Here in South Carolina, Nikki Haley got crushed again. So far, this makes three times she lost to Trump, once to DeSantis at the same time and in a fourth contest, she was second to "None". Yet on she goes to Michigan because, by golly, she's what this country needs. Don't quite see how.
One site I looked at about an hour ago showed her having been beaten by something like Trump 59%, Haley 39.something% , with both DeSantis and Ramaswamy getting small percentages, too, despite not being in the race anymore. Those who voted for the last two are goofy, but being it was a primary, people can vote as they like with no concern for the fact their choice has no chance in hell.
But such people bring up a true concern. Are they among those who won't vote for Trump if he's the nominee? Then they're assholes who don't care about their own families, much less their fellow Americans. More on that later, perhaps.
As to not caring about America, Haley is freakin' John Kasich at this point, running with no chance. Now, one might say that there is a chance as most states haven't had their primaries, yet. But those who are now over have validated all data which suggests Trump's overwhelming support among GOP voters. With each passing primary, it becomes more an issue of us against them..."them" being the Death Cult/America Sucks Party of the Democrats. Worse, of her less than 40% of voters, that percentage includes Dems who have no intention of voting for her in the general election. Thus, her percentage of support doesn't reach that lofty 40% mark, and in a primary situation, that's bad when there are only two people left and she's the one spending all the money to drum up that woeful number.
I liked DeSantis and while he was still in the race, I did not rule him out as the candidate for whom I was likely to cast my vote. In a way, I was relieved his dropping out absolved me of the hard choice. I would have felt exactly the same if it was Trump who folded, which would have made my vote for DeSantis a slam-dunk no-brainer. Now, his dropping out meant Trump was the guy.
And of course, like Tim Scott, DeSantis had the smarts and integrity to encourage his supporters to throw their support to Trump, because he's the best candidate remaining by a wide margin.
So why is Haley in the race still? One can refer to her reasons given at her concession speech last night, but I find them all really self-serving rather than America-serving. She claims the real issue is Biden (or I'd say, by extension, the Dem party and whomever they end up having as their candidate). That's certainly always been the case, but it doesn't remain a certainty at all that she had any better chance of beating Biden than did Trump. People like her are a big reason Trump would have any difficulty at all, aside from the taken-for-granted expected cheating to steal another election. Biden has no record on which to run. The Dems don't either, given their standing behind every stupid thing Biden's done. Trump had a great record which should have secured his second term in 2020 were it not for the combination of massive leftist fraud and cheating and dumbshits who refused to support Trump for a second term. We're under that very same dark cloud now, and it's darker than before due to the many bullshit indictments Trump must weather. The left will do anything to win!
Then some wonder if she's just sticking around in case Trump dies or gets incarcerated on any of the many lies in these bullshit indictments. But then, would it simply go to the "runner up", or would a GOP convention choose to nominate someone, among whom could be one of those who've ended their primary campaigns, like either of the aforementioned Scott or DeSantis?
Haley's said she would refuse to be Trump's VP, so some wonder if she's sticking around to be a third party moron once the primaries are over. Yeah. That's thinking about the nation. She'll still only get around a third of the vote at best, and likely only a hunk of the center-right vote. That means that Biden/theDemreplacement wins. She's not serving America by her continued assaults against Trump.
She likes to say that Trump draws chaos. That's crap. Chaos is drummed up to obstruct Trump. These indictments, for examples, exist for no other reason than to prevent him from holding public office, not because he's a danger to the nation, but because he's a danger to the left and anyone who looks like them, including RINOS and/or establishment Republicans (if that's not too redundant) who make up the Uni-Party.
Trump's sole focus has always been us. Period. And even when some policies were sketchy in terms of benefit to the nation, the intention was to provide benefit to the nation. Those lying assholes who like to pretend Trump only cares about himself are lying for the leftist cause. Who would put up with what Trump's had to since he first threw his hat into politics in 2015, defer his presidential wages and continue seeking to serve us who only cares for his own self? That's patently absurd.
I don't know how Michigan plays the game. Do they run open primaries? Can Dems vote for Haley? Can independents vote in a primary without declaring they will vote for that party's candidate? I don't even know if indies are ever so obliged anywhere, to be honest, though they should be so obliged everywhere. So however many Haley manages to pick up in Michigan, how many of them will be Dems who won't be voting for her OR Trump in the general, like those Dems who voted for her yesterday?
