Oldbear83 said:

---

You're acting delusional right now, you know that?

You still can't recognize that Trump USED MAGA, he did not define it.

DeSantis is MAGA, so is Youngkin. Ironically that's why Trump is going after them, they are much better at it than The Donald, so he sees his grip slipping.

That's a good thing. Spitting on millions of MAGA voters, well, that's a Pelosi thing.

---

you MAGA people are the "Lunatic Fringe", just like SQAUD and Bernie. Both are foolish and their sycophants are the same, but just effing dumb.

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

"I am saying the MAGA make up a small percentage of the GOP"

That is incorrect. I agree that the MAGA acronym doesn't impress many, but the values and ideals espoused by Trump, however imperfectly, resonate with the GOP base and rejecting MAGA would send the message that the GOP is retreating to the days of Bush/McCain/Romney-style conventionalism.

The GOP would become a permanent minority party a generation if they were that foolish.

It's vital for the GOP to step back from emotion and pay attention to what the voters really care about:

• Globalism, when used to punish American interests, is wrong and must be stopped.
• Perverting Environmentalism to obsess on CO2 instead of clean water and viable environments, is wrong and must be stopped.
• We must be reluctant to go to war, anywhere.
• Spending money you do not have is stealing from your children, plain and dirty.
• There is no reason not to require ID to vote, or to not purge voter rolls
• Politicians must abide by the same laws as non-politicians
• Politicians who vote on taxes must prepare their own personal taxes
• Any social media which cancels accounts according to politics will be put out of business
• Assisting illegal entry into the US shall be a felony with a 20 year sentence per offense

That's a decent starting place.

---

You are mistaken some of the common positions and or believes between conservatives (Reagan Conservatives) and MAGA's.

Greene, Gaetz, and Rudi are MAGA. They DO NOT represent most of the GOP. Trump had the Bully Pulpit, but that is gone.

MAGA's are ready to blow up (not physically) Washington to get there way. That will never work. The systems and bureaucracy (I know most think of it as a bad word, but it serves a purpose) provide the stability and efficiency to get things done. If we did even half of what some of the people on this site wants, the Nation grinds to a halt. Need to work within the systems in place, not destroy them or blow them up, MAGA's want to blow it up. MAGA's and the Progressives use the same tactics. Same as Facists and Communists. Neither extreme works and is sustainable. US has been strong because we are not extremists.

---

You are over-thinking and mis-thinking.

Just look at the polling. Last snapshot we've seen, which was fairly consistent (with a slight downward trickle in the average) for most of the year, had Trump in the 53-63% range. That, by any reasonable definition is representative of the sentiments of more than half of GOP primary voters. Not MAGA-world. Republican world.

The results of Tuesday will have an impact on those numbers. We clearly see the establishment trying to influence them by blaming Trump. And we see Trump-world blaming establishment. There's nothing remarkable about that. Success has many fathers; failure is an orphan.

Yes, some of Trump's highest profile picks lost. But, his overall record was like 170-something to 9. In no serious discussion could he be the totality of the problem. Moreover, he showed deference to requests that he NOT engage in campaigning for these candidates. Dems had to conjure up a pretext to make him the issue (MAL raid).

I have no problem in debating pros-cons of Trump.
But to exempt the actual leadership of the party - McConnell, McCarthy, Romney - is ignoring the problem.
They did a piss-poor job, too.
What we are discussing is not remarkable.
It is a garden-variety establishment vs grass-roots debate that every party goes thru every cycle.
And in this particular context, the GOP establishment is going to try to co-opt the success of Desantis to take out Trump.
May work.
May. Not.

Now, to the next round in the coming = Georgia. I see that Kemp has handed his consulting team and ground operation over to Walker. That is good leadership AND good politics. (and being a team player I will not overly focus on why he did not do it two years ago.....) That sets up potential for establishment to be able to criticize grass-roots, should Walker get across the line.

So. If I'm advising Trump. I tell him this: You played team ball in the mid-terms and sat on the sidelines. As a result, the Maga-base did not show up to vote. And now they are blaming you for that. You need to engage in GA in a big way and show that you can carry Walker to victory. If you do not do that, you will be ceding the battlefield to your critics. If Walker loses, they will blame you. And if they win, they will say they don't need you. If you believe you are the guy who can win in 2024, you will have to go show them you can win GA. So go out and show everyone right now, because if you don't, you cede to your critics the premise of your own toxicity.

A run-off is the quintessential base turnout election. Lower turnout, particularly low with independents. Everybody knows the candidates by now. There will be no persuasion. Victory is almost solely a function of which side is more energized to get their voters turned out. I hope Trump spends the next six weeks barnstomring GA.

sombear said:

---

Since when is Desantis a go-along conformist? Or Youngkin? Or Kemp for that matter? These are strong conservatives who have taken on establishments of all kinds. Being a decent human being who gets things done and who doesn't support wild conspiracy theories does not make you go-along or establishment.

---

Younkin didn't do much to help win the House. Lost 2 of 3 swing districts. No red wave there. No sir.

