TheVat Posted July 15 Posted July 15 (edited) And now Vance is the veep choice, who makes sense only if you want to narrow your base. Vance's fealty to Plan 9 from Outer Space, sorry I mean Project 2025, is a devotion to the most extreme framing of a MAGA administration that could drive away some of those near-centre groups Trump was supposedly wooing. Will be amusing to watch Dems dig up all those nasty things Vance said about Trump back in 2016. “I go back and forth between thinking Trump is a cynical asshole like Nixon who wouldn’t be that bad (and might even prove useful) or that he’s America’s Hitler. How’s that for discouraging?” - Feb. 2016 "To every complex problem, Trump promises a simple solution … He never offers details for how these plans will work, because he can’t. Trump’s promises are the needle in America’s collective vein.” - The Atlantic, 4 July 2016 Edited July 15 by TheVat
StringJunky Posted July 15 Posted July 15 (edited) 1 hour ago, TheVat said: And now Vance is the veep choice, who makes sense only if you want to narrow your base. Vance's fealty to Plan 9 from Outer Space, sorry I mean Project 2025, is a devotion to the most extreme framing of a MAGA administration that could drive away some of those near-centre groups Trump was supposedly wooing. Will be amusing to watch Dems dig up all those nasty things Vance said about Trump back in 2016. “I go back and forth between thinking Trump is a cynical asshole like Nixon who wouldn’t be that bad (and might even prove useful) or that he’s America’s Hitler. How’s that for discouraging?” - Feb. 2016 "To every complex problem, Trump promises a simple solution … He never offers details for how these plans will work, because he can’t. Trump’s promises are the needle in America’s collective vein.” - The Atlantic, 4 July 2016 A two-faced political marriage of convenience with all the resilience of a house built on sand. Edited July 15 by StringJunky
iNow Posted July 16 Posted July 16 “I don’t really care what happens to Ukraine one way or the other,” Senator Vance has said.
StringJunky Posted July 16 Posted July 16 6 hours ago, CharonY said: Ukraine is in serious trouble. Just as Putin planned. You mean politically in the US? War-wise it seems to be fairly stalemate for now.
J.C.MacSwell Posted July 16 Posted July 16 The good news in my opinion is that it’s probably a poor pick in terms of Trump electability. The bad news is that it probably won’t matter and if anything he might be worse than Trump with regard to Ukraine.
iNow Posted July 16 Posted July 16 (edited) 2 hours ago, StringJunky said: You mean politically in the US? War-wise it seems to be fairly stalemate for now. War-wise, the stalemate ends if US politics turns against and ceases support. See also: Why Ukraine was falling behind so much in first half of this year due to US Congressional Republicans blocking funding and arms transfers to help them. 19 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said: it’s probably a poor pick in terms of Trump electability. I hold the contrary view here. I think it was his best pick. In context of the US electoral college, the outcome of this race in 47 of our 50 states is already predetermined for whether Trump or Biden will win. Everything in this election cycle will fall entirely to Wisconsin, Ohio, and Pennsylvania as the fulcrum for this decision, and all three of them are well within the margin of error as currently being a tie between the two men. Vance appeals to all 3 of those states in very big ways given his background being extremely poor and understanding how meth and fentanyl and outsourcing of manufacturing jobs have crippled those regions. He speaks eloquently, lies calmly, debates strongly, he is well connected and has his finger on what's happening with rich powerful tech-bros, and regularly manages to put a pretty red bow around the bloody red meat Trump so often sells to amp up supporters of the worst parts of our humanity. Vance's appeal in these three critical electoral college states is only further amplified given that he's currently the sitting Senator for one of them, a Senator who's repeatedly won elections there. And even if they lose, he's now positioned as the heir apparent for MAGA for the next 4 decades. US presidential elections aren't about who's most popular or unpopular across the country. They're about who wins an extra coupla hundred votes in 6 or 7 counties in industrial mid-west states. Edited July 16 by iNow 2
joigus Posted July 16 Posted July 16 Vance's views on Ukraine could change tomorrow. After all, his views on Trump seem to have changed overnight in a manner of speaking. Meanwhile, identity politics can only be addressed by picking a VP that embodies it. We've seen it before in a different version. They're going for a demographics of males in their 30-somethings to 40-somethings who feel they'be been left aside by identity politics for too long now. I could be wrong, as politics is not my thing, let alone American politics...
CharonY Posted July 16 Posted July 16 5 hours ago, StringJunky said: You mean politically in the US? War-wise it seems to be fairly stalemate for now. Basically what iNow said. Europe is not able to provide the necessary support (and some far-right parties are actively undermining efforts).
