I remain a Trump supporter (this, though I live in Florida and feel blessed to have had DeSantis as Governor). That said, unless we fix the election system, it won't matter who the Republicans put up (unless it's a UniParty candidate that is allowed to "win" so as to maintain for the normies the pretext of a "free and fair" election system).
I remain a Trump supporter (this, though I live in Florida and feel blessed to have had DeSantis as Governor).
That said, unless we fix the election system, it won't matter who the Republicans put up (unless it's a UniParty candidate that is allowed to "win" so as to maintain for the normies the pretext of a "free and fair" election system).
I'm curious how you can remain a Trump supporter when, one, he blew his chance, and two, we're four years farther down the harrowing of the United States. 70% of the American people support same sex "marriage," which I take as the canary in the coal mine of the commonweal.
At least, DeSantis can make a reasoned case, and isn't instantly loathsome. Don't you find Trump loathsome? Although I echo Rod in my willingness to crawl naked over ground glass to vote for him if he is the Republican nominee, I do loathe him. I'm appalled by him.
One of the greatest concerns of the writer of this blog, and many of its commenters, is the lunatic vulgarity of our era. Can you argue that Trump presents a contrast to that? DeSantis does.
What's more DeSantis won reelection last year by a huge margin. It is hardly the case that elections are somehow "fixed" in the US or someone like DeSantis (or a number of others in other states) would not be in office.
This comment system is better than anything Rod has had before, but your reply baffles me. I can't remember that I said anything about DeSantis and fixed elections, and I can't spare the time to go through all of the comments to see what I said. What was it? ( Hi, Jon. I was Robert Kirby in a previous fake identity. )
Consider the possibility that the UniParty and its election fraud infrastructure allowed the "red wave" to occur in Florida (but not in other states) so as to make DeSantis look good, while providing a narrative that "MAGA candidates failed." Comments after the midterms by GOP Establishment / UniParty types are consistent with this thesis.
>>"There is no evidence whatsoever of serious election fraud. Deal with reality."
That's arguably insulting ("Deal with reality.").
Also, "no evidence whatsoever" is factually inaccurate. I will be happy to provide links to multiple sources of evidence, but even without that, the documentary "2000 Mules" alone provides compelling evidence.
I am not tryin to be isnulting, but I can respect the spreading of falsehoods, even when the person doing so believes in them hismelf.
The "evidence" of stolen elections has been aired and found severely wanting multiple times. Trump's own legal people did not dare introduce any of it (with a couple minor exceptions) in court in 2020-21 since doing so would have earned a rebuke, possibly even legal penalties from judges (including those Trump-apppointed) who cannot look kindly of fallacious, fraudulent or frivolous legal claims.
"Falsehoods." That is your opinion. Neither you (or I) are the ultimate arbiter of truth. Follow the evidence.
The statement about Trump's legal team mischaracterizes courts refusing to hear cases due to (alleged) lack of standing ... not to mention the Supreme Court refusing to hear a similar case brought by multiple states.
There are parties (including leadership of both political parties) that have been pushing (what many of us consider a "Big Lie") that 2020 (and later) were "free and fair elections." Those of us who disagree are labeled "election deniers" (same technique employed against those who point out that "climate change" is a fraud - who are then branded "deniers").
I already mentioned "2000 Mules." And I offered to post links to other sources of evidence. Accept my offer, then look at with an open mind. Then decide.
That's easy. Trump didn't blow his chance - he was being sabotaged from before he even gained the nomination (Russiagate, multiple impeachment efforts, etc.).
Trump has all the right enemies. Conversely, DeSantis has all the wrong supporters: the Murdochs of Fox; Jeb Bush and the GOP Establishment a/k/a UniParty generally. Huge red flag.
IF DeSantis "wins" the nomination - a very good possibility, as the UniParty election fraud infrastructure is available for primaries - and if he actually attempted to govern as a quasi-MAGA / America First President, he'd encounter the same undermining as Trump.
If he governs as an acceptable to the UniParty President, he'd just execute the Globalist-CCP Axis' agenda, albeit at a slightly slower pace, i.e., like another of the Bushes.
In politics one has to expect opposition from the Other Party, and for pretty much my whole life that has involved no little dirty-fighting and scandalmongering. It's how the game is played. Reagan had to deal with that. So did Clinton. Attempts wre made against both Bushes and Obama. All suceeded despite it. Trump failed.
Trump accomplished a few things, but he's an idiot. He's oblivious to the power of charm. Compare him with Franklin Roosevelt, who was as hated by his opponents as Trump has been.
Politics is about winning people over, not enraging them. Roosevelt got far more of what he wanted because he understood how to win people over. He could be brutal about his enemies, as in the "I welcome their hatred" speech in 1936, while at the same time projecting sunniness and good humor.