Yeah, Younkin appears to be a nice guy. Yeah, he won a tough election in a blue state. But his model didn't exactly translate in VA mid-terms, did it? Or did he even try?

Sure, some would say...."but...er, uh...Trump cost us those VA seats" as if his mere existence sitting in his living room at MAL was toxic.

But Trumps "mere existence" didn't cost Youngkin the governor mansion, did it?
I mean, Trump endorsed Youngkin at a rally in Virginia, the day after Younkin won the primary. And during the endorsement speech, Trump laid into McAuliffe in typical fashion. Somehow, nobody complained about it at the time. Nobody called Trump toxic. And somehow miraculously, in spite of all that MAGA-deadweight, Younkin won anyway. (insert eye roll emoji here).

The Trump critics are trying to have it both ways.....

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF: "You look at Reagan and his policies and see Trump? Who is delusional?"

No, I have always said - and you even agreed - that REAGAN started MAGA and Trump just used the principles of MAGA for his own advancement.

What worked for Trump was when he followed the MAGA course. It's when he let his ego get in the way that he went off the rails.

DeSantis is MAGA, so is Lake, so is Youngkin. Trump is Trump, he's gone off from what worked, that's part of what hurt him in 2020 (Trusting Fauci at first, letting lockdowns happen with COVID, waiting too late to fight against Vote by Mail, etc.).

In 2016 Trump was the only candidate supporting returning jobs to the US, standing up to Russia, and backing US energy independence. That's why, warts and all, he smeared the field in 2016 and won the GOP nomination easily.

Now there are others doing the message better. Even Abbott, who screwed up the Ice Storm power failures last year, is better at imaging the issues than Trump, and Trump is melting down because of it.

What's needed now is to bring the MAGA voters to where they see better options. Dissing the MAGA voters is a great way to lose elections.

---

I agree he used the phrase "Make America Great Again". But MAGA has become more than a slogan. It is a movement and a lot of the movement and especially their tactics is not inclusionary or positive. Reagan was an optimist, pragmatic but optimistic on America and the American spirit, never mean.

Trump is not. Trump has made the Reagan message negative and his tactics bullish.

As I have said before, I liked a lot of Trump's policies. I thought he was Reaganesque in 2016, with the Black Colleges, Prison Reform, Ukrainian sale of TOW missiles to preserve independence, defense of Israel, Abraham Accords and his allowing the military to defeat ISIS. There was a lot that Reagan would like. If you listen to early interviews he still had a sense of humor.

But, in the last 3 years he has morphed into something else. And his followers have gotten savage. His latest after the election, is not the Trump that ran in 2016. That Trump was even light hearted a little and made jokes. This one is vicious. Maybe Dems and constant fighting made him this way. But, I can't see him being a leader of a Nation.

You guys can disagree, that is where I am coming from.

---

Well, I do disagree. I live in a predominantly Asian neighborhood, and while they have cooled on Trump, they are still very big on MAGA.

I honestly think you are trusting too much on the media's sliming of MAGA and missing most of the message.

Yes, MAGA is a movement, just as Reagan created the Young Republicans in the 1980s MAGA is attracting Blacks, Asians and Latinos like nothing I ever saw before.

And hell no, it's not hateful or exclusionist. The people I see in MAGA are many races, and include a lot of young families.

You keep focusing on Trump when MAGA has moved on from Trump. In fact that's why he is so mad now, his creation has grown up and moved out on its own.

---

You are correct. Trump did not create "MAGA." It's been sitting there since Reagan waiting for another muse. Anyone who can see that is a little out of touch.

my physical therapist (SI joint issue) is an asian gal who just moved to Waco from CA. After some political flirting, we ascertained we are of like mind. She started it...."are you a Cowboys fan?" I said "well, I always was, but I gave the NFL up for the Anthem, and then I discovered how much I could accomplish around the farm on a Sunday afternoon. I'll come back if they work as hard to get me back as they did to go away." She laughed. Turned out, she and husband just moved to Tx because "he wanted to know what it felt like to actually win an election." Just picked Waco because it was centrally located.

I have an (anglo) employee who did the same thing....left CA for Tx specifically for political reasons. And a second one who came here from MN for work and was typical millennial blue but has taken the red pill.

MAGA made these governors we're talking about. If they start criticizing MAGA like RMF is doing, they will not win the primary.

ATL Bear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

As long as you focus on Trump, you are missing the point. What is needed is winning over his base.

DeSantis is being very smart on that point. Governor DeSantis is simply ignoring Trump, which is the best way to handle him. And DeSantis' policies are exactly the common-sense measures MAGA Republicans will buy into.

Maybe 2-3 million of Trump's base are obsessed with the man, the rest support him because only Trump seems to be on message. DeSantis and anyone like him can win them over.

---

I agree with you on this. No argument. DeSantis won over the Hispanics (Cuban & Caribbean) by producing and following up on what he said. Cubans, Haitians, Dominicans, Puerto Rican cultures are all family oriented, hard working. I know that the temp workers Haitians are in demand, or were when I was working in South Florida.

Now, I do not know enough about the Mexican and Central American Hispanic cultures to say if he would attract them.

