Trump 2024?

[canadyjd]

Not at all. For the most part Trump's platform was simply the Republican platform.

That said, it is true that Trump assistance in the 2024 election has a chance to backfire. It did with the 2022 midterm election. The DNC was not the only reason there was no "red wave".

The GOP would do well to keep Trumps platform as over 75% of Republicans like the platform. But with only a 33% approval rate among Republicans, Trump would be a very poor choice.

We are still over a year away from primaries. The GOP shouldn’t be putting their thumbs on the scale at all. Let Trump attempt to capture the imagination of the country again. If he does, then I’ll vote for him. If he doesn’t, at least he had a fair shake to make his case.

That goes for everyone that may run.

peace to you

 

[JonC]

We are still over a year away from primaries. The GOP shouldn’t be putting their thumbs on the scale at all. Let Trump attempt to capture the imagination of the country again. If he does, then I’ll vote for him. If he doesn’t, at least he had a fair shake to make his case.

That goes for everyone that may run.

peace to you

I agree to an extent. The problem is I do not see Trump moving away from 2020. Until he does that he cannot be relevant.

Now is the time for the GOP to be developing potential nominees.

The DNC is in a position where the unemployment rate is lower than it has been since Clinton. This means inflation will rise, but interest rates are combating that.

If all the GOP has to talk about is the 2020 election and inflation they are toast.

Politics is a game. Putting forth a candidate who would be 82 years old at the end of his term is bad enough. Focusing on the past would be suicide.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Not at all. For the most part Trump's platform was simply the Republican platform. …

Then that would be most problematic. The Reps* had been at best lackluster in pushing for any of the things Trump went after and achieved, much of it without them.

Others vying for the nomination were weak me-toos or worse. And when the Reps had the chance, they did as usual and held back, e.g., leaving our country with no protection.

The Reps were losers before Trump and preferred being losers to having Trump. Without Trump they will most likely remain losers. Assuming they even have the desire, which appears absent (which may explain the lack of charisma), they still lack the fortitude—big league.


* The term Rep and Dem in my posts almost always, if not always, refers to officeholders or other powerful political influencers, not rank and file registrants, who have little influence.

 

[JonC]

Then that would be most problematic. The Reps* had been at best lackluster in pushing for any of the things Trump went after and achieved, much of it without them.

Others vying for the nomination were weak me-toos or worse. And when the Reps had the chance, they did as usual and held back, e.g., leaving our country with no protection.

The Reps were losers before Trump and preferred being losers to having Trump. Without Trump they will most likely remain losers. Assuming they even have the desire, which appears absent (which may explain the lack of charisma), they still lack the fortitude—big league.


* The term Rep and Dem in my posts almost always, if not always, refers to officeholders or other powerful political influencers, not rank and file registrants, who have little influence.

The way I see it, like it or not, Trump was the GOP candidate. His platform was the GOP platform just as Biden's platform is the DNC platform.

I am not saying that Trump brought nothing to the table(quite the opposite, in fact).

I wouldn't mind seeing a non-politician president again (this would, obviously, exclude Trump now).

I personally like DeSantis.

My point is that Trump has become toxic for the GOP. Some of that is not deserved and based on DNC lies. Some of that is deserved. But a liability - even if unjustly so - is still a liability.

 

[just-want-peace]

JonC sez: "--My point is that Trump has become toxic for the GOP. Some of that is not deserved and based on DNC lies. Some of that is deserved. But a liability - even if unjustly so - is still a liability."

Unfortunately, I agree with the above! However much of that "toxicity" is simply that way too many are still clinging to all the media has said about him in the past; and in particular the distortion of his quotes about the '20 election.
Read the quote without the bias creeping in - as much as possible - and you can see what he is saying. Not worded very well I admit, but who among us has not had to explain what we said for more clarity. and who better than the media, to take a messy quote & run with a distortion that fits their agenda rather than asking for a fuller explanation!?
Now there are a few on this board that I would expect to grab this distortion and run with it, but those same posters are obvious for their TDS; the rest of you need to sit back and analyze the ACTUAL content of the quote and just try to see if you can possibly see another interpretation other than "DISMANTLING THE CONSTITUTION"
As far as his relation with the party, well, there are (seems so anyway) way too many dems in rep clothing for him NOT to be despised by quite a few Rs. After all he upset them as well!
I frankly believe that God is setting us up for a severe chastising, & for that reason He will allow the dems to regain control in '24 & complete their destruction of the once great USA!! Que sera, sera!!

 

[JonC]

JonC sez: "--My point is that Trump has become toxic for the GOP. Some of that is not deserved and based on DNC lies. Some of that is deserved. But a liability - even if unjustly so - is still a liability."