Trump is repellent. He's loathsome. Day after day after day, we got vulgarity, insult, a ceaseless degrading of the public square from him. And you do realize, don't you, that he did essentially nothing for the bottom 80%. He proposed essentially the same tax bills a stiff like Jeb would have done.
I'm bothered by DeSantis' support from the Kochs, God knows. But a great politician like FDR is perfectly prepared to betray whomever he must betray, and knows how to get away with it. It's a vicious, filthy game, politics, but we do know that Trump failed at it.
Your adulation of FDR is ... curious. As is considering Trump "loathsome."
FDR, the second "Progressive" President after Woodrow Wilson, continued that mission to unmoor us from our Constitution (his court-packing threat, which led to the enactment of the quasi-Socialist "New Deal"). He was popular with many, but via an early form of information op; radio broadcasts, a adulatory media that cooperated (including hiding his polio, even though this should not have mattered).
Yes, I wish that Trump was more of the happy warrior persona of a Ronald Reagan. But I would not let "the perfect be the enemy of the good." Amongst other good things, Trump recognizes the existential threat that the CCP represents, and was working to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. He also got us out of that Globalist-CCP Axis inspired "Paris Climate Accord."
If you want loathsome, try B. Hussein Obama, political scion of Marxist / terrorist Bill Ayers, and a Marxist mole who's mission was/is the subversion of the USA.
Or Joe Biden, a CCP-compromised puppet; himself reminiscent of post-stroke Wilson - a mentally hollowed-out figurehead serving as a prop force nefarious forces behind the curtain.
Funny you should mention Bill Ayers. For entirely personal reasons I have always believed that if I were to see him in person, I would punch him in the face.
And I don't hit people.
Wilson is an example of good intentions letting loose a sh*twhirl of an effect. As for FDR's unmooring us from our Constitution, as Justice Jackson asserted, the Constitution isn't a suicide pact, and as Jefferson thought, every generation or so, the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants. In other words, the Constitution isn't sacred. I do not idolize it. As you know, it contains within itself the means essentially to abolish it.
As horrible as slavery is, it was Lincoln who changed what Americans were taught the Constitution means.
FDR saved the Constitution, saved capitalism. And it's interesting that you read into my admiration of him. It's there, and deep, for the same reason I admire JFK, the courage of the two men. With FDR, it's deeper. If you could stand it, read Jonathan Alter's wonderful book about Roosevelt's ascent to the Presidency, "The Defining Moment." Roosevelt's spiritedness and insistence that the Warm Springs resort be what it was, and his personally leading, coaching, and encouraging the other paraplegics, will always make him dear to my heart.
You don't seem to understand that Trump's personality isn't just unfortunate, it does existential damage to the commonweal.
Woodrow Wilson did not have good intentions. He was a Progressive - openly dismissive of the Constitution as an outdate relic, preferring that we be ruled over by bureaucrats / experts in centralized government. If he were around today, he'd be in Davos with Klaus Schwab and crew. Not to mention that it was Wilson who gave us the federal income tax and Federal Reserve banking cartel.
I'm familiar with the sloganeering about FDR "saving capitalism" and such. I'll leave it at we'll have to agree to disagree. FDR was also a Progressive, who continued where Wilson left off, i.e., massively expanding the federal government way in excess of Constitutional limits.
>>You don't seem to understand that Trump's personality isn't just unfortunate, it does existential damage to the commonweal.
You're right - I don't understand that. I find your statement baffling, especially given that at present the White House is occupied by a dementia'd straw man, who's co-opted by the CCP (as are many other officials in D.C. of both parties), who wasn't duly elected but was installed via a stolen election / coup d'etat. That is an existential threat.
Of course, Wilson had good intentions. He was wrong about most things, but didn't think he was.
FDR was the great hustler the nation needed at the time. You simply cannot overestimate the value of hope.
To clarify, I think America has been done for since Roe vs Wade. But our deterioration was leisurely. Most people didn't notice it for decades. Remember the 80s, the optimism of the era? There were, thank God, Christians who saw through the whole thing, but comparatively few. The Devil is very clever. He takes his time.
I think I do overrate the harm which Trump, the infallibly vulgar, does to the country. He, Biden, Kamala et al, are no less than we deserve.
Would it be possible to "save" America? Barring a genuine Christianization of the country, or its tacky Chinese knockoff, a man - on - horseback coup, I doubt it. ( Notice I didn't say "military coup." I imagine you and I are in agreement that it seems that everywhere one turns in American life, from legal education to medical education to basic grammar school education to economic opportunities for the hardworking from modest backgrounds to popular taste in the arts and certainly to the military, everything seems to be going consistently to ****. )
I remain a Trump supporter (this, though I live in Florida and feel blessed to have had DeSantis as Governor).