---

The key to Trump is to understand that Trump did not create the GOP base which love his policies, he simply was able to recognize what the base wanted, and promised to act on it. For the most part, Trump delivered on that promise, which is what created his current support.

Trump is a bit like Fetterman. What I mean is, Fetterman had a sloppy look with his hoodie and casual way of speaking, but a report I read indicated PA voters identified with him more than they did Oz's expensive suit and perfect hair. Trump looks stupid in that red MAGA hat but it makes him look like a regular guy, especially compared to the career politicos.

Trump was smart enough to know he would never look or sound like Ronald Reagan, so he crafted his own campaign persona. What's needed now is someone smart enough to run with Trump's policies but sell it under their own brand. And ideally we need several good choices, not one person we depend on as a Messiah.

---

Once again dead on.

We have several this cycle - DeSantis, Halley, Pompeo, and Cotton (if he runs) all have similar policies to Trump WITHOUT the baggage.

Hogan to me is intriguing, he is conservative but was able to navigate a Democrat State in Maryland/DC area. Don't think he has persona to challenge, but he was able to get things done in a Dem stronghold.

I think it will be a DeSantis/Halley ticket which will be tough to beat.

---

I will vote for Desantis but not if his running mate is Halley, Pompeo or any of these other establishment hacks. The maga voters DO NOT want to go backwards to old style neocon GOP people and Neocon Nikki and CIA asset Pompeo are def not it. Now Kari Lake, yes. I'd even be ok with Tim Scott but not that big of a fan of him. Ideally give me Trump & Rand Paul or Desantis and Rand Paul or THomas Massey and you got something.

---

You would not be happy with DeSantis if you want Kari Lake, Trump or Rand Paul! DeSantis is very much an establishment guy that does what it takes to keep the economy and growth going. He is not going to do the Trump or Lake crap...

---

if you want him to win the primary, you need to avoid messaging like that part in bold. He's gotta be the opposite of that or he will not defeat Trump.

---

That is where you seem wrong. There is a bigger part of the US that wants the President to be presidential and be able to work with the establishment. Only the fringe wants to blow things up. You do not move the nation forward blowing things up and being counterculture. Look at who the big winners were yesterday, republican governors that are adults.

---

Now you're attacking over half of the people who vote in the GOP primary as crazy fringe-ists.

I didn't learn politics in wards & precincts, or the halls full of elected officials. I learned it overseas, where it really is Game of Thrones, every day....you literally win or you die. And in that world, there is one rule that must be obeyed above all others = never, ever, EVER attack your base. If you win, you have a smaller base; and if you lose....well, you lose. Politics is addition, remember. So every time you think "we have to win independents..." you have to remind yourself to also say "we have to win our base...." One cannot make it an either/or, which is the vanity of so many moderates who think they are above garden variety pandering. Anyone who thinks they're too good to pander to their base has no business being in politics. Politics by subtraction never works out very well.

There is only one Republican in sight who has a chance to defeat Trump, and that is primarily because he sprang from the MAGA base, with the same kind of slashing, in-your-face, rabble-rousing, Freedom Caucus obstructionism of leadership politics that the Maga-man himself is known for...the kind of hard-edged politics that says with great glee "Florida is where woke comes to die." (dear God how I loved that). He has spent his entire career wooing the Republican base. He's been adding. Adding establishment sentiment Adding soft-Magas. Etc.... The moment DeSantis backs away from that and starts to attack the MAGA-base the way you did...that is subtraction. It is the moment his campaign starts to curl up and die into nothing more than establishment vs base politics that actually will divide the party, with himself as the establishment.

The big winners yesterday are guys who dropped off illegal aliens at places like Washington DC and Martha's Vineyard, not guys who acted according to politically correct notions of adulthood. They threw some punches at the vanities of the new progressive cultural hegemony. Your argument should be that they are better than Trump at the game of enraging cultural establishments enraptured with wokeness...... Frankly, Desantis just might be that. But he has an awfully tall hill to climb gaining trust from the Maga faithful. Big step on Tuesday, for sure. But just one step. Long way to go.

Democrats do an outstanding job working with the crazies in their base, finding ways to keep them motivated and an overall positive force. Republicans absolutely SUCK at it. If we don't get a lot better at it, we will continue to underperform.

---

If you grew up politically where you said, then it's more never ever lose control of your military. The people are only part of the means to the outcome.

---

and how does one do that?

By ensuring institutional control with key personnel decisions, ensuring the right people command the right units.....people from family, village, tribe, region, etc....maybe a childhood friend or college roommate, or a soulmate from some jungle struggle somewhere. The dynamic is so profound that it goes beyond the "never attack" principle. The prudent leader tacitly allows his coalition latitude to excess....to be harsher than necessary with opponents, to nibble at the coffers, to be seen as an extricable part of the system. That tells the leader his inner circle has "buy-in," that their fate is tied to his. They cannot hope to step out of the regime and re-emerge in another. That can never be allowed. (call it the "General Flynn principle.")

Never attack your base, only your enemies.