In any case, she's 0 for 4 so far and by a wide margin. We're as yet way too far from the total of delegates needed, but Trump's ahead by a lot. I'm told SC is a winner take all state, which means he got 50, though his win percentage gets him 44 for sure. How will he do in other winner take all states? How many of them are there? As his lead has been so strong among GOP voters so far, only pockets, like Charleston and Columbia put Haley in front, but they were overwhelmed by the rest of the state. At this point, I can't see it being any other way anywhere else.
12 comments:
Republicans will lose this Roevember no matter if Nikki stays in the race or not. LOL! There are no longer enough conservatives to bring for themselves any significant electoral victories. LOLOLOL! Trump Dump could have one hundred million votes but we sane people will have at least thirty to fourty million more votes. LOLOL! I hope she stays in to make things more humiliating. She probably wil LOLOL!
There's nothing sane about adults voting for Dems or refusing to vote for Trump to deny Dems the White House. But then, you're neither sane nor an adult, so...
LOL! I am both sane and an adult. At least I'm not a part of the MAGA cult that would give away all my money just to pay off an old dude's fines who is going to jail anyway. I guess you do have something to look forward to after all--Trump for Prison 2024. LOL! I am sure you'd sit there with him the rest of your life and throw the keys in the toilet to flush. SO glad I am not a MAGA cultist.
No way you're an adult. Your comments are too childish. But then, that could indicate insanity. You ARE a lefty, so that's another indication given the great harm they've done to our nation over the last several decades. Then again, nothing you say suggests you pay attention any better than a small child.
There is no "MAGA cult", so that suggests mental disorder pretending such a thing exists. It's also childish to suggest such a thing rather than to speak specifically about which side promotes the most effective policies. It ain't your side, that's for sure!
So. At this point, it's plain you've nothing intelligent to add to any discussions, so given your feo-like nonsense, I'll be denying you commenting privileges. I recommend you go to Dan's blog. Your the kind of delusional visitor who is most welcome there.
Marshal, if and when Trump is found guilty of one of these crimes (and clearly, he should - he literally took top secret documents from the White House AND refused to comply with returning them AND tried to hide and obscure his actions - you all would go nuts if Biden did that! ...just for one example), WHEN he is found guilty, do you think the GOP should finally say, "This is too much. Step out of the race, you're not our candidate..." Or do you think he should run from jail/under the shadow of being a criminal? EVEN knowing that Trump is probably going to lose any way, but CERTAINLY he'll lose if he's convicted... do you think the GOP should stand by their con? Or finally cut him loose?
IF Biden were found guilty of some crime (and he's not), you WOULD go nuts if the Democrats ran him (they/we wouldn't), wouldn't you?
February 26, 2024 at 4:52 PM
Hi Dan! Is this Brandon kid a friend of yours? He's clearly on your intellectual level!
"Marshal, if and when Trump is found guilty of one of these crimes..."
You mean "allegations".
"(and clearly, he should - he literally took top secret documents from the White House AND refused to comply with returning them AND tried to hide and obscure his actions - you all would go nuts if Biden did that! ...just for one example)"j
He was president when he took them. Biden wasn't and couldn't take any classified document to store in any of several locations without documented permission from the president. Does such permission exist? Thus, there was no crime in him doing so as he has plenary power to do whatever he likes as far as classifying or declassifying documents. That means there's no one who can tell him he can't stuff them down your throat or line his birdcage or pass them out as party favors. There's no protocol he's required to follow in order to declassify them. You're too busy hating Trump in the manner common to grace embracing modern progressives that you refuse to educate yourself.
"WHEN he is found guilty,"
IF he is found guilty, it will be another case of leftist abusing the law, a grievous miscarriage of justice only modern progressives have the temerity to perpetrate on an innocent person simply for being the opposition.
"do you think the GOP should finally say, "This is too much. Step out of the race, you're not our candidate...""
Only if they have the same low character as you. What I know they should say, in perhaps not so many words, would be, "Go f**k yourselves, Trabue-like vermin! We don't abide lying evildoers!"
"Or do you think he should run from jail/under the shadow of being a criminal?"
