I'm pretty sure I predicted this, or something close to it, but I have no desire to go back and find what I said.
But the fact that Trump hasn't waited until the results of the midterms are final to announce for 2024, is pretty much what I expected. It seems clear that he wants to be the first one in the ring as a way to intimidate any potential challengers. It also seems clear that the other part of his strategy is to preemptively attack the challengers he fears the most, as a way to keep them from running. If your goal is to elect someone who is interested in simply exercising raw political power, and who doesn't care how much long term damage he does to the GOP or the conservative movement, then Trump is your guy. If you want someone who is out for themselves first and foremost, Trump is your guy. If you want someone who's going to blame others first, Trump is your guy. If old guys are your jam, Trump and Biden are your guys.
While I'm predicting, I'll try this on for size.
If Trump doesn't the the support he believes he should, or if he loses early primaries, I suspect that he will blame others for his failures and run as an independent. This course of action will, of course, result in the DFL candidate being elected and 4 more years of crap.
I'm noticing a trend. Trump is excellent at blaming others for his failures, and now his followers are starting to do the same. I guess I've always thought that taking responsibility for your own actions was a good thing.
17 comments:
Wow! That's some pretty out there stuff, Craig!!!
Yeah...I, too, had hoped he'd wait until the midterms were fully finalized across the country, as I, too, believed that the best route to take. But then, the route he took leading up to his 2016 win was unprecedented, too, wasn't it? And it resulted in the best four years the nation had, likely since Reagan.
"It seems clear that he wants to be the first one in the ring as a way to intimidate any potential challengers."
It could also mean that now that he's announced, he's free to take in campaign contributions, of which he'll need an incredible shitload to deal all the leftist money which will be spent to keep him out of office. And any intimidation can in reality mean that others recognize the guy still has incredible support which would be extremely difficult to displace. We might not have 277 people running in the primary now.
"It also seems clear that the other part of his strategy is to preemptively attack the challengers he fears the most, as a way to keep them from running."
He does that whenever he feels it's appropriate, so he didn't need to run for office to do that. And think of it this way...if you can't stand the style of Trump that you choose not to run against him, then you're not likely fit for office. The last thing we need is milquetoasts like Romney at a time like this. I say, take the gloves off and get to it! Let's see who has the spine we need to deal with the leftist asshats who're destroying this country.
"If your goal is to elect someone who is interested in simply exercising raw political power, and who doesn't care how much long term damage he does to the GOP or the conservative movement, then Trump is your guy."
This is a totally bullshit NeverTrumper assertion about his intentions. My goal is to elect someone who cares about the state of the nation and how badly it's deteriorated in just two years under Biden. He's far more representative of a true conservative movement than those who withheld party money from midterm candidates simply because Trump endorsed them and they acknowledged Trump's 2020 win was stolen from him. And the GOP needs to be...not just damaged...but destroyed and rebuilt from the uni-party assholes complicit with Dem leadership have made it. Said another way, the GOP's been damaged from before Trump's time in office. Good gosh! this should be blatantly obvious to you.
"If you want someone who is out for themselves first and foremost, Trump is your guy."
Again, as you repeat yourself, this is a standard Trump-hater, NeverTrumper leftist-style assertion never truly proven by anyone who says it, and frankly, can easily be said about most in politics these days, especially those who've served at least a term.
"If you want someone who's going to blame others first, Trump is your guy."
For what is he blaming others? Obama blamed GW Bush for the entirety of his eight years in office prior to Trump. Biden's been blaming Trump throughout his failed presidency. Finger pointing and passing the buck is political routine, but what exactly do you believe Trump put on others?
"If old guys are your jam, Trump and Biden are your guys."
To the extent I might support Trump, it's his track record, not his age. It's a really good one and if he's smart (don't know that he is in THIS regard), he'll focus on the specifics of his good record and pound on it constantly, especially in comparison to Biden and even Obama. A bid ask from me, I know. But his age seems not to be a factor at this time.
"If Trump doesn't the the support he believes he should, or if he loses early primaries, I suspect that he will blame others for his failures and run as an independent."
