╌>

First in the nation primary

  

Category:  Op/Ed

By:  vic-eldred  •  one month ago  •  172 comments

First in the nation primary
“People just assume Trump's going to win. So we need to kind of keep working on breaking that mindset that it's just inevitable for Trump,” he said. “If we have strong voter turnout against what is effectively the incumbent – that's really what Trump is – that always bodes well for the challenger.”

Link to quote: Nikki Haley and her keys to victory ahead of the New Hampshire primary (usatoday.com)



Tomorrow night the state of New Hampshire will host what traditionally has been the first in the nation primary. It won't be that way for the democrat party since Das leader Joe Biden decided to elevate South Carolina to that status for democrats. The DNC went right along with that move. Some may ask why? It could be that old Joe wants to reward the partisan bloc that saved his candidacy in 2020. It could also be that, as America's bigot, Joy Reid put it: There are too many white Christians. I don't know about Christians, but according to the 2022 census 92.6% of New Hampshire's population is white. Whatever the reason, NH by virtue of its state law will hold the first in the nation primary.


One thing that must be considered for those who may not know, is the unique breakdown of voters in the Granite state:

PARTY REGISTRATION STATISTICS


Registered Voters: 1,000,925

‍Democratic Party: 303,060 (30.28%)

Republican Party: 298,470 (29.82%)

Unaffiliated: 399,395 (39.90%)

Note: There are only two parties officially recognized by the state of New Hampshire, the Republican and Democratic Parties. All other voters are registered "undeclared."

New Hampshire Voter Statistics | Independent Voter Project

Please note that the unaffiliated aka independent voters represent the largest category. If you grew up in New England, you might know that the state of MA became a bit too expensive for its working-class way back in the 80s and many MA residents began to relocate to NH's southern cities. That may best explain the two main categories of "unaffiliated" and democratic party in a state which was once solidly Republican.

Joe Biden thus will not be on the ballot tomorrow night. There is a huge write in campaign working behind the scenes to spare him the indignity of losing to the DNC's ignored candidates Dean Phillips and Marianne Williamson who are on the ballot. The Boston Globe urged all the anti-Trump voters to get out and vote.

Another oddity about NH is that independents are allowed to vote in the GOP Primary and democrats need only switch party affiliation. We saw in 2016 how democrats are never shy about gaming the system.  The deadline for New Hampshire residents to make that change was months ago on Oct. 6.

The departure of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis from the race may hurt Haley, since much of his support came from Populist Republicans. The media is now behind Haley mainly because they don't want Trump to secure the nomination and the monetary support that comes with it too soon. If Haley actually were to become the nominee, the media would turn on her on a dime and we would be hearing about her plan to up the SS eligibility age 24/7.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  author  Vic Eldred    one month ago

Good morning

OIP.cRJadvY06jM8tr373RpZDQHaFj?rs=1&pid=ImgDetMain

Question: Can democrats really rig the NH Primary?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2  author  Vic Eldred    one month ago

This will not be the end for Ron DeSantis.



“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    one month ago

Churchill never said that. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    one month ago
Churchill never said that. 

No actual evidence though it is attributed to him.

Are you sure you'd rather discuss that than the article?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.1    one month ago

The Churchill Society, or whatever it is called, says he never said it. They should know since they examine every word he ever said or wrote. 

As for the New Hampshire primary, who cares ? 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    one month ago
The Churchill Society, or whatever it is called, says he never said it.

There is no question that there is no actual evidence. Nonetheless there are those who attribute it to him.

Success Is Never Final and Failure Never Fatal. It’s Courage That Counts – Quote Investigator®


As for the New Hampshire primary, who cares ? 

I do. I want to clear the decks as soon as possible.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
2.1.4  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    one month ago

Irrelevant and off topic.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.2  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    one month ago
This will not be the end for Ron DeSantis.

He will accept a position if offered by Trump.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @2.2    one month ago

He is also young and in 2028 he can run for the Presidency again. As for him taking a position offered by Trump, I would hope that both men give a lot of thought to grooming a strong candidate to succeed DeSantis as Governor of Florida. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.2.2  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.1    one month ago

In 2028 he might run.   So might strong candidates like Chris Sununu.

As for him taking a position offered by Trump, I would hope that both men give a lot of thought to grooming a strong candidate to succeed DeSantis as Governor of Florida. 

Their concern would be to place a Trump sycophant as the next governor.   It will not be a statesmanlike concern for doing what is best for the people.   

IMO.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.2    one month ago
In 2028 he might run.   So might strong candidates like Chris Sununu.

The GOP has a very strong bench.


Their concern would be to place a Trump sycophant as the next governor.  

No. The idea would be to seed a candidate who could build on DeSantis accomplishments and keep the state moving in the right direction.


It will not be a statesmanlike concern for doing what is best for the people.   

IMO.

A questionable concern coming from those who are ok with an open border, inflation, an EV mandate and two wars going on.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
2.2.4  Greg Jones  replied to  TᵢG @2.2    one month ago

Correct, and he is likely to follow Trump's very productive and restorative presidency.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
2.2.5  Greg Jones  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.2    one month ago

 It will not be a statesmanlike concern for doing what is best for the people.   

It's up to the voters. There is no reason to believe that a Trump sycophant can't be good for the people of Florida.

Another Republican leader like DeSantis would in the best interests of the citizens in Florida.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.2.6  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.2.3    one month ago
The idea would be to seed a candidate who could build on DeSantis accomplishments and keep the state moving in the right direction.

I am saying that Trump+DeSantis would produce a governor loyal to Trump.   Trump would accept nothing less.   You certainly must see this.

A questionable concern coming from those who are ok with an open border, inflation, an EV mandate and two wars going on.

Who is okay with that?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.2.7  TᵢG  replied to  Greg Jones @2.2.5    one month ago
There is no reason to believe that a Trump sycophant can't be good for the people of Florida.

You missed the point.

Trump would seek a loyalist.   Sure the loyalist might be good for the people, but that is not the determining factor.   It would be a happy coincidence.

Another Republican leader like DeSantis would in the best interests of the citizens in Florida.

Now that is indeed up to the voters of FL.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.2.8  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.6    one month ago
Who is okay with that?

Biden voters, even those doing so solely to keep someone else from winning.

If you are voting for someone, it is safe to assume you support much of what they run on.

Biden's record shouldn't garner him any votes from people who can see the disastrous results of his policies.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.2.9  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @2.2.8    one month ago

I am not okay with an open border, inflation, an EV mandate and two wars going on.

I am for EV infrastructure and encouragement, but not a mandate (the market must decide that).  

But I have priorities.   If the next PotUS is Biden or Trump then I will do whatever I can do to stop Trump from being elected.

It is far more important that the PotUS NOT be a traitor who is the only PotUS in our history who attempted to steal a presidential election through fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement by violating the CotUS and the foundation of democracy — the vote of the electorate. 

