New Developments III

[criddic3]

I'm honestly having a hard time remembering Republican debates before Donald Trump. Did they ever make points or policy proposals? Was it always just bickering and sabrerattling?

He really is just there to attack Trump, isn't he? It's not working. I never thought he'd be able to bring his party back but I thought he'd carve out a more effective strategy. If I didn't say it elsewhere, I just don't think the debate stage is his best format. He's better in town halls. Everything Tim Scott said just made me sad but I bet he hung onto some donors. I'm mentally scanning to see whom I forgot and I realized I left off the former Vice President. He disappeared.

And then there's Vivek Ramaswamay. I don't think I've ever hated a Presidential candidate so much in my life. I hated Donald Trump but at least there were the fond memories of him bashing the Republicans.

Whenever I write about Vivek Ramaswamay I just keep coming back to Is this how the elders on the Board felt about Nixon? Is Vivek Ramaswamay my Nixon? Someone in my age cohort whose every utterance rings cynical, huckstery, and bullshit?

As a former Republican, I can attest to the fact that Republicans used to actually talk sensibly about policy. Even then, I didn't always agree with everything in the platform, but the candidates were usually people with worthwhile credentials and who were mostly there with the intent to actually govern once they got the job.

The best thing I can say about Chris Christie is that he's doing a real service in being the main voice that says "Trump isn't the good guy you think he is," but it's way too late for that kind of wake up call in the GOP. Had he done it in 2020, maybe it could have resonated more. There are Republican voters out there who don't like Trump, but they hate Democrats more.

Ramaswamy is way worse than Nixon. I'm not of that generation; one removed (barely a 1977 baby), but at least Nixon had an actual interest in doing things for the country. The favorite seems to be his creation of the EPA, but he was also the guy who essentially said "okay so Kennedy might have stolen some votes in Chicago and cost me a close election but I'm gonna let it go and maybe I can come back someday." For all his personal flaws, he wasn't interested in being a dictator and believed in democracy. I'm not sure Ramaswamy does.

Nikki Haley is trying to make a case on policy grounds vs. Trump, but I don't think she has much of a chance here. The best she can hope for is being VP. Trump recently said he might like to have a woman on the ticket (probably to counter Kamala Harris).

While most of the country seems not to want it, this is likely going to be the first presidential re-rematch since 1956. I just don't understand why President Biden's numbers aren't better after all the good work he's done. But former Senator Claire McCaskill said something on Morning Joe that made sense: President Obama's numbers were almost identical in 2011 and he still won over Mitt Romney (who I voted for, full disclosure) in 2012 pretty handily.

[Sabin]

I'm honestly having a hard time remembering Republican debates before Donald Trump. Did they ever make points or policy proposals? Was it always just bickering and sabrerattling? Anyway, nothing happened in the second debate that was as meaningful as the first one (introducing Vivek Ramaswamay to a large audience) except that they all looked like children and bickered and talked over each other far too much. I'd imagine the biggest takeaway will be a curbing of the Ron DeSantis investors who are fleeing. I think he "won" the debate as much as you can win. He's still a socially awkward weirdo (I'd be more sympathetic if he wasn't such a monster) but he looked more calm and confident than usual and he had a good moment when he shut down that "voted off the island" nonsense. Haven't read the FOX polls yet but I bet he's the winner.

Or it's Trump because they make him seem like the adult, which is almost unthinkable.

Beyond that, Nikki Haley had a good moment where she said that everything Vivek says makes her feel dumber. She's one of three up there who isn't a psychopath, whose mental health I don't worry about, or both so I'm inclined to give her points. The other two are Doug Burgum (he can't still be there next time?) and Chris Christie whom I think lost as much as you can. He really is just there to attack Trump, isn't he? It's not working. I never thought he'd be able to bring his party back but I thought he'd carve out a more effective strategy. If I didn't say it elsewhere, I just don't think the debate stage is his best format. He's better in town halls. Everything Tim Scott said just made me sad but I bet he hung onto some donors. I'm mentally scanning to see whom I forgot and I realized I left off the former Vice President. He disappeared.

And then there's Vivek Ramaswamay. I don't think I've ever hated a Presidential candidate so much in my life. I hated Donald Trump but at least there were the fond memories of him bashing the Republicans. In last night's debate he called for an end to birthright citizenship of the children of undocumented immigrants and continued his profoundly cynical war on transgender people, always giving himself enough wiggle room for denial ( "I'm just talking about minors, I'm just talking about gender dysphoria"). His choice of language isn't accidental. We know what hatred sounds like. Whenever I write about Vivek Ramaswamay I just keep coming back to Is this how the elders on the Board felt about Nixon? Is Vivek Ramaswamay my Nixon? Someone in my age cohort whose every utterance rings cynical, huckstery, and bullshit?

[Sabin]

OscarGuy wrote
Part of the tactic, the Dems may be using right now is not to jump at every indictment as being reason for expulsion. They are concerned that a Trump White House will weaponize the judiciary and file fake indictments against every Dem in a red state just to get them out and appoint a Rep replacement. Honestly, if the Republican Party were sane, this wouldn't be fathomable, but they aren't and it is. That said, he really does need to go.

And I doubt that New Jersey Dems will return Menendez to his seat in 2024 since they know they would lose it if they don't. I don't anticipate Menendez being the Democratic nominee for the US Senate for New Jersey next year.

I just think they're dragging their heels on it because they know him, maybe they like him, I don't know...

As to your theory, that's pretty wild but I guess everything's on the table. I think the main reason I'm not concerned is the sense I get from everyone who has any inside-track on the Trump indictments has a pretty astonishing level of confidence about how not worried they are about him next year.