Going after Trump is fair.
Going after MAGA is suicide.

Does anyone, anywhere, have a link of Democrats criticizing Fetterman? Hobbs? Warnock? Can we really say that those three (or a number of others) actually outclass our candidates? That those "candidates" were so strong that they won it on their own?

Of course not. It takes a team. And our leadership team in Washington thought it could win the mid-terms without a MAGA message or a MAGA base. And now....it wants to blame the MAGA base.

That is Ceausescu-esque pathology

J.R. said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

You're acting delusional right now, you know that?

You still can't recognize that Trump USED MAGA, he did not define it.

DeSantis is MAGA, so is Youngkin. Ironically that's why Trump is going after them, they are much better at it than The Donald, so he sees his grip slipping.

That's a good thing. Spitting on millions of MAGA voters, well, that's a Pelosi thing.

---

you MAGA people are the "Lunatic Fringe", just like SQAUD and Bernie. Both are foolish and their sycophants are the same, but just effing dumb.

---

but wait, SQUAD and Bernie have won the last two elections.

Why might that be?

Could it be that their team spends its energy criticizing us rather than the SQUAD and Bernie?

Could it be that our problem is that we have too many numbnuts sitting on the sidelines carping rather than taking off their tie and getting their knuckles dirty?

whiterock said:

---

Yes, some of Trump's highest profile picks lost. But, his overall record was like 170-something to 9. In no serious discussion could he be the totality of the problem.

---

Of the 170, how many were incumbents in a ruby red state, e.g. Paxton?
How many of his high profile senate candidates won? How much of his PAC money did he send them? McConnell spent over $200 million trying to get Rs elected.
Trump is out for Trump. He may still have a majority in a GOP primary, but he can't win a general election. Maybe Republicans should nominate him so he can lose and Rs can move on.

From Strassel in WSJ yesterday:
Pennsylvanians preferred to elect a recent stroke victim rather than take a chance on an untested TV doctor. New Hampshire returned the generally disliked Maggie Hassan to the Senate rather than roll the dice on Don Bolduc, who couldn't decide two years later if the 2020 election was stolen. Arizonans appear not to have been sold on an unknown venture capitalist named Blake Masters. Georgians have sent scandal-plagued Herschel Walker to a Senate runoff, but he ran behind every other statewide GOP candidate. TV personality Tudor Dixon got crushed in the Michigan governor's race. Doug Mastriano got routed in Pennsylvania.

whiterock said:

---

sombear said:

---

Since when is Desantis a go-along conformist? Or Youngkin? Or Kemp for that matter? These are strong conservatives who have taken on establishments of all kinds. Being a decent human being who gets things done and who doesn't support wild conspiracy theories does not make you go-along or establishment.

---

Younkin didn't do much to help win the House. Lost 2 of 3 swing districts. No red wave there. No sir.

Yeah, Younkin appears to be a nice guy. Yeah, he won a tough election in a blue state. But his model didn't exactly translate in VA mid-terms, did it? Or did he even try?

Sure, some would say...."but...er, uh...Trump cost us those VA seats" as if his mere existence sitting in his living room at MAL was toxic.

But Trumps "mere existence" didn't cost Youngkin the governor mansion, did it?
I mean, Trump endorsed Youngkin at a rally in Virginia, the day after Younkin won the primary. And during the endorsement speech, Trump laid into McAuliffe in typical fashion. Somehow, nobody complained about it at the time. Nobody called Trump toxic. And somehow miraculously, in spite of all that MAGA-deadweight, Younkin won anyway. (insert eye roll emoji here).

The Trump critics are trying to have it both ways.....

---

Holy strawmen! My point: Desantis and Youngkin are strong conservatives. Your rebuttal: Youngkin lost the VA house seats (when he wasn't on the ticket); Trump got Youngkin elected; and it's not true that Trump cost us the VA house seats.

I really don't know where to start. VA GOP took down 1 of 3 targeted Dem incumbents. If every state did that, we'd have a strong majority. I did not blame Trump for the other 2 VA seats. I DID blame Trump - in earlier posts - for his Senate and Gov candidates. They all lost winnable seats, and it was foreseeable. There were far better conservative options in every key state.

Trump did some great things, on policy and in campaigns. But he deserves zero credit for Youngkin. Youngkin and the VA GOP asked Trump to stay away. It wasn't personal. Just good politics. Trump was very unpopular in VA, particularly in the suburbs where Youngkin needed votes. Trump in fact was toxic in VA. He got demolished there in both campaigns.

Dems ran on Trump Trump Trump. It worked. I wish Trump was more popular. I wish it would have failed. Trump's disapproval among all voters was in the mid-to-high 60s. For one of the few times in history, independents broke strongly in favor of a very unpopular President.

Trump won 45% of the popular vote last time around against Joe freaking Biden, and that was before Jan 6 and Trump's bizarre behavior since then. That's who you want to hook our wagon to?

You state two false premises.