Policy differences do not justify voting for Trump.   Not even remotely close.   Voting for Trump is irrational, irresponsible, and unpatriotic.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.2.10  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.9    one month ago
I am not okay with an open border, inflation, an EV mandate and two wars going on

An argument that your "inevitable" vote for Traitor Joe tells me something completely different, that you are willing to vote for known failures.

I didn't mention Trump, why are you dragging him in?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.2.11  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @2.2.10    one month ago

When speaking of who will be the next PotUS, it is rather ridiculous for you to whine that I mentioned Trump in my answer.

Clearly you did not read my comment:

I am not okay with an open border, inflation, an EV mandate and two wars going on.

I am for EV infrastructure and encouragement, but not a mandate (the market must decide that).  

But I have priorities.   If the next PotUS is Biden or Trump then I will do whatever I can do to stop Trump from being elected.

It is far more important that the PotUS NOT be a traitor who is the only PotUS in our history who attempted to steal a presidential election through fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement by violating the CotUS and the foundation of democracy — the vote of the electorate. 

Policy differences do not justify voting for Trump.   Not even remotely close.   Voting for Trump is irrational, irresponsible, and unpatriotic.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.2.12  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.11    one month ago
When speaking of who will be the next PotUS, it is rather ridiculous for you to whine that I mentioned Trump in my answer

A difference of opinion is hardly whining, but when its all you have......

Clearly you did not read my comment:

Again with this tripe?!?!? Of course I read your comment and responded to your exact words.

You still are yapping on about Trump and it STILL has absolutely nothing to do with what I wrote.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3  Nerm_L    one month ago

Now there are only two.  That's going to change the narrative.  Nikki Haley is on the ascent so where does that leave the other Republican candidate?  Yes, Trump won Iowa by wide margins but the field is much narrower now.  Now there are only two and that, alone, will shrink the margins.

Meanwhile Joe Biden doesn't even bother.  Is Biden really in it to win it?  Biden has the luxury of prioritizing race baiting politics because he is protected by a rigged Democrat primary system.  No doubt the unbiased liberal press will completely ignore Biden to focus attention on the Trump/Haley contest.  And the narrative of the unbiased liberal press will have to change again when the Republican candidates begin dropping hints about VP picks. 

No, the story in the near future will be whether or not Nikki Haley can build upon momentum.  Unless, of course, Democrats put in the fix and require the unbiased liberal press to focus attention on an unstoppable Trump. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Nerm_L @3    one month ago
No, the story in the near future will be whether or not Nikki Haley can build upon momentum. 

No one who knows politics thinks Haley has the slightest chance, even if she were to pull off NH. (Thats not going to happen, the latest poll from NH has Trump with an 18 point lead, and that is before DeSantis dropped out. Most of the DeSantis voters will go to Trump). 

Haley's insurmountable problem is that there is no more Republican Party, there is the MAGA party, and those who submit to the MAGA party. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    one month ago
there is the MAGA party

And evidently there is a RINO party too. I'll gladly take the former.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    one month ago

But won't Trump have been convicted by then of something?

Haley has a shot as long as people vote FOR her and not just against someone else.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.3  Nerm_L  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    one month ago
No one who knows politics thinks Haley has the slightest chance, even if she were to pull off NH. (Thats not going to happen, the latest poll from NH has Trump with an 18 point lead, and that is before DeSantis dropped out. Most of the DeSantis voters will go to Trump). 

Will they jump to Trump?  Seems like a leap of faith there.  Yes, Trump won Iowa by large margins in a very divided field.  But now there are only two.  Haley will perform better in New Hampshire than Iowa because she is the only alternative.  Haley is on the rise; where does that leave Trump?

Democrats are scared shitless that Nikki Haley could successfully challenge Trump.  That means Biden loses.  And since Biden has no coattails that will influence down ballot races.  Independents would be happier with a Republican Congress led by Nikki Haley than with either Trump or Biden at the helm.

If Democrats get their wish and coronate Trump then the 2024 election will shrink the ranks of both parties.  Keep that in mind, too.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.4  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.3    one month ago
Democrats are scared shitless that Nikki Haley could successfully challenge Trump.

Then the perfectly timed conviction should come when and if Trump wins the nomination, not before.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.5  JohnRussell  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.3    one month ago

There is no path for Haley to win the nomination. Well over half the Republicans believe the 2020 election was stolen from Trump. Very few of those people will vote for Haley if Trump is on the ballot. 

The chance that any of the non Trump candidates had was that Republican voters would be tired of Trump and his pathological lying.  We now see that tiring did not take place. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.5    one month ago
There is no path for Haley to win the nomination.

Of course there is. Don't you understand how elections work?

Look, I get how 'convenient' it must be to lump every Republican together, but I prefer to deal with reality.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.7  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.5    one month ago
Well over half the Republicans believe the 2020 election was stolen from Trump.

Do they think it was fraudulently stolen or rigged by various means like voting rule changes and censorship of valid news stories?


The chance that any of the non Trump candidates had was that Republican voters would be tired of Trump and his pathological lying.

Oh ya, voters should be consumed with the personalities of candidates, not their performances as national leaders.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.8  Nerm_L  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.4    one month ago
Then the perfectly timed conviction should come when and if Trump wins the nomination, not before.

Well, that's obviously Democrats' game plan.  Biden isn't even bothering to show up because he thinks the system has been gamed to rig the election.  Somehow autocratic courts are defending democracy.

Everyone ignores that voters have a reason to choose Nikki Haley other than beating Trump or Biden.  Haley can run on a policy platform; something Trump and Biden cannot do.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.9  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.7    one month ago

Pathological lying is not a personality trait. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.10  Texan1211  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.3    one month ago

I think you hit the nail on the head here.

The constant attention to all things Trump by liberals show how scared they are of anyone other than Trump running against Traitor Joe, because they know how weak Biden's hand is.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.11  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.8    one month ago
Haley can run on a policy platform; something Trump and Biden cannot do.

Explain please.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.12  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.9    one month ago

Tell that to Corn Pop and Nelson Mandela.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.13  Nerm_L  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.5    one month ago
There is no path for Haley to win the nomination. Well over half the Republicans believe the 2020 election was stolen from Trump. Very few of those people will vote for Haley if Trump is on the ballot. 

Trump won Iowa with 51 pct of the vote in a divided field.  It's far too early to coronate Trump. 

The weather in Iowa was really nasty to get people to turn out for a caucus.  The turnout might have been bigger with a ballot primary.  Half of Republican voters dragged their sorry asses out into the miserable cold to support someone other than Trump.  That required more dedication than the unbiased liberal press will credit.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.14  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.3    one month ago
Will they jump to Trump? 

The GOP is a mess.   The herd mentality will shift to the expected winner which is Trump.   This is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I expect no epiphany, no sudden realization of the irrational, irresponsible and unpatriotic factors of supporting Trump over a decent human being who is fit to be PotUS.