It's a stretch to believe others wouldn't be deserving of blame, given how many people want him gone. It's a freaking self-fulfilling prophesy. And if he chose to run as an indie, he could be the first to win in a long, long time (if ever there was one...American history had many forming new parties to run) given how many continue to support him because of his track record. But if things continue as they've been going since Jan of '21, there's no right-leaning candidate who would not be a victim of leftist bullshit, so whomever the GOP nominee is, there will likely be legit blame of others should such person lose.
"I'm noticing a trend. Trump is excellent at blaming others for his failures, and now his followers are starting to do the same."
Bullshit. What you're noticing is others, Trump followers and other center-right people, frustrated with what should have been a more decisive win for the right and understanding why the that didn't take place. We're still victims of far too many states f**kin with election laws which put the GOP at a distinct disadvantage. Are you actually disputing the impact of this crap against our cause? If you want to blame GOP candidates...or Trump...for failing to overcome Dem bullshit, you might have an argument. But to pretend this was anymore a fair election than the last requires a rather masochistic suspension of disbelief.
There's only one way one can accept blame for these losses, and that's to understand how the game is played by virtue of the "new rules" imposed by self-serving Democrats and yet not to have played accordingly. It's hard not to without becoming what we oppose, but there has to be some coming to terms with the reality that without accepting what the Dems have done to "our democracy", it's unlikely we'll ever win again.
" We might not have 277 people running in the primary now."
Exactly, Trump's goal is to intimidate any possible challengers.
FYI, we're seeing at least two major Trump donors/bundlers who've already said that they won't be financially supporting Trump this time.
It's interesting that you've simply gone right to Danesque personal attacks. It's not that I'm anti-Trump or a Trump hater at all. I've been supportive of many things he's done. It's more that I'm (as others have said) more interested in the view from the windshield that the rear view mirror. But keep up the ad homs, if you think it'll help your case.
"For what is he blaming others?"
he blamed his wife for "making" him support OZ. He's claiming responsibility for electoral wins (including DeSantis), while ignoring the dismal record of candidates he backed. As we saw during his administration, his track record of picking good people or candidates isn't particularly stellar.
But if you think that "P-BO did it." is a good reason to support Trump, then go right ahead. Because it's absurd to expect an adult to take responsibility for their actions, right?
Holy crap, are you serious that you're already blaming others if Trump doesn't win early primaries?
If trump runs as an independent, it's a freaking pipe dream to think he'd win. You literally just spun the "everyone is out to get him" conspiracy theory, then followed it up with he'd wan as an independent. If trump runs third party, he loses and the GOP candidate loses. And if that happens y'all will blame the people who voted GOP, instead of yourselves. Which is especially strange since you're literally choosing Trump over any possible options before you even know who else might run. Hope you're enjoying the cool aid.
Excellent job of blaming others, and of absolving Trump.
But if you really think these sorts of rants are going to rally people to your cause, you go right ahead. Just like Dan and his irrational hatred of Trump was what pushed me to vote for him before, your irrational veneration might be enough to actually turn me in to what you think I already am. Although, I doubt you'd acknowledge your responsibility for it anyway.
Heaven forbid that I have high standards for our national leaders, wait until I see the entire field before making up my mind, and ultimately vote my conscience. Much better that I simply give in to your strong arm tactics before I have all of the information that I can get.
Trump's running and you need to believe any who choose not to will make that choice out of "intimidation"? There's two problems with this:
1. Anyone intimidated by Trump is not one I would want as president. So his announcement serves America by chasing off cowards. Trump's not that intimidating, because mean tweets and nicknames are nowhere near as bad as what foreign dictators are capable of presenting.
2. Trump's intention to run may as easily be seen as a good thing to those who then choose not to run themselves. That is, they chose to run because they thought they could...to one degree or another...do as well as Trump, pick up the baton he left behind and/or carry on with the agenda set by Trump during his four years.
"FYI, we're seeing at least two major Trump donors/bundlers who've already said that they won't be financially supporting Trump this time."
I don't know who those two are, so I don't know why they made that decision. Such info is essential before I decide whether or not to give a flying rat's ass about it. Who knows? Maybe they have compelling reasons. I don't think I'd be out on a limb to imagine they don't.