One, Trump did not sit on the sidelines. He spent a lot of time in all the battlegrounds - PA, GA, OH, AZ, NV, and others. The only way Trump stayed on the sidelines was with his money. He raised all that money promising to spend it on the midterms, but he didn't. 90% of it he kept or spent on staff and admin expenses. If I was a donor (which I was for 6 years) I'd be pissed.

Two, MAGA did turn out. So did every other GOP faction. We met virtually all our turnout targets. We will end up winning the national vote, which almost never happens. Problem was indies did what they have virtually never done and that is break hard for Dems despite Biden's low approvals.

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Yes, some of Trump's highest profile picks lost. But, his overall record was like 170-something to 9. In no serious discussion could he be the totality of the problem.

---

Of the 170, how many were incumbents in a ruby red state, e.g. Paxton?
How many of his high profile senate candidates won? How much of his PAC money did he send them? McConnell spent over $200 million trying to get Rs elected.
Trump is out for Trump. He may still have a majority in a GOP primary, but he can't win a general election. Maybe Republicans should nominate him so he can lose and Rs can move on.

From Strassel in WSJ yesterday:
Pennsylvanians preferred to elect a recent stroke victim rather than take a chance on an untested TV doctor. New Hampshire returned the generally disliked Maggie Hassan to the Senate rather than roll the dice on Don Bolduc, who couldn't decide two years later if the 2020 election was stolen. Arizonans appear not to have been sold on an unknown venture capitalist named Blake Masters. Georgians have sent scandal-plagued Herschel Walker to a Senate runoff, but he ran behind every other statewide GOP candidate. TV personality Tudor Dixon got crushed in the Michigan governor's race. Doug Mastriano got routed in Pennsylvania.

---

Look at the analysis. Where his MAGA Candidate took on a GOP incumbent his success rate was 35%. That number I agree, about 35% of the Conservative vote aligns with MAGA. When given the choice between Moderate or non-MAGA candidate versus a Donald Trump hand selected MAGA candidate, he hit 35% of the time. Murkowski still may pull it out. MAGA is NOT the choice of the majority of Republicans. If you want to go into how many were unopposed or versus Dems, ok. I am interested in what does the GOP Party of Lincoln, Eisenhower, and Reagan want. I do not believe it is Trump.


LOST
Georgia Attorney General John Gordon
Georgia Insurance and Safety Fire Commissioner Patrick Witt
Georgia Secretary of State Jody Hice
Georgia Governor David Perdue
Idaho Governor Janice McGeachin
Michigan State House District 88 Mick Bricker
Michigan State Senate District 22 Mike Detmer
U.S. House SC-01 Katie Arrington
U.S. House WA-04 Loren Culp
Wisconsin State Assembly District 63 Adam Steen

WON
Arizona State Senate District 9 Robert Scantlebury
Michigan State Senate District 17 Jonathan Lindsey
U.S. House MI-03 John Gibbs
U.S. House SC-07 Russell Fry
U.S. House WA-03 Joe Kent
U.S. House WY-AL Harriet Hageman (Defeated Liz Cheney)

Draw
Kelly Tshibaka Advanced along with incumbent Lisa Murkowski

Again, you MAGA clowns.... I'm just a simple guy. Here is what Trumpy has deliver for you guys. He lost, the Presidency , lost the Congress, lost the Senate and presided over the Red Wave that wasn't and he gives you Lake (she cray) and Hershel (he dumb). Nice that this is what Trump has delivered! pathetic . Go away, Fat Orange!

J.R. said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF: "You look at Reagan and his policies and see Trump? Who is delusional?"

No, I have always said - and you even agreed - that REAGAN started MAGA and Trump just used the principles of MAGA for his own advancement.

What worked for Trump was when he followed the MAGA course. It's when he let his ego get in the way that he went off the rails.

DeSantis is MAGA, so is Lake, so is Youngkin. Trump is Trump, he's gone off from what worked, that's part of what hurt him in 2020 (Trusting Fauci at first, letting lockdowns happen with COVID, waiting too late to fight against Vote by Mail, etc.).

In 2016 Trump was the only candidate supporting returning jobs to the US, standing up to Russia, and backing US energy independence. That's why, warts and all, he smeared the field in 2016 and won the GOP nomination easily.

Now there are others doing the message better. Even Abbott, who screwed up the Ice Storm power failures last year, is better at imaging the issues than Trump, and Trump is melting down because of it.

What's needed now is to bring the MAGA voters to where they see better options. Dissing the MAGA voters is a great way to lose elections.

---

I agree he used the phrase "Make America Great Again". But MAGA has become more than a slogan. It is a movement and a lot of the movement and especially their tactics is not inclusionary or positive. Reagan was an optimist, pragmatic but optimistic on America and the American spirit, never mean.

Trump is not. Trump has made the Reagan message negative and his tactics bullish.

As I have said before, I liked a lot of Trump's policies. I thought he was Reaganesque in 2016, with the Black Colleges, Prison Reform, Ukrainian sale of TOW missiles to preserve independence, defense of Israel, Abraham Accords and his allowing the military to defeat ISIS. There was a lot that Reagan would like. If you listen to early interviews he still had a sense of humor.