While I hope you are correct, there is very little chance of it.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.15  Nerm_L  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.10    one month ago
I think you hit the nail on the head here. The constant attention to all things Trump by liberals show how scared they are of anyone other than Trump running against Traitor Joe, because they know how weak Biden's hand is.

Democrats plan is to coronate Trump and then use indictments and convictions to pull the rug from under Republicans.  The idea is that it would be too late for Republicans to coalesce around an alternative.

But an alternative emerging too soon in the primary race screws up Democrats' plan.  A viable alternative to Trump helps down ballot Republicans.  Since Biden doesn't provide coattails down ballot, Democrats would be at a real disadvantage across all the races.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.16  JohnRussell  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.13    one month ago
Trump won Iowa with 51 pct of the vote in a divided field.  It's far too early to coronate Trump. 

DeSantis and Ramaswamy got close to 30 percent of the vote between them. That vote is not going to Haley. Very little of it will go to Haley. Trump's margins will grow wider. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.17  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.15    one month ago
Democrats plan is to coronate Trump and then use indictments and convictions to pull the rug from under Republicans.

How, exactly, do you imagine that working?    Do you think the GOP would abandon Trump even if he is a convicted felon?

I do not see that happening.   The GOP is currently predictably irrational and all-in for Trump.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.18  Nerm_L  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.11    one month ago
Explain please.

Nikki Haley is a policy wonk that gained experience in the bureaucratic trenches.  Trump can't string three words together into a coherent sentence.  And Biden just panders to whoever is in the audience; Senators aren't policy wonks because they have people for that.

Haley, as a bureaucrat, contributed to formulating policy during the Trump administration.  Even a governor has to be more bureaucrat than politician at times.  Haley can talk policy; something Trump and Biden cannot do because they've never gotten their hands dirty.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.19  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.17    one month ago
Do you think the GOP would abandon Trump even if he is a convicted felon?

This is the poll that helped shape the democrat strategy:

N ew polling from Reuters/Ipsos demonstrates that  Donald Trump's  chances of winning in November drop dramatically if he is convicted, and are even worse if he is serving time in prison.

The poll, which currently has  President Biden  leading Donald Trump by 2 points in a hypothetical head-to-head matchup, surveyed 3,815 registered voters, asking them whether they would vote for Trump in the event of a criminal conviction. The results could not be worse for Trump.

New Polling Shows Americans Fleeing From Trump If He Is Convicted (msn.com)

That's it!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.20  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.18    one month ago

Both Trump and Biden served as President. Their records are clear for all to see.

What needs to be said?

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.21  Nerm_L  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.14    one month ago
The GOP is a mess.   The herd mentality will shift to the expected winner which is Trump.   This is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I expect no epiphany, no sudden realization of the irrational, irresponsible and unpatriotic factors of supporting Trump over a decent human being who is fit to be PotUS.

While I hope you are correct, there is very little chance of it.

Less than a third of the electorate is GOP.  The unbiased liberal press has created a narrative for their own self-serving benefit.  The unbiased liberal press tried that with Clinton and was blindsided by the 2016 election.

Ignoring the electorate doesn't mean the experts understand the election.  2016 really was an inflection point.  The conventional wisdom is no longer conventional.  Polling in big blue islands will skew the results, expectations, and predictions.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.22  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.19    one month ago

Your argument, such as it is, is that Trump should not be indicted for crimes he committed as long as he still wants to run for president. Absurd. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.23  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.19    one month ago
That's it!

Hopefully true.   

If the GOP were collectively rational, they would be running to Nikki Haley right now.  

But no, per the poll, they will continue with their inexplicably stupid support of Trump and then abandon their nominee if convicted.   This leaves the GOP to scramble and end up with a late-in-the-game nominee who will certainly be weakened by the Hail Mary process.

Best the remaining rational elements of the GOP can hope for is a quick conviction which would give Haley a chance to emerge with time to galvanize support as the nominee.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.24  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.21    one month ago
Less than a third of the electorate is GOP. 

Surely you understood that I have been talking about the GOP nomination, not the general election.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.25  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.22    one month ago

democrats made a choice. They chose to do all this during the Presidential campaign.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.26  Texan1211  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.15    one month ago
Democrats plan is to coronate Trump and then use indictments and convictions to pull the rug from under Republicans.  The idea is that it would be too late for Republicans to coalesce around an alternative.

That has been obvious for quite a while now.

The timing is all off if they just wanted to prosecute Trump.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.27  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.25    one month ago

Trump would run for president every day for the rest of his life if it would keep him out of jail.  He announced his candidacy two years before the election. No one does that.  He did it to try and create objection to the indictments, and evidently that worked on his supporters. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.28  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.23    one month ago
they would be running to Nikki Haley right now.  

Why? 

You act like there is no difference between these candidates. What did she say about Social Security? How far apart were Trump and DeSantis on abortion?


But no, per the poll, they will continue with their inexplicably stupid support of Trump and then abandon their nominee if convicted. 

And democrats have bet the house on it.


This leaves the GOP to scramble and end up with a late-in-the-game nominee who will certainly be weakened by the Hail Mary process.

I'm not very optimistic of them winning no matter who the nominee is.


Best the remaining rational elements of the GOP can hope for is a quick conviction which would give Haley a chance to emerge with time to galvanize support as the nominee.

Democrats are not going to allow that. The conviction will not come as long as Haley is in the race. You can take that to the bank.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.29  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.23    one month ago
But no, per the poll, they will continue with their inexplicably stupid support of Trump and then abandon their nominee if convicted.

This is a dubious assumption , imo.  This election is being "both sided" at a very high level. It may well be that at the time when the voting starts a lot of the ordinary conservative voters will be convinced that Trump is no worse than Biden, that they are both criminals. They will then vote for Trump whether he is in prison or in Siberia. 

The real issue is what will the independents do? That may also depend on how all these issues are framed by our ubiquitously misinformative national media. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.30  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.27    one month ago
Trump would run for president every day for the rest of his life if it would keep him out of jail.

That's the backup propaganda for the quick trial that Merrick Garland is calling for. When have we ever heard an AG talk like that. They certainly didn't give speedy trials to the Jan 6th rioters. Many sat in prison for a year before a trial was even in the works. The idea here is obvious. As soon as Trump gets the nomination, we convict him of something. He appeals the verdict, but the appeal is heard after the election. 

That is the game plan.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.31  Nerm_L  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.16    one month ago
DeSantis and Ramaswamy got close to 30 percent of the vote between them. That vote is not going to Haley. Very little of it will go to Haley. Trump's margins will grow wider. 

DeSantis and Ramaswamy pandered to those who did not want Trump by trying to be just like Trump.  Why vote for a cheap knock-off?  If voters preferred an imitation of Trump instead of the real deal then we're supposed to believe they'll jump to Trump?  The unbiased liberal press wants us to believe that but they've been proven wrong about politics too many times over the last 8 years.  Just because the unbiased liberal press says it doesn't make it so.

