springsteen
Subscribe to The Ricochet Podcast in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.
fair nuff. We just can’t afford such vicious schisms today…or our nation is lost.
BTW, listened to the podcast with Christie. The swamp doesn’t know that it’s swamp. Poor Chris…even though “please clap” was at a Jeb! rally, most of these swamp creatures don’t realize that their “sell by” date is over. I voted for Trump twice. I would vote for him again if he’s the nominee…I would RATHER vote for someone with less baggage like DeSantis. But IN THE END, Republican primary voters will make this decision.
I certainly don’t think Christie could win. Talk about baggage. But Desantis could win. But he won’t get a chance to win if in the end, Republican primary voters make the WRONG decision. I don’t think Desantis would even try if Trump is running.
Sorry to bring them up again, but the NT-ers and fellow travelers blame the schism on the 95%-or-more of us who won’t go along with the 5%-or-less of them.
yes, if so, I would think that sad. I have a sense the two talk…they ARE in the same state. I was most dismayed to hear of DS’ wife’s diagnosis. I hope they feel it’s treatable. So far, DeSantis seems to have the right policies without the “baggage.” Lincoln often used to make small steps in his decisions because he said, “things may change.” Let’s see what happens over the next 24 months.
Agreed. Let’s make it better…
As a FANT (former Almost Never Trumper), I blame the schism on both y’all.
The 95%+ actually have quite a bit of flexibility, the 5%- don’t. They won’t support or vote for anyone they consider “Trumpy.”
Gary, your Ronald Reagan Halloween mask is slipping. It’s only Democrats who fantasize that the Constitutionally meaningless “national popular vote” has any significance. And adding together these meaningless numbers makes them even more farcical — and serves to conceal Dubya‘s popular vote loss in 2000.
Which Presidential candidate got the highest Republican popular vote of all time? Answer: Trump. Second highest? Answer: Trump.
Who are you trying to fool? People who are too young to remember? You tell us that “George H.W. Bush won” while “Trump lost”. In reality, Bush won his first election (on Ronald Reagan‘s coattails), and lost his second; while Trump won his first election (on no one‘s coattails), and lost his second.
Finally, comparing Reagan’s hostile press with Trump‘s is pathetic.
I was eleven the year My World and Welcome to It showed up on TV. I had hoped I wasn’t the only one to love it. Now I’m not so sure…
It was great!
How did Trump impact the Senate election? How on earth did both Loeffler and Perdue lose the run offs?
I Own Atlanta!
Here’s what the Pew study actually says:
Two-thirds of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say they would like to see former President Donald Trump continue to be a major political figure for many years to come, including 44% who say they would like him to run for president in 2024, according to a Pew Research Center survey of U.S. adults conducted Sept. 13 to 19.
Evidently the Pew study was designed to get Trump‘s numbers as low as possible: it’s not limited to Republicans, nor to registered voters!
Here’s a more recent survey:
Two-thirds of Republican voters endorse former President Donald Trump’s potential bid for office in 2024, a Wednesday poll showed.
Fifty-one percent of Republican and Republican-leaning respondents of the new Morning Consult/Politico poll said that Trump should “definitely” run again, and 16% of them responded that he “probably” should launch a presidential campaign in 2024.
The poll surveyed 1,999 registered voters between Oct. 8-11. […]
Only 14% of Republicans were strongly opposed a Trump reelection bid, while 15% of them said he should “probably not” run again …
https://dailycaller.com/2021/10/14/morning-consult-politico-poll-67-percent-republicans-donald-trump-run-again/
Gary goes down in flames once again!
One, polls 2 years out with no declared candidates are only good at gauging one thing: who in a potential field is the most famous. And yes, Trump is the most famous. No question about that. Doesn’t reveal anything about how people are going to vote in an actual election 36 months from now.
Maybe he’ll win the nomination and win back the White House. It’s possible! But the only value these early polls have right now are as conversation starters.
Two, I’m fairly certain you excoriated me a few months back for having the gaul to post a link to a piece in Politico, which I believe you described (paraphrasing now) as just another Trump hating mainstream media organization dedicated to spreading lies. So Politico is cool now? Good to know!
James, you’ve forgotten just how moderate, and patriotic, and socially conservative liberals used to be, in Reagan’s time.
The executive editor of the New York Times during Reagan’s Presidency was A.M. Rosenthal, who then went on to write a column for the paper. Until they kicked him to the curb in 2004 for being, wait for it, too conservative! And remember what happened last year, when the very liberal opinion editor was fired for being insufficiently deferential to the young radicals who are taking over.
And the Washington Post used to be less liberal than the New York Times. Today, I occasionally read an article in the Post and I’m horrified: it’s like reading a left-wing opinion blog, not a newspaper.