StringJunky Posted July 16 Posted July 16 (edited) 5 minutes ago, CharonY said: Basically what iNow said. Europe is not able to provide the necessary support (and some far-right parties are actively undermining efforts). If that happens, and Trump gets in, we'll likely be moving away from the US. It doesn't help Ukraine in the long term, but I think people will be talking about shifting the axis of geopolitical influence. NATO is already talking about what to do to mitigate a Trump presidency. I can see the UK putting more effort into Europe. It would have been a nightmare if the Tories had got back in because quite a few lean MAGA right and pro-Trump. Edited July 16 by StringJunky
CharonY Posted July 16 Posted July 16 31 minutes ago, StringJunky said: If that happens, and Trump gets in, we'll likely be moving away from the US. It doesn't help Ukraine in the long term, but I think people will be talking about shifting the axis of geopolitical influence. NATO is already talking about what to do to mitigate a Trump presidency. What worries me is that that discussion about US as an unreliable partner has been ongoing since the first Trump presidency, but at least as far as I can see, nothing fundamental has changed. Also, both Trump and his VP have been rather vocal for supporting Russia. I mean, not supporting Ukraine.
TheVat Posted July 16 Posted July 16 https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-courts-rfk-jrs-support-leaked-phone-call-2024-07-16/ Quote "When you feed a baby, Bobby," Trump said, "a vaccination that is like 38 different vaccines, and it looks like it's meant for a horse, not a, you know, 10-pound or 20-pound baby... and then you see the baby all of a sudden starting to change radically..." Another form of the demented babble that could contribute to UK and Europe distancing themselves. And, of course, loosening of EPA regulations which in turn causes our babies to change radically...
swansont Posted July 16 Posted July 16 On 7/15/2024 at 6:09 PM, TheVat said: And now Vance is the veep choice, who makes sense only if you want to narrow your base. Vance's fealty to Plan 9 from Outer Space, sorry I mean Project 2025, is a devotion to the most extreme framing of a MAGA administration that could drive away some of those near-centre groups Trump was supposedly wooing. Will be amusing to watch Dems dig up all those nasty things Vance said about Trump back in 2016. Back in 2016 he chose Pence to shore up the religious vote (though it seems increasingly obvious that the evangelicals care little about religion compared to power) I don’t see that Vance appeals to anyone who didn’t already support Trump, his position on various rights for women will drive some people away, and it destroys the fiction that Project 2025 isn’t their game plan. P2025 is not popular, and raising awareness of it is just starting out. edit: and we’re also seeing what happens with increased scrutiny. e.g. some on the right are not happy that his wife is not a white Christian.
iNow Posted July 17 Posted July 17 Attendees at the RNC convention have begun wearing bandages over their ears. They seem to be using Idiocracy as a user guide instead of a mockumentary.
TheVat Posted July 17 Posted July 17 15 hours ago, swansont said: edit: and we’re also seeing what happens with increased scrutiny. e.g. some on the right are not happy that his wife is not a white Christian. Had missed that, thanks. That should create some cognitive dissonance for some of the Trump base. How to embrace diversity while parsing which diversity is okay and which remains an existential threat to America. Heh.
dimreepr Posted July 17 Posted July 17 34 minutes ago, iNow said: Attendees at the RNC convention have begun wearing bandages over their ears. They seem to be using Idiocracy as a user guide instead of a mockumentary. I always thought it would end with the parrot sketch... 🖖
J.C.MacSwell Posted July 31 Posted July 31 On 7/16/2024 at 10:13 AM, iNow said: I hold the contrary view here. I think it was his best pick. In context of the US electoral college, the outcome of this race in 47 of our 50 states is already predetermined for whether Trump or Biden will win. Everything in this election cycle will fall entirely to Wisconsin, Ohio, and Pennsylvania as the fulcrum for this decision, and all three of them are well within the margin of error as currently being a tie between the two men. Vance appeals to all 3 of those states in very big ways given his background being extremely poor and understanding how meth and fentanyl and outsourcing of manufacturing jobs have crippled those regions. He speaks eloquently, lies calmly, debates strongly, he is well connected and has his finger on what's happening with rich powerful tech-bros, and regularly manages to put a pretty red bow around the bloody red meat Trump so often sells to amp up supporters of the worst parts of our humanity. Vance's appeal in these three critical electoral college states is only further amplified given that he's currently the sitting Senator for one of them, a Senator who's repeatedly won elections there. And even if they lose, he's now positioned as the heir apparent for MAGA for the next 4 decades. US presidential elections aren't about who's most popular or unpopular across the country. They're about who wins an extra coupla hundred votes in 6 or 7 counties in industrial mid-west states. Seems Vance might turn out to be "too much of a good thing"? Trump may now be regretting his choice: https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-better-off-with-nikki-haley-jd-vance-bad-decision-2024-7 On one hand if Trump managed to get in I would certainly prefer Haley as VP (despite her taking a hit in my books for endorsing Trump). On the other I think Trump would be more likely to win with her on the ticket. I'd prefer he stick with Vance. Hopefully I won't regret it.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now