Yep, Nikki Haley is going to have to change her political message.  Which she is doing.  Haley is shifting toward a message that Trump is no different than Biden.  Nikki Haley is shifting toward a message that she is the only real alternative to both Trump and Biden.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.32  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.28    one month ago
Why? 

(sigh)

Have you noticed that Trump (and not Haley) has been indicted (with merit) for ...

I   .   Trying to steal a presidential election for the first time in USA history by:

  • claiming that he won the election but was cheated due to fraud in the US electoral system?
  • agitating his supporters into falsely thinking their votes were disenfranchised?
  • trying to get officials (e.g.  Raffensperger) to 'find votes' so that he could win states he lost (e.g. Georgia)?
  • trying to get state legislators to override the votes in their states (e.g. Michigan)?
  • trying to get the Speaker of the AZ House (Bowers) to authorize fake electors?
  • organizing fake alternate electors in seven states he lost
  • trying to suborn an unconstitutional act from his own V.P. — to get Pence to table counts of select states he lost to try to win through all other states?
  • encouraging his supporters to fight against the 'fraud' and to protest the count (after months of working them up with lies of a fraudulent election)?
  • tweeting that Pence had let them down in the middle of the insurrection?
  • refusing to take action to stop the insurrection for 3 hours?

II   .   Obstructing the lawful securing of classified documents by   knowingly  and   willingly   :

  • communicating classified contents to an unauthorized source
  • concealing (hiding) classified documents (holding national defense information) to avoid having to return them
  • lying about held classified documents
  • corruptly persuading another person to withhold or hide classified documents rather than return them
  • conspiring to obstruct justice in the return of classified documents

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.33  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.32    one month ago

Thus far two of your "trials" have been discredited. Jack Smith has run into a little snafu with the AG falling all over himself trying to get a speedy trial.

TiG, don't you realize how bad it all looks?

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.34  Nerm_L  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.17    one month ago
How, exactly, do you imagine that working?    Do you think the GOP would abandon Trump even if he is a convicted felon? I do not see that happening.   The GOP is currently predictably irrational and all-in for Trump.

That narrative only works by completely and utterly discounting independent voters.  That's why the unbiased liberal press have the heads shoved up their arses.  The unbiased liberal press would have us believe that independents lean Democrat and Republican so are only extensions of the party base.

Maybe statistics don't lie.  But liars typically rely on statistics.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.35  JohnRussell  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.31    one month ago
DeSantis and Ramaswamy pandered to those who did not want Trump by trying to be just like Trump.  Why vote for a cheap knock-off?  If voters preferred an imitation of Trump instead of the real deal then we're supposed to believe they'll jump to Trump?

Do you believe that Nikki Haley was the second choice among DeSantis and Ramaswamy voters?  

Not a chance. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.36  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.29    one month ago

My comment assumed the poll is true.   That does not mean I think that will happen.   Those who currently support Trump will (at least the vast majority of them) support him no matter what.

If Trump is convicted, the most likely scenario is low turnout by Trump supporters.   But in today's bizarro world, I would not be surprised if his popularity grew within the GOP if indicted.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.37  JohnRussell  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.34    one month ago

There were three "MAGA" candidates in Iowa, Trump , Ramaswamy, and DeSantis. Combined they got 80% of the vote.  Haley doesnt have a prayer. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.38  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.33    one month ago
Thus far two of your "trials" have been discredited. Jack Smith has run into a little snafu with the AG falling all over himself trying to get a speedy trial.

Here is what matters, Vic:

  • The evidence
  • The charges
  • The arguments
  • The verdict

Pay less attention to theatrics and side shows and focus on what matters.   If Trump engaged in criminal acts do you believe he should be held accountable?    If so, then you should support jurisprudence and thus support trials to determine guilt or absence thereof.


Further, cease with the snarky bullshit.   None of these trials are "my" trials.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.39  Nerm_L  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.24    one month ago
Surely you understood that I have been talking about the GOP nomination, not the general election.

26 states hold open primaries.  18 of those states do not require party affiliation to vote in a primary.

It's not just about the GOP.  The GOP is less than a third of the electorate.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.40  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.33    one month ago
TiG, don't you realize how bad it all looks?

Nothing has been discredited. That is MAGA propaganda. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.41  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.40    one month ago
Nothing has been discredited.

Even TiG knows the NYC case is a farce. Meanwhile, Fat Fanni has put the entire GA case in jeopardy.

You evidently don't see that.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.42  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.39    one month ago

The GOP are the primary voters in GOP primaries.    

Hopefully that will not be true in 2024.   I, for example, will be voting in the GOP primary for Haley since I have that option.   Hopefully many of my fellow independents will join me.   I doubt the Ds will do so.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.43  Nerm_L  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.35    one month ago
Do you believe that Nikki Haley was the second choice among DeSantis and Ramaswamy voters?   Not a chance. 

In one friggin' caucus?  Where voters had to risk frostbite to participate in a gab fest?  

There's only two now.  We'll see if those who wanted an alternative will go back to Trump.  Of course, now its up to Haley to convince those voters she is an acceptable alternative.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.44  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.38    one month ago

Here is what matters:

When you have DAs running for office on the platform of "getting Trump" you have what is called a Malicious Prosecution.


Further, cease with the snarky bullshit.   None of these trials are "my" trials.

They represent an evil weaponization of American law.


 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.45  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.41    one month ago
Even TiG knows the NYC case is a farce.

"Even TiG"?   Really, Vic?   

Also, you are putting words in my mouth.   I have never stated that the NYC case is a farce.   I have stated that the case is clearly politically motivated.   But I have also stated that it is incredibly likely that Trump did indeed break NY law by playing fast and loose with his books and his valuations.

There are plenty of people in New York who could be brought up on these same charges.   But Trump is the 800lb Gorilla and, too bad for him, his antics have brought him under the radar.

I believe the NYC case has legal merit.   It is not a farce.   But it was brought to trial based on political motivation of the DA.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.46  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.44    one month ago
When you have DAs running for office on the platform of "getting Trump" you have what is called a Malicious Prosecution.

You keep running to the NYC case.

My focus, and I have told you this repeatedly so clearly you are playing games, is on the actions of Trump while PotUS.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
3.1.47  afrayedknot  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.38    one month ago

“Pay less attention to theatrics and side shows and focus on what matters.“ 

The entirety of the trump phenomenon is but theatre of the absurd. That the wheels of justice move slowly does not a conspiracy make. 

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.48  Nerm_L  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.37    one month ago
There were three "MAGA" candidates in Iowa, Trump , Ramaswamy, and DeSantis. Combined they got 80% of the vote.  Haley doesnt have a prayer. 

Then it might be time for Nikki Haley to define MAGA.  She's a policy wonk.  At the least, Haley should get enough support to fight for a party platform like Bernie Sanders did with Democrats.