Unfortunately, I agree with the above! However much of that "toxicity" is simply that way too many are still clinging to all the media has said about him in the past; and in particular the distortion of his quotes about the '20 election.
Read the quote without the bias creeping in - as much as possible - and you can see what he is saying. Not worded very well I admit, but who among us has not had to explain what we said for more clarity. and who better than the media, to take a messy quote & run with a distortion that fits their agenda rather than asking for a fuller explanation!?
Now there are a few on this board that I would expect to grab this distortion and run with it, but those same posters are obvious for their TDS; the rest of you need to sit back and analyze the ACTUAL content of the quote and just try to see if you can possibly see another interpretation other than "DISMANTLING THE CONSTITUTION"
As far as his relation with the party, well, there are (seems so anyway) way too many dems in rep clothing for him NOT to be despised by quite a few Rs. After all he upset them as well!
I frankly believe that God is setting us up for a severe chastising, & for that reason He will allow the dems to regain control in '24 & complete their destruction of the once great USA!! Que sera, sera!!

Part of the problem is also Trump supporters that cannot move on from Trump to a viable candidate.

As far as Trumps comments go, the context dictates only one interpretation (two options - install Trump as President or hold a new election for 2020).

If we remove the statement from the context the yes, we could wring another interpretation out of his statement. But I am not sure it would be an honest interpretation.

The only way to install Trump as POTUS or hold a new election for 2020 is to terminate parts of the US Constitution.

I'm not saying Trump is a bad guy. He was my favorite President.

I am saying that he is not fit to be the 2024 candidate. Part of this is my personal opinion that 78 years old is too old to enter the office. Part is lies told by the DNC that has affected his capacity to unify. Part is Trump himself.

 

[just-want-peace]

Part of the problem is also Trump supporters that cannot move on from Trump to a viable candidate.

As far as Trumps comments go, the context dictates only one interpretation (two options - install Trump as President or hold a new election for 2020).

If we remove the statement from the context the yes, we could wring another interpretation out of his statement. But I am not sure it would be an honest interpretation.

The only way to install Trump as POTUS or hold a new election for 2020 is to terminate parts of the US Constitution.

I'm not saying Trump is a bad guy. He was my favorite President.

I am saying that he is not fit to be the 2024 candidate. Part of this is my personal opinion that 78 years old is too old to enter the office. Part is lies told by the DNC that has affected his capacity to unify. Part is Trump himself.

Go back and re-read (slowly & carefully) my post and THEN make your reply.
Your answer tells me that either you did not read what I wrote, OR you are purposefully answering points never made.
You have done this with several of my posts, and I have noticed the same in other's posts in past!

Now I know it would be traumatic for you CryJK) but if I can't get straight answers from you, you will go on my ignore list!!

 

[JonC]

Go back and re-read (slowly & carefully) my post and THEN make your reply.
Your answer tells me that either you did not read what I wrote, OR you are purposefully answering points never made.
You have done this with several of my posts, and I have noticed the same in other's posts in past!

Now I know it would be traumatic for you CryJK) but if I can't get straight answers from you, you will go on my ignore list!!

A few points.

First, I don't care if you put me on your ignore list.

Second, I did read your post. I also do not like how the media spins things. But I have not seen how the media spins this one.

I am criticizing Trump solely for his statement.

Third. I addressed your post but made points of my own. You did the same. We make our own posts and points.

 

[just-want-peace]

Well, well, well!! Seems “STAFF MEMBERS MAY NOT BE IGNORED”

So, Rev Bob/Squire/Salty/Whoever, would you please delete me from the BB membership roll, or advise steps to do so!? Thank you!!!!

 

[canadyjd]

Well, well, well!! Seems “STAFF MEMBERS MAY NOT BE IGNORED”

So, Rev Bob/Squire/Salty/Whoever, would you please delete me from the BB membership roll, or advise steps to do so!? Thank you!!!!

You can do what you think is best, but I’d rather you reconsider.

peace to you

 

[Bible Thumpin n Gun Totin]

The way I see it, like it or not, Trump was the GOP candidate. His platform was the GOP platform just as Biden's platform is the DNC platform.

I am not saying that Trump brought nothing to the table(quite the opposite, in fact).

I wouldn't mind seeing a non-politician president again (this would, obviously, exclude Trump now).

I personally like DeSantis.

My point is that Trump has become toxic for the GOP. Some of that is not deserved and based on DNC lies. Some of that is deserved. But a liability - even if unjustly so - is still a liability.

I'd like to see a bigger focus on preserving the American family in the GOP's agenda. Expansion of the child tax credit, tax incentives so that one parent can stay home with the child, restructured single family home benefits, tax structure favoring main street over wall street and deregulation of small businesses.