But, in the last 3 years he has morphed into something else. And his followers have gotten savage. His latest after the election, is not the Trump that ran in 2016. That Trump was even light hearted a little and made jokes. This one is vicious. Maybe Dems and constant fighting made him this way. But, I can't see him being a leader of a Nation.

You guys can disagree, that is where I am coming from.

---

Well, I do disagree. I live in a predominantly Asian neighborhood, and while they have cooled on Trump, they are still very big on MAGA.

I honestly think you are trusting too much on the media's sliming of MAGA and missing most of the message.

Yes, MAGA is a movement, just as Reagan created the Young Republicans in the 1980s MAGA is attracting Blacks, Asians and Latinos like nothing I ever saw before.

And hell no, it's not hateful or exclusionist. The people I see in MAGA are many races, and include a lot of young families.

You keep focusing on Trump when MAGA has moved on from Trump. In fact that's why he is so mad now, his creation has grown up and moved out on its own.

---

I'm sure your Asian neighbors are really digging the latest Trumpty Dumbty tweet about Younkin "sounds kinda Chinese"! What the hell are you doing living with a bunch of *****s? You need to move to an all white Arian neighborhood with the rest of your MAGA peeps!

---

Me: "they have cooled on Trump, they are still very big on MAGA."

You: "your Asian neighbors are really digging the latest Trumpty Dumbty tweet "

Do you even read before you shoot back?

Oldbear83 said:

---

J.R. said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF: "You look at Reagan and his policies and see Trump? Who is delusional?"

No, I have always said - and you even agreed - that REAGAN started MAGA and Trump just used the principles of MAGA for his own advancement.

What worked for Trump was when he followed the MAGA course. It's when he let his ego get in the way that he went off the rails.

DeSantis is MAGA, so is Lake, so is Youngkin. Trump is Trump, he's gone off from what worked, that's part of what hurt him in 2020 (Trusting Fauci at first, letting lockdowns happen with COVID, waiting too late to fight against Vote by Mail, etc.).

In 2016 Trump was the only candidate supporting returning jobs to the US, standing up to Russia, and backing US energy independence. That's why, warts and all, he smeared the field in 2016 and won the GOP nomination easily.

Now there are others doing the message better. Even Abbott, who screwed up the Ice Storm power failures last year, is better at imaging the issues than Trump, and Trump is melting down because of it.

What's needed now is to bring the MAGA voters to where they see better options. Dissing the MAGA voters is a great way to lose elections.

---

I agree he used the phrase "Make America Great Again". But MAGA has become more than a slogan. It is a movement and a lot of the movement and especially their tactics is not inclusionary or positive. Reagan was an optimist, pragmatic but optimistic on America and the American spirit, never mean.

Trump is not. Trump has made the Reagan message negative and his tactics bullish.

As I have said before, I liked a lot of Trump's policies. I thought he was Reaganesque in 2016, with the Black Colleges, Prison Reform, Ukrainian sale of TOW missiles to preserve independence, defense of Israel, Abraham Accords and his allowing the military to defeat ISIS. There was a lot that Reagan would like. If you listen to early interviews he still had a sense of humor.

But, in the last 3 years he has morphed into something else. And his followers have gotten savage. His latest after the election, is not the Trump that ran in 2016. That Trump was even light hearted a little and made jokes. This one is vicious. Maybe Dems and constant fighting made him this way. But, I can't see him being a leader of a Nation.

You guys can disagree, that is where I am coming from.

---

Well, I do disagree. I live in a predominantly Asian neighborhood, and while they have cooled on Trump, they are still very big on MAGA.

I honestly think you are trusting too much on the media's sliming of MAGA and missing most of the message.

Yes, MAGA is a movement, just as Reagan created the Young Republicans in the 1980s MAGA is attracting Blacks, Asians and Latinos like nothing I ever saw before.

And hell no, it's not hateful or exclusionist. The people I see in MAGA are many races, and include a lot of young families.

You keep focusing on Trump when MAGA has moved on from Trump. In fact that's why he is so mad now, his creation has grown up and moved out on its own.

---

I'm sure your Asian neighbors are really digging the latest Trumpty Dumbty tweet about Younkin "sounds kinda Chinese"! What the hell are you doing living with a bunch of *****s? You need to move to an all white Arian neighborhood with the rest of your MAGA peeps!

---

Me: "they have cooled on Trump, they are still very big on MAGA."

You: "your Asian neighbors are really digging the latest Trumpty Dumbty tweet "

Do you even read before you shoot back?

---

I knew zactly what you said. You just are fun to rib because you are a RWNJ!

J.R. said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

J.R. said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF: "You look at Reagan and his policies and see Trump? Who is delusional?"

No, I have always said - and you even agreed - that REAGAN started MAGA and Trump just used the principles of MAGA for his own advancement.

What worked for Trump was when he followed the MAGA course. It's when he let his ego get in the way that he went off the rails.

DeSantis is MAGA, so is Lake, so is Youngkin. Trump is Trump, he's gone off from what worked, that's part of what hurt him in 2020 (Trusting Fauci at first, letting lockdowns happen with COVID, waiting too late to fight against Vote by Mail, etc.).