Of course, Haley may choose to go a different way.  It's up to her to decide if she's going to lead the Republican Party or not.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.49  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.45    one month ago
I have stated that the case is clearly politically motivated. 

That's right.


 But it was brought to trial based on political motivation of the DA.

AKA : A Malicious Prosecution.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.50  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.41    one month ago

The facts determine the worth of the Georgia case, not some extraneous activity by the prosecutor. There are defendants in the Georgia case that have already pleaded guilty. 

None of the facts, in any of the Trump indictments, are exculpatory for him, his effort is to muddy the waters, delay , and try to get off on technicalities. That is what career criminals do. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.51  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  afrayedknot @3.1.47    one month ago
 But it was brought to trial based on political motivation of the DA.

It is a question of two visions for the country. 

The alternative is the totally corrupt government of the radical left which is now firmly in power.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.52  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.28    one month ago
Democrats are not going to allow that. The conviction will not come as long as Haley is in the race. You can take that to the bank.

Explain your reasoning.

You think that the federal trials will be delayed so that a verdict is not delivered until Haley drops out?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.53  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.50    one month ago

The allegations threaten to undermine public confidence in Willis’s prosecution of Trump. On one side, they have enflamed grievances among those who believe that Trump has been unfairly targeted by partisan prosecutors and courts. On the other, those who want Trump held accountable for his effort to reverse his 2020 defeat are scrambling to protect the case.

Allegations against Georgia prosecutors likely damaged case against Trump - Anchorage Daily News (adn.com)

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.54  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.52    one month ago
You think that the federal trials will be delayed so that a verdict is not delivered until Haley drops out?

Correct.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.55  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.49    one month ago
AKA : A Malicious Prosecution.

The question now is if the case has merit.

I see merit in the case.   Do you believe that Trump did not act as charged?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.56  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.53    one month ago

Did the allegations against the Georgia prosecutor damage the facts in the case against Trump? 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.57  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.54    one month ago

Good grief Vic.   Stop with these conspiracy theories.

The Jack Smith cases will proceed according to jurisprudence.   The timing of the verdict will be based on the mechanics of the judicial process.   If the verdict appears before Haley drops out or after (assuming she drops out), that will be a function of the judicial system, and not a function of Haley.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.58  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.55    one month ago

You will never get a straight answer. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.59  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.55    one month ago
The question now is if the case has merit.

No, it isn't. All the trials are being held in highly partisan precincts: NYC, DC and Fulton County GA.  In any one of those places one can convict Trump of anything. The merits of the case would come with the appeal and that won't come until after the election.


Do you believe that Trump did not act as charged?

I'm not interested.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.60  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.58    one month ago

You nailed that one.

Vic's answer is:

Vic@3.1.59I'm not interested.
 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.61  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.57    one month ago

Haley will drop out as soon as she is convinced she doesnt have a chance. That could happen within days, but she may try and stick it out and see how much South Carolina loves her. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.62  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.59    one month ago
All the trials are being held in highly partisan precincts ...

If the case has merit, it does not matter where it is adjudicated.

In other words, if Trump is guilty as charged, he should be found guilty as charged.

If Trump is not guilty, then the location would matter.   A very Trump oriented location would find him not guilty and an anti-Trump location might find him guilty.

Apparently you believe the charges are without merit.   

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.63  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.57    one month ago
Stop with these conspiracy theories.

Did the GA prosecution meet with Joe Biden?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.64  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.61    one month ago

Hopefully you are wrong.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.65  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.60    one month ago

That's what happens when people do dirty things. They play with election rules, censor real news stories and weaponize the law and that is what happens. We want to take it all down.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.66  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.62    one month ago
Apparently you believe the charges are without merit.   

No, I'm saying the whole process was politicized and therefore I'm nullifying it.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.67  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.62    one month ago

We are dealing with a large group of people who religiously follow far right media. In other words, they are addicted to believing blatant lies. In any objective sense America is in big trouble, but we will always have both sidesers to normalize all this. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.68  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.67    one month ago
America is in big trouble,

Since 2020!

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.69  Nerm_L  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.42    one month ago
The GOP are the primary voters in GOP primaries.     Hopefully that will not be true in 2024.   I, for example, will be voting in the GOP primary for Haley since I have that option.   Hopefully many of my fellow independents will join me.   I doubt the Ds will do so.

Aren't the polls showing that close to half of Republicans (base and lean) want an alternative to Trump?  The Iowa results were too small to say anything definitive but still supports the idea that Republicans are seriously divided over supporting Trump.

There were four candidates vying to be the alternative to Trump.  Now there is only one challenger; the other three have dropped out.  Nikki Haley, as the only alternative to Trump, will get a rise from that.  But it is up to Haley to take advantage of that momentum.

Nikki Haley has to commit to leading the Republican Party.  She can't be wishy washy about it.  It will require a little time for Haley to adjust but she better be ready by super Tuesday.  Of course, Haley might decide she doesn't want to do that.  IMO that would be a missed opportunity but Haley may not want to carry that burden.  It's her choice; only she can make that choice.

I said it months ago, the 2024 election is Nikki Haley's to win or lose.  Haley is in a position to become the replacement for Ronald Reagan in the Republican Party.  IMO Nikki Haley could accomplish that if she wants it.  Haley may not want to carry that burden; that's understandable, too.    

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.70  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.63    one month ago

That is what a conspiracy theory is:  connecting dots that are miles away from each other.

When people allow themselves to make such leaps, they can believe anything.

Biden is not running the GA prosecution.   Biden is not running the Smith prosecutions.

The indictments are clear.   The evidence is clear.   The trial will proceed with both sides making their arguments.   The juries will decide.

Biden is not micro-managing the trials.   ( Seriously, Vic, do you actually believe that Biden is so clever, so skilled as to be directing these judicial processes without being caught?   Do you actually believe Trump's rhetoric? )

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.71  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.69    one month ago
Aren't the polls showing that close to half of Republicans (base and lean) want an alternative to Trump? 

The polls are showing Trump with a commanding lead.   What does that mean to you?

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.72  Nerm_L  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.71    one month ago
The polls are showing Trump with a commanding lead.   What does that mean to you?

That means the polls are out of date.  The polls didn't account for a single challenger to Trump, did they?  Public opinion will shift now that conditions have changed.

We'll have to wait for super Tuesday to get a clearer picture.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.73  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.70    one month ago
connecting dots that are miles away from each other.

But they are not miles away:

T he Fulton County prosecutor, who District Attorney Fani Willis allegedly had an "improper"  romantic relationship  with, met with the Biden White House twice last year as he worked to investigate former President Trump's alleged election interference, according to court documents.

Fulton County prosecutor, Fani Willis romantic partner, met with Biden White House twice before charging Trump (msn.com)

That is a glaring ethical problem.


Biden is not running the GA prosecution.   Biden is not running the Smith prosecutions.