"It's interesting that you've simply gone right to Danesque personal attacks. It's not that I'm anti-Trump or a Trump hater at all. I've been supportive of many things he's done."
Well, I'll try not to be as defensive for comparing me to Dan than you are when faced with the reality of your Trump "rejection" (there...is that better? I see it as no different).
" It's more that I'm (as others have said) more interested in the view from the windshield that the rear view mirror."
Meaningless. Absolutely anyone could say that about absolutely every president who seeks a second term. It's pseudo-intellectual...barely sounding compelling in a superficial kinda way. If Trump's the best option...work with me here...then the future is the beneficiary of his return to the Big Chair and so are we. If his time is passed, it's only because those like you want it to be so. Are his ideas and plans obsolete in any way? How exactly? It's only because that might be the case...and I don't see how at this point...that one's time might be passed.
"But keep up the ad homs, if you think it'll help your case."
I'm just so grateful for the permission.
"he blamed his wife for "making" him support OZ."
Yeaahhhh....the only sources I can find for this kind of thing is from hard core conservative Trump supporters Maggie Haberman and Jim Acosta, so.... Indeed, every article I've read cite one or both of those two for this kind of "reporting".
" He's claiming responsibility for electoral wins (including DeSantis), while ignoring the dismal record of candidates he backed."
I thought he was "fuming" and "furious". That doesn't sound like "ignoring". Which is it? If it's the former, it can't be the latter and vice versa. Scraping barrels?
"But if you think that "P-BO did it." is a good reason to support Trump, then go right ahead. Because it's absurd to expect an adult to take responsibility for their actions, right?"
If you think Trump is "blaming" in the same way presidents like Obama do, I won't tell you to go right ahead because that would be lying on your part. You're suggesting Trump is blaming others for that which is his fault. If merely endorsing someone is the reason they lost, that would have to require something really bad about the person doing the endorsing for the charge to be appropriate. So what did he do which justifies blaming him for their loss? It's not his fault people reject him and his endorsed candidates on for the crime of "Orange Man Bad", which is pretty much the extent of their rejection. How else to explain rejecting someone not of the party which has caused all manner of harm over the last two years alone? They'd rather endure more of the same so long as the winner isn't anything like or related to Trump? How is that on Trump?
And if you want to insist that his endorsed candidates were bad candidates, by what measure and in what way? I wasn't particularly an Oz fan, but I can't imagine he'd legislate for as many moronic things Fetterman will be told to support!
No. To whine that Trump won't take responsibility for the failure of his endorsed candidates to win is absurd. And as to Obumble, he DID blame others for things he failed to do. Biden has been blaming Trump for COVID deaths and Afghanistan, to name just two lies. Different ballgame, dude.
"Holy crap, are you serious that you're already blaming others if Trump doesn't win early primaries?"
It's a far more fact-based prediction than any you've been making about him. But no. I'm merely speaking to the obvious. Is it not true many want him gone as they've wanted him gone since he came down the escalator to announce his 2016 candidacy? Is it not true you're not the only one who wants him gone now? He's the only one who's announced so far, so let's see who else gets in the primary race and then talk about who's the best choice. If he still comes out on top, then we'll have to talk afterwards about why he lost anyway if he does indeed fail to win the nomination. If others how enter can be shown to be better choices, then it would be moot...unless he wins nonetheless. Then the reason will be his support is still strong because of how well he did his first term.
But it's a done deal that many on the right oppose him for similarly dumbass reasons lefties do, so blame would be justified.
"If trump runs as an independent, it's a freaking pipe dream to think he'd win."
If it were anyone else, I'd agree without a doubt. But this is Trump. It was a freaking pipe dream he'd win the nomination for 2016 and a bigger one to beat Hillary. I'm not sure I remember how all that turned out. And then of course it would be a great mistake to move our embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and all manner of trouble would take place...as it would to get out of the Paris Climate Accords and the Iran Nuclear Deal and NAFTA and...you get the point. Somehow this guy manages to amaze and confound. I would never bet against the guy.
"You literally just spun the "everyone is out to get him" conspiracy theory, then followed it up with he'd wan as an independent."