Big Business has made its bed with the kooky wokesters, let them lie in it. I wouldn't mind if the corporate tax rate was back as high as it was in the 1950s.

 

[JonC]

Well, well, well!! Seems “STAFF MEMBERS MAY NOT BE IGNORED”

So, Rev Bob/Squire/Salty/Whoever, would you please delete me from the BB membership roll, or advise steps to do so!? Thank you!!!!

Why? Because I read your post and disagree with you?

Your view does not bother me in the least. Mine shouldn't bother you. Heck, I don't even vote. I watch politics like watching MLB...if Colorado and Kansas City were the only two teams.

But to answer your question, we don't delete accounts.

Occasionally we run into members who cannot tolerate others disagreeing with them. Some forums upset members more than others. Politics and Calv vs Arm seem the most common.

Perhaps you could enjoy the board more by avoiding topics that make you overly emotional. Or simply avoid interacting with people you would rather not engage.

We are adults. We have the capability of seeing posts and choosing not to interact.

 

[JonC]

I'd like to see a bigger focus on preserving the American family in the GOP's agenda. Expansion of the child tax credit, tax incentives so that one parent can stay home with the child, restructured single family home benefits, tax structure favoring main street over wall street and deregulation of small businesses.

Big Business has made its bed with the kooky wokesters, let them lie in it. I wouldn't mind if the corporate tax rate was back as high as it was in the 1950s.

I agree. I'd also like to see the federal government turning more over to States.

 

[JonC]

@Bible Thumpin n Gun Totin

I guess I have an extreme view (apparently for this board, anyway).

I do not believe our founding fathers intended the federal government to have as much power over the states which comprise our nation.

I would prefer States to tax its citizens (the federal government taxing states). As it stands the federal government has far too much control. States have become dependent on the federal government.

The US Constitution was not designed to empower the government, or to grant rights, but to restrain the government. The power was intended to reside with the citizens.

 

[JonC]

We always look back to the intent of the Founding Fathers.

But looking at our government it seems that we are not remotely close. Considering the fed government now, and states rights.....and how much our nation has changed -

Is it possible to get back to the intent for our system of government?

 

[AustinC]

We always look back to the intent of the Founding Fathers.

But looking at our government it seems that we are not remotely close. Considering the fed government now, and states rights.....and how much our nation has changed -

Is it possible to get back to the intent for our system of government?

Our Founding Fathers had a fatal flaw. They did not deal with the issue of slavery. Second, individual States refused to give all humans the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Since this was not happening at the State level, which meant States were fundamentally breaking the cornerstone of our legal system, the Federal government was obligated to provide these rights to all persons in the Union regardless of States complaints. God was on the side of right, which is why the South was soundly defeated.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

@Bible Thumpin n Gun Totin

I guess I have an extreme view (apparently for this board, anyway).

I do not believe our founding fathers intended the federal government to have as much power over the states which comprise our nation.

I would prefer States to tax its citizens (the federal government taxing states). As it stands the federal government has far too much control. States have become dependent on the federal government.

The US Constitution was not designed to empower the government, or to grant rights, but to restrain the government. The power was intended to reside with the citizens.

Yes, much of that is so. But before COTUS, there were the Articles of Confederation (and Perpetual Union).

COTUS was designed to give the federal government more power, but to hopefully limit it enough through its checks and balances, etc.

It seems there were quite a few arguments both ways regarding federalism, some fearing it would become too much government or grow too powerful.

Perhaps not just hindsight is 20/20.

 

[JonC]

Our Founding Fathers had a fatal flaw. They did not deal with the issue of slavery. Second, individual States refused to give all humans the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Since this was not happening at the State level, which meant States were fundamentally breaking the cornerstone of our legal system, the Federal government was obligated to provide these rights to all persons in the Union regardless of States complaints. God was on the side of right, which is why the South was soundly defeated.

Slavery did become an issue. But to be fair, our Founding Fathers inherited a worldview which included slavery.

England abolished slavery 32 years before the US. It would have been abolished at the State level, but it would have taken much longer. Slavery became an economic burden to the South.

In a perfect world the developed nations would have stopped slavery in Africa (which would have ended the slave trade).

 

[JonC]

I suspect if we want a preview of 2024 we can watch the Kevin Mccarthy vote for speaker.

 

[Salty]

Well, well, well!! Seems “STAFF MEMBERS MAY NOT BE IGNORED”

So, Rev Bob/Squire/Salty/Whoever, would you please delete me from the BB membership roll, or advise steps to do so!? Thank you!!!!

We do not delete members - if we did - than all you OP would be deleted - including the posts of other members in threads you started.

If you wish to leave - you may do so - just stop posting - - If need be, I can closed threads you have started

You can block members - you wont see their posts - and they will not see yourl