You mean he shouldn't be. Biden has called for these prosecutions:

"President Joe Biden privately said that former President Donald Trump should be prosecuted over the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol,  The New York Times  reported on Saturday. 

In addition, the president described Trump as a "threat to democracy," according to two individuals with knowledge of the conversation who spoke with the newspaper.

The Times said that their report was based on interviews with more than a dozen people, "including officials in the Biden administration and people with knowledge of the president's thinking." All requested anonymity to speak freely, the paper said. 

Biden has reportedly grown frustrated with US Attorney General Merrick Garland, who is investigating the riot, according to people close to the president. The president has described Garland as a "ponderous judge" and said he wants to see him take more "decisive action" regarding the Capitol siege, according to The Times."

Biden Believes Trump Should Be Prosecuted for Jan. 6 Riot: NYT (businessinsider.com)


( Seriously, Vic, do you actually believe that Biden is so clever, so skilled as to be directing these judicial processes without being caught? 

Biden's handlers are very clever. The media is with him all the way.

His AG is obvious.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.74  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.72    one month ago
That means the polls are out of date. 

Again, Nerm, I very much hope you are correct.   I do not see it.   But I do hope it is the case.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.75  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.73    one month ago
But they are not miles away:

That is the problem, you do not realize that those dots are miles apart.

Biden has called for these prosecutions:

Calling for following the rule of law is substantially different from micro-managing the judicial process.

Biden's handlers are very clever. The media is with him all the way.

Well then Biden should win in a landslide.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
3.1.76  Greg Jones  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.14    one month ago
"I expect no epiphany, no sudden realization of the irrational, irresponsible and unpatriotic factors of supporting Trump over a decent human being who is fit to be PotUS."

Biden is anything but a decent and fit human being.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
3.1.77  afrayedknot  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.59    one month ago

“I'm not interested.”

For not being interested, there is a lot of constant, confusing, convoluted conspiracy mongering being spewed. 

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.78  Nerm_L  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.74    one month ago
Again, Nerm, I very much hope you are correct.   I do not see it.   But I do hope it is the case.

Didn't anyone pay attention in 2016?  Hillary had the election locked.  So, what happened?

Trust in the unbiased liberal press is misplaced.  The unbiased liberal press hasn't a clue and are making it up as they go.  According to the unbiased liberal press, Trump should be in prison by now.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.79  JohnRussell  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.69    one month ago
  Now there is only one challenger; the other three have dropped out.  Nikki Haley, as the only alternative to Trump, will get a rise from that.

You greatly underestimate the dysfunction of the Republican electorate. DeSantis and Ramaswamy are MAGA all the way. The great bulk of their support will go to Trump. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.80  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.78    one month ago
Didn't anyone pay attention in 2016?  Hillary had the election locked.  So, what happened?

You can start making such comparisons when Trump's overall lead over Haley is in single digits.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
3.1.81  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.9    one month ago

"Pathological lying is not a personality trait." 

It does seem to large part of Biden's personality, however.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.82  TᵢG  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.76    one month ago
Biden is anything but a decent and fit human being.

I was speaking of Haley.    Hello?

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.83  Nerm_L  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.79    one month ago
You greatly underestimate the dysfunction of the Republican electorate. DeSantis and Ramaswamy are MAGA all the way. The great bulk of their support will go to Trump. 

What is MAGA?  So far Biden has been doing more to define MAGA than any Republican.  The Freedom Caucus latched onto MAGA only because the TEA Party nonsense is dead.  Small government isn't the overriding priority for most Republicans any longer.  The demands to stop illegal immigration isn't a small government solution.  The national sovereignty rhetoric hasn't been about small government, either. 

(Like it or not, Trump finally allowed Reagan to die in the Republican Party.  Reagan can't hold the center any longer.  And Clinton can't hold the center any longer, either.  The political landscape has changed dramatically.)

What happens if someone turns MAGA into a real policy doctrine instead of just pander points?  What happens if the Republican Party actually adopts a platform that defines MAGA?

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
3.1.84  Greg Jones  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.82    one month ago

I wasn't replying to you.   Hello?

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.85  Nerm_L  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.80    one month ago
You can start making such comparisons when Trump's overall lead over Haley is in single digits.

IMO we could see that happen on super Tuesday.  Haley has until Mar. 5th to decide how badly she wants to win.

Haven't you noticed that Haley has been more directly engaging Trump now that she is the only alternative?  The fight hasn't even started yet.  And Haley can be a fighter when she wants to be.  The unknown at this point is whether or not Haley is willing to fight.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.86  TᵢG  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.84    one month ago

Greg (and Just Jim), there is a point where one needs to stop denying cold hard fact:

TiG @3.1.14 I expect no epiphany, no sudden realization of the irrational, irresponsible and unpatriotic factors of supporting Trump over a decent human being who is fit to be PotUS.

You quoted this in your reply to my 3.1.14 here:

Greg @3.1.76  
"I expect no epiphany, no sudden realization of the irrational, irresponsible and unpatriotic factors of supporting Trump over a decent human being who is fit to be PotUS."
Biden is anything but a decent and fit human being.

I then replied to you noting that I was speaking of Haley, not Biden:

TiG @3.1.82 I was speaking of Haley.    Hello?

See?   Follow the chain.   The system shows exactly who you replied to:

3.1.76    Greg Jones    replied to    TᵢG   @ 3.1.14    

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.87  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.44    one month ago

Not true.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.88  Tessylo  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.45    one month ago

There is no doubt whatsoever that the former 'president' played fast and loose with his books and his valuations.  That's the truth.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.89  Tessylo  replied to  afrayedknot @3.1.77    one month ago

"I'm not interested."

in the truth, facts, or reality

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.90  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.51    one month ago

Projection

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.91  Tessylo  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.71    one month ago

The former 'president' is now continuing his claims seeking immunity while comparing himself with rogue cops and pedophile priests - another confession?  

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.92  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.85    one month ago
The unknown at this point is whether or not Haley is willing to fight.

I think she is willing to fight.   That is not the big question for me.   The big question is how much rational thought is left in the GOP electorate.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Quiet
3.1.93  Jasper2529  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.63    one month ago
Did the GA prosecution meet with Joe Biden?

Fani's and Nathan's bank records and expense reports show evidence that they both flew to Washington, DC using taxpayer money and met with Biden White House officials in 2022. Hmmm ...  I wonder why.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.94  Texan1211  replied to  Jasper2529 @3.1.93    one month ago
Hmmm ...  I wonder why

Coordination of timelines?

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.95  Nerm_L  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.92    one month ago
I think she is willing to fight.   That is not the big question for me.   The big question is how much rational thought is left in the GOP electorate.

Well, you may be right.  I still believe that ignoring independents is a big mistake.  Nikki Haley will have broader appeal than Trump or Biden.  IMO Haley has broader appeal than DeSantis, Ramaswamy, or Christie.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
3.1.96  Greg Jones  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.86    one month ago

I was replying to John's comment. End of debate.