Have you forgotten how a wimpy liberal Republican like Mitt Romney was monsterized by the liberal media in 2012?
”[T]he clips would’ve shown a guy who was either smiling and projecting American optimism …” Today, they simply don’t show the clips, if they don’t show what they want them to show.
A striking example from last year was when Anthony Fauci was a guest on a radio show and was asked, if he were a clinician and a COVID-19 patient asked him to prescribe hydroxychloroquine, would he do it? Absolutely, he said, because it’s important to keep the patient’s morale up. This got a lot of play in the conservative media, but I was interested to see what the liberal media had to say.
The answer was: nothing. As far as they were concerned, it never happened.
@blueyeti speaketh (from #164, above):
One, polls 2 years out with no declared candidates are only good at gauging one thing: who in a potential field is the most famous. And yes, Trump is the most famous. No question about that. Doesn’t reveal anything about how people are going to vote in an actual election 36 months from now.
Maybe he’ll win the nomination and win back the White House. It’s possible! But the only value these early polls have right now are as conversation starters.
Two, I’m fairly certain you excoriated me a few months back for having the gaul to post a link to a piece in Politico, which I believe you described (paraphrasing now) as just another Trump hating mainstream media organization dedicated to spreading lies. So Politico is cool now? Good to know!
Taking the last point first, you must have me mixed up with somebody else, or Politico mixed up with some other news source, if for no other reason than because I frequently quote Politico myself, in my Ricochet comments.
In either case, though, you’re guilty of a logical fallacy: the Excluded Middle. It is simply not the case that Politico must either be 100% reliable or 100% unreliable, all true or all false, and nothing in between. Some (probably most) material is true; some, false.
No question it’s a long way from a poll in October, 2021 to an election in 2024. After all, the FBI might find Biden’s brain or Kamala’s spine! But then, that’s even truer of a poll from September, 2021 — yet by some strange, unaccountable oversight you never criticized Gary’s poll report. A suspicious mind might conclude that you wanted to believe the poll less favorable to Donald Trump.
I was criticizing all polls taken this far away from an election. I just couldn’t quote your post and his in the same comment from my phone. I hope that puts your suspicions to rest.
But you didn’t criticize Gary’s poll post sometime shortly after he posted it, almost 4 days ago.
I try to not work on the weekends and I didn’t see it until yesterday evening.
Arguing sarcastically with customers and having an extremely thin skin is not a good look for you.
Well, let’s see.
Gary posted his poll comment on Sunday night, 10/17/21, at 9:04 PM PDT.
I responded to it on Tuesday night, 10/19/21, at 10:08 PM PDT, just over 49 hours later.
Blue Yeti responded to my comment on the same night, 10/19/21, at 10:44 PM PDT, 36 minutes later.
This reminds me of when, a few days after Saddam Hussein was captured in Iraq, Libya’s Colonel Qaddafi gave up all his WMD’s. Liberals insisted that this was merely a coincidence, that Qaddafi took the steps he did because of “20 years of diplomacy”.
Not impossible, but very unlikely.
Lol.
Finally, I came back and listened to this podcast today. (I caught the last five minutes or so of the original video podcast when it was live, but never listened to the show.)
I liked it. I think Christie makes a lot of sense, has a practical approach to politics that I like. In particular, his suggestion that we don’t need to “win back the cities,” but rather reduce the margins in the cities, was I think exactly right. It has that aspect of continuous grinding advancement that I think is our best hope for long-term success.
So Jonah Goldberg and David French think we need a new conservative party. Color me unsurprised: I think these gentlemen lost their way awhile ago, and hearing that they embrace a self-destructive, finger-in-the-eye-of-the-Republican-Party position is about what I’d expect. I find Goldberg tedious and juvenile, French much more to my liking, but I don’t think either makes much sense.
One minor quibble with our hosts today (though the podcast itself was, I thought, one of their best). When talking about why a third party is a recipe for defeat, no one mentioned what I think is an important factor: the Democrat lapdog media and tech behemoths would immediately jump in to divide the right and guarantee that neither the Republican Party nor the new party could secure a substantial majority of the conservative vote. Dividing the conservative vote is crazy anyway, but particularly crazy when it plays into the hands of a profoundly dishonest, monolithic, and manipulative press.
Good show.
A question just occurred to me. Has Jonah Goldberg or David French ever been censored, or demonetized, or shadow banned by social media?
I know that Goldberg once got an on-air apology from no less than Stephen Colbert, which has got to be considered a black mark for any conservative.
I think Goldberg and French do not see the dominance of the Corporate Left as an existential threat, to them personally. Indeed, it may be to their advantage. Like court jesters, they keep their dissent within licensed and authorized limits.
They kinda have to, don’t they? Are either of them capable of doing any other kind of work?