That said, unless we fix the election system, it won't matter who the Republicans put up (unless it's a UniParty candidate that is allowed to "win" so as to maintain for the normies the pretext of a "free and fair" election system).
I'm curious how you can remain a Trump supporter when, one, he blew his chance, and two, we're four years farther down the harrowing of the United States. 70% of the American people support same sex "marriage," which I take as the canary in the coal mine of the commonweal.
At least, DeSantis can make a reasoned case, and isn't instantly loathsome. Don't you find Trump loathsome? Although I echo Rod in my willingness to crawl naked over ground glass to vote for him if he is the Republican nominee, I do loathe him. I'm appalled by him.
One of the greatest concerns of the writer of this blog, and many of its commenters, is the lunatic vulgarity of our era. Can you argue that Trump presents a contrast to that? DeSantis does.
What's more DeSantis won reelection last year by a huge margin. It is hardly the case that elections are somehow "fixed" in the US or someone like DeSantis (or a number of others in other states) would not be in office.
This comment system is better than anything Rod has had before, but your reply baffles me. I can't remember that I said anything about DeSantis and fixed elections, and I can't spare the time to go through all of the comments to see what I said. What was it? ( Hi, Jon. I was Robert Kirby in a previous fake identity. )
My reply would have been better had I made it more directly to the person above you who was floating the "rigged election" line.
I am glad to see you here.
Consider the possibility that the UniParty and its election fraud infrastructure allowed the "red wave" to occur in Florida (but not in other states) so as to make DeSantis look good, while providing a narrative that "MAGA candidates failed." Comments after the midterms by GOP Establishment / UniParty types are consistent with this thesis.
There is no evidence whatsoever of serious election fraud. Deal with reality.
>>"There is no evidence whatsoever of serious election fraud. Deal with reality."
That's arguably insulting ("Deal with reality.").
Also, "no evidence whatsoever" is factually inaccurate. I will be happy to provide links to multiple sources of evidence, but even without that, the documentary "2000 Mules" alone provides compelling evidence.
I am not tryin to be isnulting, but I can respect the spreading of falsehoods, even when the person doing so believes in them hismelf.
The "evidence" of stolen elections has been aired and found severely wanting multiple times. Trump's own legal people did not dare introduce any of it (with a couple minor exceptions) in court in 2020-21 since doing so would have earned a rebuke, possibly even legal penalties from judges (including those Trump-apppointed) who cannot look kindly of fallacious, fraudulent or frivolous legal claims.
"Falsehoods." That is your opinion. Neither you (or I) are the ultimate arbiter of truth. Follow the evidence.
The statement about Trump's legal team mischaracterizes courts refusing to hear cases due to (alleged) lack of standing ... not to mention the Supreme Court refusing to hear a similar case brought by multiple states.
There are parties (including leadership of both political parties) that have been pushing (what many of us consider a "Big Lie") that 2020 (and later) were "free and fair elections." Those of us who disagree are labeled "election deniers" (same technique employed against those who point out that "climate change" is a fraud - who are then branded "deniers").
I already mentioned "2000 Mules." And I offered to post links to other sources of evidence. Accept my offer, then look at with an open mind. Then decide.
That's easy. Trump didn't blow his chance - he was being sabotaged from before he even gained the nomination (Russiagate, multiple impeachment efforts, etc.).
Trump has all the right enemies. Conversely, DeSantis has all the wrong supporters: the Murdochs of Fox; Jeb Bush and the GOP Establishment a/k/a UniParty generally. Huge red flag.
IF DeSantis "wins" the nomination - a very good possibility, as the UniParty election fraud infrastructure is available for primaries - and if he actually attempted to govern as a quasi-MAGA / America First President, he'd encounter the same undermining as Trump.
If he governs as an acceptable to the UniParty President, he'd just execute the Globalist-CCP Axis' agenda, albeit at a slightly slower pace, i.e., like another of the Bushes.
In politics one has to expect opposition from the Other Party, and for pretty much my whole life that has involved no little dirty-fighting and scandalmongering. It's how the game is played. Reagan had to deal with that. So did Clinton. Attempts wre made against both Bushes and Obama. All suceeded despite it. Trump failed.
Trump accomplished a few things, but he's an idiot. He's oblivious to the power of charm. Compare him with Franklin Roosevelt, who was as hated by his opponents as Trump has been.
Politics is about winning people over, not enraging them. Roosevelt got far more of what he wanted because he understood how to win people over. He could be brutal about his enemies, as in the "I welcome their hatred" speech in 1936, while at the same time projecting sunniness and good humor.