In 2016 Trump was the only candidate supporting returning jobs to the US, standing up to Russia, and backing US energy independence. That's why, warts and all, he smeared the field in 2016 and won the GOP nomination easily.

Now there are others doing the message better. Even Abbott, who screwed up the Ice Storm power failures last year, is better at imaging the issues than Trump, and Trump is melting down because of it.

What's needed now is to bring the MAGA voters to where they see better options. Dissing the MAGA voters is a great way to lose elections.

---

I agree he used the phrase "Make America Great Again". But MAGA has become more than a slogan. It is a movement and a lot of the movement and especially their tactics is not inclusionary or positive. Reagan was an optimist, pragmatic but optimistic on America and the American spirit, never mean.

Trump is not. Trump has made the Reagan message negative and his tactics bullish.

As I have said before, I liked a lot of Trump's policies. I thought he was Reaganesque in 2016, with the Black Colleges, Prison Reform, Ukrainian sale of TOW missiles to preserve independence, defense of Israel, Abraham Accords and his allowing the military to defeat ISIS. There was a lot that Reagan would like. If you listen to early interviews he still had a sense of humor.

But, in the last 3 years he has morphed into something else. And his followers have gotten savage. His latest after the election, is not the Trump that ran in 2016. That Trump was even light hearted a little and made jokes. This one is vicious. Maybe Dems and constant fighting made him this way. But, I can't see him being a leader of a Nation.

You guys can disagree, that is where I am coming from.

---

Well, I do disagree. I live in a predominantly Asian neighborhood, and while they have cooled on Trump, they are still very big on MAGA.

I honestly think you are trusting too much on the media's sliming of MAGA and missing most of the message.

Yes, MAGA is a movement, just as Reagan created the Young Republicans in the 1980s MAGA is attracting Blacks, Asians and Latinos like nothing I ever saw before.

And hell no, it's not hateful or exclusionist. The people I see in MAGA are many races, and include a lot of young families.

You keep focusing on Trump when MAGA has moved on from Trump. In fact that's why he is so mad now, his creation has grown up and moved out on its own.

---

I'm sure your Asian neighbors are really digging the latest Trumpty Dumbty tweet about Younkin "sounds kinda Chinese"! What the hell are you doing living with a bunch of *****s? You need to move to an all white Arian neighborhood with the rest of your MAGA peeps!

---

Me: "they have cooled on Trump, they are still very big on MAGA."

You: "your Asian neighbors are really digging the latest Trumpty Dumbty tweet "

Do you even read before you shoot back?

---

I knew zactly what you said. You just are fun to rib because you are a RWNJ!

---

An educated, well-read, experienced RightWingNutJob, thankyewverramuch!

J.R. said:

---

Again, you MAGA clowns.... I'm just a simple guy. Here is what Trumpy has deliver for you guys. He lost, the Presidency , lost the Congress, lost the Senate and presided over the Red Wave that wasn't and he gives you Lake (she cray) and Hershel (he dumb). Nice that this is what Trump has delivered! pathetic . Go away, Fat Orange!

---

Fat Orange is just getting warmed up .

As Trump fades into political obscurity…..he will do everything possible to 'revenge ' himself on the Republican Party .

Going to be epic .

sombear said:

---

You state two false premises.

One, Trump did not sit on the sidelines. He spent a lot of time in all the battlegrounds - PA, GA, OH, AZ, NV, and others. The only way Trump stayed on the sidelines was with his money. He raised all that money promising to spend it on the midterms, but he didn't. 90% of it he kept or spent on staff and admin expenses. If I was a donor (which I was for 6 years) I'd be pissed.

Two, MAGA did turn out. So did every other GOP faction. We met virtually all our turnout targets. We will end up winning the national vote, which almost never happens. Problem was indies did what they have virtually never done and that is break hard for Dems despite Biden's low approvals.

---

Call Washington back and get on message.
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/midterms-2022-rick-scott/2022/11/12/id/1096072/

sombear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

sombear said:

---

Since when is Desantis a go-along conformist? Or Youngkin? Or Kemp for that matter? These are strong conservatives who have taken on establishments of all kinds. Being a decent human being who gets things done and who doesn't support wild conspiracy theories does not make you go-along or establishment.

---

Younkin didn't do much to help win the House. Lost 2 of 3 swing districts. No red wave there. No sir.

Yeah, Younkin appears to be a nice guy. Yeah, he won a tough election in a blue state. But his model didn't exactly translate in VA mid-terms, did it? Or did he even try?

Sure, some would say...."but...er, uh...Trump cost us those VA seats" as if his mere existence sitting in his living room at MAL was toxic.

But Trumps "mere existence" didn't cost Youngkin the governor mansion, did it?
I mean, Trump endorsed Youngkin at a rally in Virginia, the day after Younkin won the primary. And during the endorsement speech, Trump laid into McAuliffe in typical fashion. Somehow, nobody complained about it at the time. Nobody called Trump toxic. And somehow miraculously, in spite of all that MAGA-deadweight, Younkin won anyway. (insert eye roll emoji here).