[OscarGuy]

Part of the tactic, the Dems may be using right now is not to jump at every indictment as being reason for expulsion. They are concerned that a Trump White House will weaponize the judiciary and file fake indictments against every Dem in a red state just to get them out and appoint a Rep replacement. Honestly, if the Republican Party were sane, this wouldn't be fathomable, but they aren't and it is. That said, he really does need to go.

And I doubt that New Jersey Dems will return Menendez to his seat in 2024 since they know they would lose it if they don't. I don't anticipate Menendez being the Democratic nominee for the US Senate for New Jersey next year.

[Big Magilla]

Andy Kim, who was my representative until redistricting gave all of the Jersey Shore to a Trump Republican in 2020, is raising money to go against Menendez in 2024. Not sure if he or someone else would be appointed by Gov. Murphy if Menendez actually does bow out but I would definitely vote for him in the primary.

[Sabin]

I don't know what conversations Chuck Schumer is already having with Bob Menendez or, y'know, if they're bowling buddies or whatever. But that guy is dazzlingly corrupt. He needs to be gone so fast that any Democrat can say "Bob Mewho? I don't remember that guy. You sure he was ours?"

[criddic3]

The kind of charges Hunter Biden is up for rarely goes to trial, much less conviction. I agree that the deal was broken out of political reasons, in order to appear as if they are not being soft on him because he's the son of the president. I think that's a bad message to send, because it makes it seem as though he did something worse than he did. It's not that I'm saying he shouldn't be called out for his behavior, but this story is being used by the Right as a political fundraising tool and as an excuse for baseless investigations of his father. The recent decision by Kevin McCarthy to open an impeachment inquiry is all part of this ridiculous circus. McCarthy is already one of the weakest Speakers in our nation's history after striking a bargain with the far-right Freedom Caucus in order get the job (on the 15th ballot).

[Big Magilla]

I just apologized to Sabin privately for overreacting.

I had a rough day. I'm recovering from an apicoectomy (oral surgery on a tooth I had a root canal on 30 years ago) on Tuesday. On top of that, yesterday and today my HOA is having its annual garage sale. The house across the street is one of the participants. All day yesterday I had people bocking my mailbox, driveway, and even the fire hydrant on the corner. I expect more of the same today. That's not an excuse, but it is the reason.

I would hate not to have conversations with Sabin and everyone else here about movies, but I really don't want to talk about Hunter Biden. He's a jerk but what he's being charged with is lying on an application to buy a gun when he was under the influence of drugs. He had a deal with the prosecutor who reneged due to politics. It's a sordid mess as is everything that's going on in Congress. Thankfully everyone here seems to be on the same page politically, so that's a plus, but just thinking about what is going on in this country now is depressing enough without having to talk about it, so I probably won't be adding too much to any of the political discussions. Unfortunately, as monitor I will still have to read them.

[Big Magilla]

You just got yourself one less to converse with.

[Sabin]

Big Magilla wrote
Sabin, I knew you meant it as hypothetical because I know you but as I said in response to Dan Frank, it would not to those who are not on top of the news.

I'm not spreading misinformation on twitter. I'm having a conversation with seven people on a message board.

It's fine. Let's just move on.

[Big Magilla]

Sabin, I knew you meant it as hypothetical because I know you but as I said in response to Dan Frank, it would not to those who are not on top of the news.

Unfortunately, the number of people now posting isn't great, but our readership remains strong.

Right now, there are 26 users online: 3 registered, 0 hidden and 23 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online at the same time was 685 on Tue Nov 06, 2018 2:02 am.

[Sabin]

Big Magilla wrote
I know Sabin meant it to be a hypothetical question, but it doesn't read that way.

Anyone not up on the news, might think Hunter Biden was actually convicted of something.

While I don't necessarily agree that we get the country we deserve, I do think we are an incredibly naive one where half the population doesn't vote and a large percentage of those who do aren't savvy enough to vote in their own best interests. That and the long ago outmoded electoral college keep us on tenterhooks from election to election.

Magilla, if you figured out that it was a hypothetical question, then it reads that way. What I wrote was obviously a hypothetical question. Also, the title of this thread is New Developments. It's for discussing the news. Hunter Biden's indictments is in the news. I'm allowed to talk about it. But put that aside from the moment. How many people actually post on this board? Six? Seven? I know all of you. I'm not spreading misinformation.

[danfrank]

I definitely agree with that!

[Big Magilla]

I know Sabin meant it to be a hypothetical question, but it doesn't read that way.

Anyone not up on the news, might think Hunter Biden was actually convicted of something.

While I don't necessarily agree that we get the country we deserve, I do think we are an incredibly naive one where half the population doesn't vote and a large percentage of those who do aren't savvy enough to vote in their own best interests. That and the long ago outmoded electoral college keep us on tenterhooks from election to election.

[danfrank]

Magulla, I’m pretty sure Sabin was just putting out a hypothetical, not trying to spread false information. It is POSSIBLE that Hunter Biden serves some prison time, though I doubt that will happen. As to whether a president’s kid has served prison time while their parent was in office, I’m not enough of a historian to know for sure, but I don’t think so. The closest approximation in my lifetime was all the legal problems surrounding Clinton’s half-brother, Roger. Presidential children are under a lot of scrutiny and there have been scandals, e.g., George HW Bush’s son getting in trouble for conflict of interest, or W’s girls getting busted for underage drinking. I have little doubt that bulk of Trumps’s kids have done things they COULD be imprisoned for.

Hunter Biden going to prison would be a big deal and a big drag on Joe’s presidency, way more than it already is.

As for getting the country we deserve, I think there’s some truth to that, though mostly I think it’s a minority of rotten apples making it miserable for the rest of us, who really DON’T deserve that.