If he was to do that, it would be after a false conviction for a crime that doesn't exist. No one has authority over the president to dictate to him in any way regarding classification of any documents or any other matter of national security.
"Or do you think he should run from jail/under the shadow of being a criminal? EVEN knowing that Trump is probably going to lose any way, but CERTAINLY he'll lose if he's convicted... do you think the GOP should stand by their con?"
All good and honest Americans should stand by this guy against the false charges by your KGB grade political criminals.
"IF Biden were found guilty of some crime (and he's not), you WOULD go nuts if the Democrats ran him (they/we wouldn't), wouldn't you?"
He's a plagiarist, a sexual abuser, an adulterer, one who defies both the Constitution and the SCOTUS who supports it and is guilty of a host of other issues far more worthy of prosecution than anything Trump's being jacked around over. You stupidly think he's a better person than Trump.
You've never had an honest argument against Trump. You just hate him like the Christ-mocking liar you are. Despite his flaws and imperfections, he's been far more beneficially effective as president on behalf of ALL Americans than either your abject morons Biden and Obama. Biden destroying the country with the help of the entirety of the Dem party and you, like the vile evil you are, pretend there's some serious problem with Trump.
People like you are what's wrong with this country. People like you are a clear and present danger to my grandchildren. People like you vote for destroyers like Obama and Biden, who fund terrorism and blow off nations like Israel in favor of China and Iran. You are like the Dems and their minions in the press...a real enemy of the people of my country.
"you all would go nuts if Biden did that!"
Well, Biden did that!. He took more top secret documents, stored them in more unsecure locations, and took them when he was in positions where he did not have the power to declassify documents (as trump did). Not only that but the classified documents at UPenn were in a location accessible to pretty much anyone, yet somehow the logs of who accessed them magically disappeared. The special counsel literally found that Biden knowingly took classified documents, but didn't recommend charging him because of the likelihood that he'd get off at trial because he was a senile, bumbling, fool, who appears likeable.
Not only that, but the authority abusers Dan reveres saw fit to send a SWAT team to rummage through Melania's wardrobe despite Trump's plenary authority and found less problem with others having done the same thing without it...such as Biden, Hillary, Pence and others. This again demonstrates the left's propensity of inflating perceived wrongs of their opponents while minimizing almost to nothingness the more obvious and factual wrongs of their own. Few do that better and more routinely than Dan.
I agree with Haley on one thing. It's time for "Out with the old, in with the new." in the GOP. As we see McConnell stepping down from senate leadership, hopefully as a prelude to stepping down period, it's time for the old guard to move on.
The problem is that while she's right about the principle, she's dead wrong that she's the answer to the problem. She needs to get out of the race, and move on.
Trump-Biden isn't the choice I'd hoped for, but since it's what I'm stuck with, let's get it over with.
I'm proposing that since neither Trump nor Biden will say anything remotely new, original, or different from last time, we do the following. Dispense with commercials, debates, and news coverage of both of them and enjoy the silence until the election.
If Trump does no better than he did the first time, the nation will enjoy great improvement over what's been happening since he was criminally denied a second term in 2020. That's just an obvious and irrefutable fact. Given his first term was his first foray into politics, he's not among "the old". He's a 77 year old moving into his sophomore year. A rookie. A Patrick Mahomes level rookie.
"Out with the old and in with the new" is no more rational criteria for electing or reelecting than is "throw the bums out...they're all the same". How long someone serves is not an issue. How beneficially effective someone is is all which matters.
Not very long ago, there was a guy who replaced Democrat Melissa Bean in my district back in Hellinois. His name was Joe Walsh. Instead of being the effective conservative I thought he'd be, he turned out to be a blowhard grandstander who thought yelling and stomping his foot was good governance. He rightly lasted just his first term and was replaced by another lefty moron. Thus, "the new" wasn't all that great.
I don't are how long a person has been in office. I don't care if they've been there since the 1830s. If they're still doing the job in a manner I find beneficial for those they're in office to serve, I'm voting for them again and again and again until they die or retire or prove themselves no longer a benefit.