Trump is repellent. He's loathsome. Day after day after day, we got vulgarity, insult, a ceaseless degrading of the public square from him. And you do realize, don't you, that he did essentially nothing for the bottom 80%. He proposed essentially the same tax bills a stiff like Jeb would have done.
I'm bothered by DeSantis' support from the Kochs, God knows. But a great politician like FDR is perfectly prepared to betray whomever he must betray, and knows how to get away with it. It's a vicious, filthy game, politics, but we do know that Trump failed at it.
Your adulation of FDR is ... curious. As is considering Trump "loathsome."
FDR, the second "Progressive" President after Woodrow Wilson, continued that mission to unmoor us from our Constitution (his court-packing threat, which led to the enactment of the quasi-Socialist "New Deal"). He was popular with many, but via an early form of information op; radio broadcasts, a adulatory media that cooperated (including hiding his polio, even though this should not have mattered).
Yes, I wish that Trump was more of the happy warrior persona of a Ronald Reagan. But I would not let "the perfect be the enemy of the good." Amongst other good things, Trump recognizes the existential threat that the CCP represents, and was working to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. He also got us out of that Globalist-CCP Axis inspired "Paris Climate Accord."
If you want loathsome, try B. Hussein Obama, political scion of Marxist / terrorist Bill Ayers, and a Marxist mole who's mission was/is the subversion of the USA.
Or Joe Biden, a CCP-compromised puppet; himself reminiscent of post-stroke Wilson - a mentally hollowed-out figurehead serving as a prop force nefarious forces behind the curtain.
Funny you should mention Bill Ayers. For entirely personal reasons I have always believed that if I were to see him in person, I would punch him in the face.
And I don't hit people.
Wilson is an example of good intentions letting loose a sh*twhirl of an effect. As for FDR's unmooring us from our Constitution, as Justice Jackson asserted, the Constitution isn't a suicide pact, and as Jefferson thought, every generation or so, the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants. In other words, the Constitution isn't sacred. I do not idolize it. As you know, it contains within itself the means essentially to abolish it.
As horrible as slavery is, it was Lincoln who changed what Americans were taught the Constitution means.
FDR saved the Constitution, saved capitalism. And it's interesting that you read into my admiration of him. It's there, and deep, for the same reason I admire JFK, the courage of the two men. With FDR, it's deeper. If you could stand it, read Jonathan Alter's wonderful book about Roosevelt's ascent to the Presidency, "The Defining Moment." Roosevelt's spiritedness and insistence that the Warm Springs resort be what it was, and his personally leading, coaching, and encouraging the other paraplegics, will always make him dear to my heart.
You don't seem to understand that Trump's personality isn't just unfortunate, it does existential damage to the commonweal.
Woodrow Wilson did not have good intentions. He was a Progressive - openly dismissive of the Constitution as an outdate relic, preferring that we be ruled over by bureaucrats / experts in centralized government. If he were around today, he'd be in Davos with Klaus Schwab and crew. Not to mention that it was Wilson who gave us the federal income tax and Federal Reserve banking cartel.
I'm familiar with the sloganeering about FDR "saving capitalism" and such. I'll leave it at we'll have to agree to disagree. FDR was also a Progressive, who continued where Wilson left off, i.e., massively expanding the federal government way in excess of Constitutional limits.
>>You don't seem to understand that Trump's personality isn't just unfortunate, it does existential damage to the commonweal.
You're right - I don't understand that. I find your statement baffling, especially given that at present the White House is occupied by a dementia'd straw man, who's co-opted by the CCP (as are many other officials in D.C. of both parties), who wasn't duly elected but was installed via a stolen election / coup d'etat. That is an existential threat.
Of course, Wilson had good intentions. He was wrong about most things, but didn't think he was.
FDR was the great hustler the nation needed at the time. You simply cannot overestimate the value of hope.
To clarify, I think America has been done for since Roe vs Wade. But our deterioration was leisurely. Most people didn't notice it for decades. Remember the 80s, the optimism of the era? There were, thank God, Christians who saw through the whole thing, but comparatively few. The Devil is very clever. He takes his time.
I think I do overrate the harm which Trump, the infallibly vulgar, does to the country. He, Biden, Kamala et al, are no less than we deserve.
Would it be possible to "save" America? Barring a genuine Christianization of the country, or its tacky Chinese knockoff, a man - on - horseback coup, I doubt it. ( Notice I didn't say "military coup." I imagine you and I are in agreement that it seems that everywhere one turns in American life, from legal education to medical education to basic grammar school education to economic opportunities for the hardworking from modest backgrounds to popular taste in the arts and certainly to the military, everything seems to be going consistently to ****. )