Please stop the childish taunting.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.97  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.95    one month ago
I still believe that ignoring independents is a big mistake. 

Ignoring independents would be a big mistake.   I do not think she is doing that.   I do not feel ignored.   She, importantly, is not an irrational nutcase who dismisses climate change as a hoax.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.98  TᵢG  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.96    one month ago
I was replying to John's comment.

If you want to reply to John then actually reply to his comment rather than reply to my comment.

When you reply to my comment and even include a quote from my comment, you are replying to me.   

This is as basic as it gets.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Expert
3.1.99  Nerm_L  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.97    one month ago
Ignoring independents would be a big mistake.   I do not think she is doing that.   I do not feel ignored.   She, importantly, is not an irrational nutcase who dismisses climate change as a hoax.

I agree, Nikki Haley has not been ignoring independents.  IMO that's one of the reasons she has been chastised for not going after Trump.  Independents want an alternative; they're less motivated by payback.  Payback only provides red meat for the loyal party base of both parties.  Neither Biden or Trump can toss red meat to independents.  Biden and Trump may try to fearmonger independents but that's less appealing than a candidate that offers policy proposals.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.100  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.96    one month ago

TiG isn't the one doing 'the childish taunting'

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.101  TᵢG  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.99    one month ago

Yes, and I think independents in 2024 are mostly driven to have a rational candidate.   It would be nice to have a PotUS who is in the prime of life, with experience, stable, etc.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.102  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jasper2529 @3.1.93    one month ago

They want us to ignore all the dirty deeds and just focus on the charges that the same people have cooked up.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.103  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.75    one month ago
Well then Biden should win in a landslide.

He had all that and more in 2020 and he just barely won.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.104  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  afrayedknot @3.1.77    one month ago

Fraudulent FISA warrant applications are not conspiracy theories.

Violation of Americans civil liberties is not a conspiracy theory.

A plethora of baseless investigations is not a conspiracy theory.

A 3-year hoax in which the media was complicit is not a conspiracy theory.

Changing voting rules was not a conspiracy theory.

Two faux impeachments is not a conspiracy theory.

Censoring news stories is not a conspiracy theory.


So, now you want us to consider the merits of cases brought by the same partisan democrats?

NOT INTERESTED!

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.105  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.103    one month ago
He had all that and more in 2020 and he just barely won.

Well if the US electorate is sensible, whoever runs against Trump should win easily.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.106  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.104    one month ago
So, now you want us to consider the merits of cases brought by the same partisan democrats?

See, Vic, the merits of the case make it entirely irrelevant who brought the charges.   If there is strong, substantial evidence that leads to Trump being found guilty as charged, do you really want to suspend the rule of law because of political factors?

The whole idea of merit is that it transcends partisan politics.   If Trump really is guilty then the merits of the case, adjudicated in a fair trial, will end in a guilty verdict.   If not, there will be a not-guilty verdict.   Regardless of the political affiliation of those who brought the charges.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.107  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.106    one month ago
See, Vic, the merits of the case make it entirely irrelevant who brought the charges. 

No, TiG. They can't lie and cheat and then be taken seriously.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.108  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.105    one month ago
whoever runs against Trump should win easily.

It could have been a competitive primary, but a strange thing happened that changed all of that. That first sketchy indictment unleashed something that I doubt anyone can stop.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
3.1.109  JBB  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.108    one month ago

Nope, nobody can stop Trump from being convicted, sentenced and imprisoned now.

Nobody can stop the gop nominating him...

Nobody can stop the voters whooping him!

It is cute though you think he has a chance.

original

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.110  JohnRussell  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.83    one month ago
The Freedom Caucus latched onto MAGA only because the TEA Party nonsense is dead. 

More preposterous denial. 

MAGA (Make America Great Again) was brought to the table by Donald Trump in 2015 as his campaign slogan and merchandising branding. The acronym was popularized not by the Freedom Caucus, but by the legions of trump cultists for the past 8 1/2 years. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.111  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @3.1.109    one month ago
Nope, nobody can stop Trump from being convicted

As opposed to a democratic election.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.112  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.110    one month ago
The acronym was popularized not by the Freedom Caucus

No. It was popularized by Bill Clinton.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1.113  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.110    one month ago
The acronym was popularized not by the Freedom Caucus, but by the legions of trump cultists for the past 8 1/2 years. 

Wrong.  

It was first used and popularized by Reagan in the 80’s.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.114  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.107    one month ago
No, TiG. They can't lie and cheat and then be taken seriously.

If someone has committed a crime and is brought to justice and found guilty as charged based on the evidence, arguments, and sound jurisprudence then that is proper justice.

If there is extraordinary bias that prevents the attorneys, judge, jury from fairly performing their roles then that is an out for the defendant.   But this requires a strong case be made that the agents recuse themselves (or a case made during appeal).    To wit, the bias must be shown to disrupt proper justice.

Although not admirable, normal preconceived bias of the prosecutor, et.al. is typically irrelevant — what matters is the case itself.   That is why I told you early on that no matter the partisan bias, a formal, legal case must be made which convinces the jury of the defendant's guilt.

If Trump is actually guilty, then he should be fairly held accountable.   Do you disagree?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.115  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.108    one month ago

Blaming the Ds for the wholesale failure of the GOP to nominate a decent human being rather than a demonstrable traitor is not going to fly.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
3.1.116  afrayedknot  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.115    one month ago

“…the wholesale failure of the GOP…”

’tis telling that the presumptive nominee is consistently, intentionally, and inexplicably excused from every standard that any candidate should be held to account. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.117  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.115    one month ago

Neither is your ignoring Joe Biden's corruption and the weaponization of the law.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.1.118  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.117    one month ago

a delusional comment...

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.119  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.107    one month ago

No, you can't.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.120  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @3.1.109    one month ago

GEiR4fqbcAAV0C8?format=jpg&name=small

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1.121  Sparty On  replied to  devangelical @3.1.118    one month ago

100% denial ….. nice!

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.122  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.117    one month ago

Your belief that Biden is weaponizing the DoJ is simply that.   You have no supporting credible evidence.   It is all conjecture based, no doubt, on distorted partisan reasoning.  IMO.

Biden's corruption remains to be seen.   And I am not talking about the normal crap that we see in Congress, I am talking about what the GOP is trying to charge him with.   If Biden took money from foreign nationals in return for political favors then I will deem him corrupt.  But that has to be demonstrated with clear and convincing evidence.   It has yet to show up.

In contrast, blaming the Ds for the wholesale failure of the GOP to nominate a decent human being rather than a demonstrable traitor is clear bullshit.   The GOP has the power to nominate Haley.   If they fail to do so, it is on them.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.123  TᵢG  replied to  devangelical @3.1.118    one month ago

It was a Hail Mary.  