Trump's experience and track record are all the argument I need to know that he was the front runner from the start of the primary. Though I liked DeSantis as well, he provided no special reason why his great work in a lower level executive position meant he was more suited for the higher level executive position than one who had proven himself beneficially effective in that position. Had DeSantis convinced enough people to the extent he won the GOP nomination, I'd have no problem voting for him, as there are no Democrats who are more worthy of the presidency than he. But he didn't. Now, Trump remains the one who is far more worthy than anyone the Dems might try to run, and certainly more so than Haley as well in my opinion.
I'm absolutely on board with dispensing with campaign ads for either Trump or Biden. If anyone is at all confused as to why Trump should be 47, they're either not paying attention, they're stupid, or worse, they're Dan Trabue.
New coverage about the false charges against Trump and the factual charges against Biden is actual news, so pay attention or don't, it's legit coverage even if the lying lefty enemy of the people side of the media are pretending they're being objective.
As to McConnell, I'm more pleased than not that he's stepping down. He should have been a force for good, and sometimes he very much has been. The Garland issue was an example of when he was a force for good. But he's as corrupt as a Dem as far as I'm concerned and now that he's had episodes which suggest he's physically past being of service, he should step down. It's my understanding that he's only stepping down as GOP Senate leader, but not as the senior Senator from Kentucky. Is that what you're hearing? Now the question is, who will replace him? Let's pray it's not someone like Lindsey Graham!
Obviously out with the old..., presumes a certain degree of competency with the "new". But when you look at the number of long serving elected officials and at their use of their offices to generate massive wealth (often through questionable means) and to further their own interests, it is completely rational to want to see some turnover. Again, one of Trump's big selling points in 2016 was his outsider status. Yet, somehow, that only seems to apply to Trump in 2016, and virtually no one else.
Be that as it may, we are apparently stuck with Trump-Biden, and I'm all for silencing campaign ads until November.
You can say whatever negative crap you want, but I'm sick of recycling the same old choices election after election. Maybe I'm spending too much time reconsidering the Libertarian's positions on things.
"Obviously out with the old..., presumes a certain degree of competency with the "new"."
Now that you've said so, OK.
"But when you look at the number of long serving elected officials and at their use of their offices to generate massive wealth (often through questionable means) and to further their own interests, it is completely rational to want to see some turnover."
This only concerns me in two ways:
1. They were ineffective as legislators, spending all that time getting no more done to truly benefit the American people than did Biden in 47 years in Congress.
2. Any case of where self-enrichment was illegal.
I don't know that it's possible or proper to inhibit a legislator from taking advantage of their position to improve their lot so long as there's no illegality involved. They may indeed have means of doing so not available to the rest of us, and if that can't be addressed in a manner is simply sour grapes, I can easily live with it so long as they're doing the people's work and improving our lives in some way. If that's the case, any of us can step up to the plate and having done so avail ourselves of those means of profit as well.
"Again, one of Trump's big selling points in 2016 was his outsider status. Yet, somehow, that only seems to apply to Trump in 2016, and virtually no one else."
I don't know who's saying this. In my case, someone like a Vivek Ramaswamy outsider status is no more or less a plus or minus than it was for Trump. But unlike Trump, he wasn't there doing a good job yet, so when weighing all factors, one chooses which factors have more weight than others. I think the "been there done that quite well" factor Trump has on his side weighs substantially more than others are prepared to say it does. And it's not just that he has been there and done it well, but that in this particular moment in time, I'd much prefer going with what we know rather than wager on VR being able to get anything done at all. If Biden & Co. not f**ked things up as badly as they have, this point would not weigh as much as it does now.
"Be that as it may, we are apparently stuck with Trump-Biden, and I'm all for silencing campaign ads until November."
On this point we're definitely in agreement. As I said, if one doesn't know by now...
"You can say whatever negative crap you want, but I'm sick of recycling the same old choices election after election."
Two questions:
1. What "negative crap"?
2. Isn't that reveling in hate for you to post that sentiment?
"Maybe I'm spending too much time reconsidering the Libertarian's positions on things."
Why would you be? I'm sincerely interested in knowing the answer to that question. Perhaps you can do a post on it elaborating your reasoning. Personally, I find them wanting. However, a read something promoting Rand Paul as McConnell's replacement as Senate GOP leader and I find the notion appealing...not based on him identifying as a Libertarian, but by virtue of his track record.
Post a Comment