Two unrelated things. Neither are unjustified positions to hold. Oh...BTW...the first part isn't a "conspiracy theory". It's actual history, and still ongoing, perhaps worse than ever, too. Note how he's being blamed for candidates losing because he endorsed them. If that's not evidence "everyone is out to get him", it certainly shows some are.
"If trump runs third party, he loses and the GOP candidate loses."
Again, that's the trend in at least recent American history. But Trump wasn't a part of that history with regard to third party candidacies. Personally, I hope he bows out if he doesn't get the GOP nod. I hope who beats him for it does so because the person's a good candidate and not a "NotTrump", because then we all lose. Sadly, most will reject him for stupid reasons, not because he's less than. We'll know just how true that is depending on who wins.
"Which is especially strange since you're literally choosing Trump over any possible options before you even know who else might run."
I haven't chosen anyone, yet. But YOU'VE rejected Trump before knowing who else might run...you who's not a NeverTrumper or Trump-hater.
"Hope you're enjoying the cool aid."
It's "KOOL Aid", and I'm mocking you for the misspelling. ��
"Excellent job of blaming others, and of absolving Trump."
Not at all. I'm pointing out how you're blaming Trump and absolving others. I'm willing to listen to an actual argument for why he should be blamed, but haven't heard one yet that isn't more superficial crap. I've provided a few examples which have more impact on the success or failure of a candidate than the mere endorsement of a former president.
"But if you really think these sorts of rants are going to rally people to your cause, you go right ahead."
Presenting a sound argument is not "ranting". I expect sound arguments would compel people interested in sound arguments. I expect more people to actually focus on sound arguments than crap. It's better for the nation.
"Just like Dan and his irrational hatred of Trump was what pushed me to vote for him before..."
Well that's troubling. And here I thought you made decisions based on facts. I would never in my wildest dreams have imagined you'd be influenced by the likes of a Dan Trabue.
"...your irrational veneration might be enough to actually turn me in to what you think I already am."
"Veneration???" That's funny. I see it as objectively acknowledging the good work of an individual and seeing the benefit of having that individual given an additional opportunity to work his stuff. Are you telling me you've never voted for any candidate to have additional terms allowed by law? Everybody for whom you've ever voted were unworthy for your vote a second time around? That's amazing!
I don't know that I'd "turn you into" anything you aren't already. And it's less what I "think" as much as what I "fear". Weight the facts that matter. I fear you aren't doing that, based on everything you've been saying.
"Heaven forbid that I have high standards for our national leaders, wait until I see the entire field before making up my mind, and ultimately vote my conscience."
Heaven forbid you let your high standards lead you to support low ability. My conscience dictates I do what's best for the country, and given I don't have all the info of a candidate's true personal life, but only their track record and any legal problems made public, doing best for my country might mean putting a crude dude in office once again. My conscience won't abide the knowledge that I let more harm come to the country because I wouldn't.
"Much better that I simply give in to your strong arm tactics before I have all of the information that I can get."
Wow. That sounds a lot like feo telling me I'm working to force people into a life of chastity because I promote putting sex in it's proper place. I've no doubt you will vote for whomever the f**k you want. I'm not so confident you'll do so based on what's important for the nation if you reject Trump for the reasons you've listed already. But as I've said of myself repeatedly every time we speak of Trump running again, I've made no decision at all. I've merely said it's his job to lose. He's earned another term. If someone comes along and presents me with a reason to vote his way, then I'll do so and hope Trump bows out. So you can stop the lefty-style whining that I'm forcing you to do anything. Good gosh!
Art,
I'm not going to waste a bunch of time on what looks like the same old shit. But I will say that yes, Dan's irrational hatred of Trump was a factor in pushing me over the edge to vote for him. In much the same way, your incessant bashing of anyone who is less than 100% enthusiastic for Trump, just might be the think that pushes me over the edge in 2024. What you've missed, apparently, is that both you and Dan seem to think that bashing and casting those who disagree with you in the most negative way possible is going to get people to vote the way you think they should. For example. mocking someone who chooses to vote their conscience, or to base their vote on character, only pushes people away from your position.
But, like Dan, you do you. Just don't expect anyone else to go along for the ride.