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Quiet
3.1.124  Jasper2529  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.102    one month ago

Re: the trip(s) to DC - records show that the discussion(s) with the WH were also about Jan 6. Hmmm again.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.1.125  devangelical  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.123    one month ago

that only works on sundays, sometimes...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.126  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.122    one month ago
You have no supporting credible evidence.

That is the most disingenuous statement I've ever heard on here.


Are you able to contest any of this:

The contracting of old Twitter to suppress the news by representatives of the FBI, and the admitted lying under oath of its interim director Andrew McCabe, or the “amnesia” on 245 occasions of James Comey while under oath, as well as the bureau’s current fixation with parents at school board meetings, traditional Catholics and pro-life activists?

How about our "so-called" intelligence officials who were knee-deep in the fraud of “51 former intelligence authorities" who willingly lied, via the urging of the current secretary of state, about a laptop in order to influence a presidential debate and election?

Or the entire collusion hoax that was hatched by the Clinton campaign, with help from the FBI, DOJ, and CIA and the media?

What about the two top intelligence officials who lied admittedly under oath, Brennan and Clapper?

Or the DOJ that was ready to exempt, save a brave dissenting judge, Hunter Biden and by extension the Biden family from legal jeopardy.


Do you deny that?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.127  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jasper2529 @3.1.124    one month ago
records show that the discussion(s) with the WH were also about Jan 6. Hmmm again.

You know they'll just say, "there is no evidence!"

 
 
 
Gazoo
Junior Silent
3.1.128  Gazoo  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.127    one month ago

Maybe they had a nice chat about golf and grandkids, like bill clinton and attorney general loretta lynch had on a tarmac in phoenix while hillary was being investigated for her handling of classified emails?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.129  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Gazoo @3.1.128    one month ago

It is so easy for them to tell a story like that and never get questioned.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.130  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.126    one month ago
That is the most disingenuous statement I've ever heard on here.

And you start with over-the-top hyperbole.   Always a fine sign of what is coming.

Where, specifically, is the evidence for your claim that Biden is weaponizing the DoJ?:

  • The contracting of old Twitter to suppress the news by representatives of the FBI is mere allegation, not evidence.
  • McCabe and Comey were not in the FBI under Biden.
  • The 51 former agents affair was under the Trump administration.
  • The collusion hoax that was hatched by the Clinton campaign was ... surprise ... hatched by the Clinton campaign (Biden was not PotUS).
  • Brennan and Clapper claims took place when Trump was PotUS.
  • The Hunter Biden deal would be at best showing favoritism;  that is not weaponizing.

As usual, Vic, you makes these wild claims and then produce, as 'evidence', events that are at best indirectly related.

Do you get your 'news' from Tucker Carlson?

What strange meaning do you ascribe to the phrase "weaponizing the DoJ"?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.131  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.130    one month ago
Do you get your 'news' from Tucker Carlson?

or worse. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.132  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.126    one month ago

There was no collusion hoax. Russia interfered with the 2016 American election, and the Trump campaign welcomed the interference. 

According to a  report  issued by high-ranking American intelligence officials in January of 2017, Russian operatives reporting to Putin interfered in the 2016 presidential election in favor of Trump  1 The report was drafted and compiled by the CIA, the FBI, and the National Security Agency  1 The Senate panel also found that the Trump campaign’s interactions with Russian intelligence services during the 2016 presidential election posed a “grave” counterintelligence threat  2 .
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump campaign’s interactions with Russian intelligence services during the 2016 presidential election posed a “grave” counterintelligence threat, a Senate panel concluded Tuesday as it detailed how associates of Donald Trump had regular contact with Russians and expected to benefit from the Kremlin’s help.

The nearly 1,000-page report, the fifth and final one from the Republican-led Senate intelligence committee on the Russia investigation, details how Russia launched an aggressive effort to interfere in the election on Trump’s behalf. It says the Trump campaign chairman had regular contact with a Russian intelligence officer and says other Trump associates were eager to exploit the Kremlin’s aid, particularly by maximizing the impact of the disclosure of Democratic emails hacked by Russian intelligence officers.

Senate panel finds Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. election | PBS NewsHour

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1.133  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.132    one month ago

That’s not collusion.  

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1.134  Sparty On  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.126    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.135  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.130    one month ago

In other words, you are only saying that Biden wasn't involved?

At least we managed to get someone to acknowledge that these "events" took place.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1.136  Sparty On  replied to  Sparty On @3.1.134    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.137  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.135    one month ago
In other words, you are only saying that Biden wasn't involved?

I am saying that you have again failed to back up your claim.   It is always possible that Biden is involved.   But unlike you, I follow the evidence to where it leads rather than try to assemble 'evidence' to support a partisan belief.

And I am not going to acknowledge anything since you have demonstrated that you take agreement from me and exaggerate same.

Operate with specifics when dealing with me.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Quiet
3.1.138  Jasper2529  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.127    one month ago
You know they'll just say, "there is no evidence!"

Except for the fact that dumbasses Willis and Wade never completely expunged evidence of their billing paper trail:

This link shows the billing evidence to the White House:

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.139  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.137    one month ago

We will get nowhere unless we have a set of agreed upon facts.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.140  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jasper2529 @3.1.138    one month ago

Yup that is called evidence.

There are those who are still waiting for the "facts" to come in.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.141  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.139    one month ago

It would help if you based your hypotheses on facts (or at least persuasive evidence) and then toned down the extrapolation.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1.142  Sparty On  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.139    one month ago

Here, “facts” are what people tell you they are.

”Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please”

- Mark Twain

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.143  TᵢG  replied to  Sparty On @3.1.142    one month ago

Facts are based on evidence and reason.   That is how we approximate truth.   Quality, persuasive evidence and sound reasoning.

Facts are not determined by connecting distant dots and drawing a conspiratorial conclusion.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1.144  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.143    one month ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
4  Greg Jones    one month ago

The New York case is questionable. Most real estate developers and investors fudge their asset valuations to be more than they are worth. It's an accepted and legal practice in the negotiating loans. Experts in finance have attested to this....look it up.

The long these partisan circuses continue into the campaign season, it's going to reach critical mass and be considered to be election interference.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @4    one month ago

Trump has already been found "guilty" . They are just deciding on the penalty, so i guess it's not "legal". 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
4.1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1    one month ago

It'll be overturned on appeal.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @4.1.1    one month ago

No, it won't.  It's just a matter of deciding how much the former 'president' alleged billionaire has to pay in damages.

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
4.1.3  evilone  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.2    one month ago
It's just a matter of deciding how much the former 'president' alleged billionaire has to pay in damages.

Several things including the executive fraud ruling are under appeal. There is no reason to believe any of it will be overruled though. The initial ruling on damages hasn't been released yet. That is expected within the next several business days.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.1.4  TᵢG  replied to  Greg Jones @4.1.1    one month ago

On what grounds?

 
 

Who is online

Right Down the Center
Jasper2529
Outis


32 visitors