Nah, someone running on a Mitt Romney platform would not have had the same results this election. And Sarah acting like conservatism hasn’t evolved and then having Josh and Matt school her on the history of modern conservative views shows her ignorance of the subject. She is great on law, campaigns and comms but terrible on knowing anyth…
Nah, someone running on a Mitt Romney platform would not have had the same results this election. And Sarah acting like conservatism hasn’t evolved and then having Josh and Matt school her on the history of modern conservative views shows her ignorance of the subject. She is great on law, campaigns and comms but terrible on knowing anything about policy. And because she knows so little of it she doesn’t understand when it impacts elections.
I would bet a Nikki Haley (or any Republican really) would have been just as successful if not more so. A “normal” republican may have carried more down ballot races. Instead, Trump won but in 6 of 7 swing states Democratic Party senators got re-elected- quite a lot of split ticket voters! That’s why this wasn’t a rejection of the entire party - just of Biden and Harris. And misreading it as a broad mandate is going to produce the same result as it did for Bush after 2004.
I supported Nikki over Trump but in retrospect disagree. Traditional conservative views on economics are a loser. You must address the non-college educated who are screaming out that things aren’t right for them instead of just dismissing them as a dysfunctional lot who need to go to college and get information economy jobs. It is gross. And Nikki and Ron had no answers except espousing nonsensical libertarian economic views, which is why they go nowhere in the primary.
I wholeheartedly agree. You can’t have a functioning society if large portions of the population aren’t realizing the gains from a growing economy. I’m just very skeptical that Trump has anything to offer those people except the rhetorical pat on the back and cultural red meat.
Trump will no doubt push to extend the tax cuts from his first term (the debt be damned) - those benefits went overwhelmingly to those most well off. There is reporting now that Republicans are looking to offset the tax cuts’ high cost in part by restructuring Medicaid and limiting options for SNAP recipients - it’s the same old party agenda of tax cuts for the rich, exploding deficits and debt and then demands to offset the cost on the back of those most in need. Except now it’s Trump doing it, not Bush.
Color me skeptical that this party will really deliver any meaningful improvement to the lives of working people. I hope I’m wrong. We’ll find out soon. Or maybe rhetoric and culture wars is all they need to keep those newly minted republican voters. That too will be telling.
Agree Trump is all over the place and yet to be seen. I am a JD Vance guy and believe me, he’s serious about improving the lives of the working class. What he can’t get done as VP, he can as President.
He’s a smart guy and I hope he’s honest about his views. I wouldn’t want him as president but I’m not too worried — the track record of VPs getting elected president immediately afterwards is not great.
Nah, someone running on a Mitt Romney platform would not have had the same results this election. And Sarah acting like conservatism hasn’t evolved and then having Josh and Matt school her on the history of modern conservative views shows her ignorance of the subject. She is great on law, campaigns and comms but terrible on knowing anything about policy. And because she knows so little of it she doesn’t understand when it impacts elections.
I would bet a Nikki Haley (or any Republican really) would have been just as successful if not more so. A “normal” republican may have carried more down ballot races. Instead, Trump won but in 6 of 7 swing states Democratic Party senators got re-elected- quite a lot of split ticket voters! That’s why this wasn’t a rejection of the entire party - just of Biden and Harris. And misreading it as a broad mandate is going to produce the same result as it did for Bush after 2004.
I supported Nikki over Trump but in retrospect disagree. Traditional conservative views on economics are a loser. You must address the non-college educated who are screaming out that things aren’t right for them instead of just dismissing them as a dysfunctional lot who need to go to college and get information economy jobs. It is gross. And Nikki and Ron had no answers except espousing nonsensical libertarian economic views, which is why they go nowhere in the primary.
I wholeheartedly agree. You can’t have a functioning society if large portions of the population aren’t realizing the gains from a growing economy. I’m just very skeptical that Trump has anything to offer those people except the rhetorical pat on the back and cultural red meat.
Trump will no doubt push to extend the tax cuts from his first term (the debt be damned) - those benefits went overwhelmingly to those most well off. There is reporting now that Republicans are looking to offset the tax cuts’ high cost in part by restructuring Medicaid and limiting options for SNAP recipients - it’s the same old party agenda of tax cuts for the rich, exploding deficits and debt and then demands to offset the cost on the back of those most in need. Except now it’s Trump doing it, not Bush.
Color me skeptical that this party will really deliver any meaningful improvement to the lives of working people. I hope I’m wrong. We’ll find out soon. Or maybe rhetoric and culture wars is all they need to keep those newly minted republican voters. That too will be telling.
Agree Trump is all over the place and yet to be seen. I am a JD Vance guy and believe me, he’s serious about improving the lives of the working class. What he can’t get done as VP, he can as President.
He’s a smart guy and I hope he’s honest about his views. I wouldn’t want him as president but I’m not too worried — the track record of VPs getting elected president immediately afterwards is not great.