To piggyback on one other thing you said. I have no doubt that you will vote for Trump in 2024, 2028, and 2032 if you have that option. I have no doubt that you'll apply some sort of Trump seal of approval to any other candidates. I also have not doubt that you'll do so regardless of his chances to win, his chances to effectively govern, or how he'll negatively affect the future.
This notion that it's somehow harmful to wait until we actually have a campaign before I decide who to vote for is frighteningly extreme and monomaniacal.
Hell, are you telling me that you'd vote for Trump is he is convicted of a felony and can't run for office?
"Irrational hatred of Trump" = Someone who takes a reasonable, reasoned and principled stand against an inept and corrupt candidate who was ENTIRELY unfit for office, as his corrupt and criminal administration proved over and over. Yes, I stood with the historians, scholars, conservatives, moderates and progressives of all types who recognized how unfit he was.
And THIS, you call "irrational hatred."
Have more decency than passing on such stupidly false claims. I never had a SINGLE thing to say about the buffoon Trump until he because a serious candidate for office. I don't hate the idiot, but neither do I want him in public office. As nearly ALL the GOP is increasingly agreeing with.
Good God, man, the shallowness of your "reasoning" on who to vote for.
Do you feel no shame?
Craig...
What you've missed, apparently, is that both you and Dan seem to think that bashing and casting those who disagree with you in the most negative way possible is going to get people to vote the way you think they should. For example. mocking someone who chooses to vote their conscience, or to base their vote on character,
The irony. I and people of good faith across the political spectrum, recognize how unfit for office Trump was and yet you mock us as being irrationally hateful towards Trump. "YOU are that man." YOU are the very hypocrite that you describe. And you don't see it and so, don't acknowledge it.
Are any of you going to condemn unequivocally the shooting of gay folk at the Club Q in Colorado, apparently by a conservative?
"The irony. I and people of good faith across the political spectrum, recognize how unfit for office Trump was and yet you mock us as being irrationally hateful towards Trump. "YOU are that man." YOU are the very hypocrite that you describe. And you don't see it and so, don't acknowledge it."
The real irony is that you refuse to acknowledge that I have been pointing out Trump's unfitness for office since 2016. I've been consistent in my criticisms of his flaws/failures/shortcomings, for several years. I have pointed out things that I've agreed with him on, just like I've done with every single president for as long as I can remember. The difference is that I don't find it helpful to blame Trump for things he's not responsible for, refer to him with vitriol, and bring him into discussions where he has no business being involved. So, while I am a hypocrite on multiple things, this is one when whatever hypocrisy I have is pretty minimal.
It's interesting that multiple MSM outlets are reporting that the shooter in the CO shooting, is "non-binary" and has pronouns that are "they,them". I could be wrong, but I think that this bit of information would seem to indicate that this individual was not particularly conservative.
"But I will say that yes, Dan's irrational hatred of Trump was a factor in pushing me over the edge to vote for him."
More's the pity. That Dan would be a factor in any way with regard to your voting decision is truly self-indicting. I would encourage you to focus less on what morons like Dan say about anybody and more on the people morons attack or what intelligent people say about them.
"In much the same way, your incessant bashing of anyone who is less than 100% enthusiastic for Trump, just might be the think that pushes me over the edge in 2024."
My "bashing" is justified by the dearth of cogent arguments, which I find alarming coming from an otherwise intelligent person. Geez, Craig. Even I'm not 100% enthusiastic about Trump and never was. But I'm clearly far more objective and focused on what's best for the nation. They guy was good. Not perfect, but really good and the data backs it up, despite what morons like Dan need to believe, or the partisan hack historians, scholars, conservatives, moderates and progressives of all types with whom he stands simply because they hate the guy as much as he does.
"What you've missed, apparently, is that both you and Dan seem to think that bashing and casting those who disagree with you in the most negative way possible is going to get people to vote the way you think they should."
An overly-sensitive over-statement of my methods and purpose, as well as a false comparison to the moronic Dan.
"For example. mocking someone who chooses to vote their conscience, or to base their vote on character, only pushes people away from your position."
First, I haven't so much "mocked you" for "voting your conscience" as wonder how all that was predictable (if not to the specific degree it's played out) can be ignored by one's conscience who rejects a proven commodity like Trump. It was easy to see and MY conscience could not abide being in any way part of the reason for the harm which came about.
Second, Trump's character turned out to be of little concern throughout his first term, and given his wonderful record as president, less so now. And frankly, to the extent the more unseemly aspects of his character seem to be appearing now are directly related to the nonsensical and unjustified opposition to the guy. The "volume" of it, as it were, seems to me to be nothing more than him getting out in front of the noise which inundates us by his detractors from every direction. But while anguishing over his character, those like you ignore the aspects of his character which resulted in so much good for the nation...good which wouldn't happen with typical politicians in the same position. We know this because it took this guy, with his unique character, warts and all, to get things done, most of which so many were convinced he was incapable and unlikely to get done. That this aspect of his character is so quickly ignored (and not even detected by morons like Dan) I find amazing and troubling at the same time given the consequences of doing so.
Third, it's no better for YOUR reputation if I'm responsible for "pushing you away". Are you a sheep? Have you no spine? All that should matter is if what I say about his record and abilities is true. If they are...and they most certainly are...then he remains a viable choice. That's the alpha and omega of my position on the man. Nothing more. Nothing less.
"To piggyback on one other thing you said. I have no doubt that you will vote for Trump in 2024, 2028, and 2032 if you have that option."
If he seems to me to still be the best choice, I'd be a fool to do otherwise...as would everyone else.
"I have no doubt that you'll apply some sort of Trump seal of approval to any other candidates."
On what possible basis would you suggest such a thing? Have I ever mentioned I'm supporting anyone else because of a Trump endorsement? Please cite the date, time and place of such a comment. Indeed, the thought's never crossed my mind. More so, I can't think of a time I supported anyone because of anyone who may have endorsed them.
"I also have not doubt that you'll do so regardless of his chances to win, his chances to effectively govern, or how he'll negatively affect the future."
I would hate that I might be moved to consider a lesser candidate because the one I prefer has no support besides me.
Trump governed quite effectively in the face of mountains of crap from all directions. While I'm fairly convinced he'll face much more should he win election, I have little doubt he'll fare well nonetheless. No one can be as successful in life as Trump has without learning things along the way. I would suppose he's learned a few things during his first term which will aid him in a second term.
You seem cocksure he'll "negatively affect the future". Oh what basis? This guy actually loves his country. Despite the constant claims by haters that he only cares about himself, no one has bothered to prove this is true with regard to his intentions as president. As his first term positively affected that period, to say he's likely to do the opposite requires more to support the contention than just a feeling. What have you got?
"This notion that it's somehow harmful to wait until we actually have a campaign before I decide who to vote for is frighteningly extreme and monomaniacal."
Yet, you've written Trump off categorically. And it is only that I've addressed thus far...not this absurd claim I'm demanding you throw all your support behind Trump. I'm not even doing that (despite your irrational belief to the contrary)! Why would I expect you to do it?
Here's the thing: there's no other one-term ex-president running in '24. As such, he's the most experienced. As he did a really good job, that experience should give him an edge in the minds of any objective and honest voter. That's my complete position right there. There's no more to it. Oh...and that it's absurd, counter-productive and potentially self-destructive to ignore it and write him off...to say nothing of completely irrational.
"Hell, are you telling me that you'd vote for Trump is he is convicted of a felony and can't run for office?"
Unlike lefties electing a dead guy, I would not vote for anyone legally ineligible...even if that ineligibility was unjustly imposed upon him. Given all that's occurred since he won in 2016, that's the most likely reason he'd be convicted of anything...that some chicanery was afoot.
I hope at this point it's crystal clear to you that it's foolish to carry on with this absurdity that I'm "TrumpNoMatterWhat". But if you insist on being "AnyoneButTrumpRegardlessOfWhat'sBestForAmerica", that's on you.
"The irony. I and people of good faith across the political spectrum, recognize how unfit for office Trump was and yet you mock us as being irrationally hateful towards Trump."
You are not a person of good faith, Dan. You actually believed Biden would be an improvement over Trump. I would not be at all surprised if you actually believe Biden IS an improvement even after the last two years. "Good faith"? Good gosh! How abjectly absurd!! You're a moron and irrationally hateful towards Trump as you were against Bush 43 and Reagan!!
Post a Comment