The Trump critics are trying to have it both ways.....

---

Holy strawmen! My point: Desantis and Youngkin are strong conservatives. Your rebuttal: Youngkin lost the VA house seats (when he wasn't on the ticket); Trump got Youngkin elected; and it's not true that Trump cost us the VA house seats.

I really don't know where to start. VA GOP took down 1 of 3 targeted Dem incumbents. If every state did that, we'd have a strong majority. I did not blame Trump for the other 2 VA seats. I DID blame Trump - in earlier posts - for his Senate and Gov candidates. They all lost winnable seats, and it was foreseeable. There were far better conservative options in every key state.

Trump did some great things, on policy and in campaigns. But he deserves zero credit for Youngkin. Youngkin and the VA GOP asked Trump to stay away. It wasn't personal. Just good politics. Trump was very unpopular in VA, particularly in the suburbs where Youngkin needed votes. Trump in fact was toxic in VA. He got demolished there in both campaigns.

Dems ran on Trump Trump Trump. It worked. I wish Trump was more popular. I wish it would have failed. Trump's disapproval among all voters was in the mid-to-high 60s. For one of the few times in history, independents broke strongly in favor of a very unpopular President.

Trump won 45% of the popular vote last time around against Joe freaking Biden, and that was before Jan 6 and Trump's bizarre behavior since then. That's who you want to hook our wagon to?

---

That part in bold touched the heart of it.

We kept Trump quiet in order to avoid turning out the Dem base, thereby ensuring that our base did not turn out. That opened the door for Democrats to make the election mostly about Trump (the MAL raid early, "threat to democracy" later) to turn out their base. And it worked. Tx turnout model (which I have posted) is instructive. Yeah, we did ok, but not impressive, but we won anyway. You can do that..."meh" your way to victory.....in a red state. You can't do that in a purple or blue state-wide race, or a swing congressional district.

Again, the parallels to 2012 are almost seamless. Perfect conditions for a win, so perfect we thought we had to play it safe so as not to F it up. "Don't set your hair on fire.....It'll only fire up Dems......Conditions will push indies to us.....unpopular incumbent.....(Trump please be quiet)....." Meanwhile, Dems worked furiously, to the point of histrionic messaging, to turn out their base. And they beat us. Both times. An unpopular incumbent has to turn out his base, get the indies to stay home, and dispirit the opponent's base into lower turnout. Dems hit a trifecta this go-around, in no small part because we helped them with that last part.

Look back to that 37-point margin of victory Dems had with unmarried women. Never have unmarried women been a GOP demographic. They always vote blue. The only question is, will they show up. That is exactly why moderate GOP always wanted to avoid the abortion issue.....it tends to energize a part of the Dem base that didn't always turn out at high rates. Well, Dems used the abortion issue to drive up their turnout and save a number of swing districts by narrow margins. And we did not match it by firing up our base to fight wokeness (except in one place = FL).

You have to identify your voters and turn them out.
Dems did.
We didn't.

YMMV in some states. In GA and AZ, we have a patent problem of state party infighting - moderate wings intent on defeating MAGA at any cost.

RMF5630 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Yes, some of Trump's highest profile picks lost. But, his overall record was like 170-something to 9. In no serious discussion could he be the totality of the problem.

---

Of the 170, how many were incumbents in a ruby red state, e.g. Paxton?
How many of his high profile senate candidates won? How much of his PAC money did he send them? McConnell spent over $200 million trying to get Rs elected.
Trump is out for Trump. He may still have a majority in a GOP primary, but he can't win a general election. Maybe Republicans should nominate him so he can lose and Rs can move on.

From Strassel in WSJ yesterday:
Pennsylvanians preferred to elect a recent stroke victim rather than take a chance on an untested TV doctor. New Hampshire returned the generally disliked Maggie Hassan to the Senate rather than roll the dice on Don Bolduc, who couldn't decide two years later if the 2020 election was stolen. Arizonans appear not to have been sold on an unknown venture capitalist named Blake Masters. Georgians have sent scandal-plagued Herschel Walker to a Senate runoff, but he ran behind every other statewide GOP candidate. TV personality Tudor Dixon got crushed in the Michigan governor's race. Doug Mastriano got routed in Pennsylvania.

---

Look at the analysis. Where his MAGA Candidate took on a GOP incumbent his success rate was 35%. That number I agree, about 35% of the Conservative vote aligns with MAGA. When given the choice between Moderate or non-MAGA candidate versus a Donald Trump hand selected MAGA candidate, he hit 35% of the time. Murkowski still may pull it out. MAGA is NOT the choice of the majority of Republicans. If you want to go into how many were unopposed or versus Dems, ok. I am interested in what does the GOP Party of Lincoln, Eisenhower, and Reagan want. I do not believe it is Trump.


LOST
Georgia Attorney General John Gordon
Georgia Insurance and Safety Fire Commissioner Patrick Witt
Georgia Secretary of State Jody Hice
Georgia Governor David Perdue
Idaho Governor Janice McGeachin
Michigan State House District 88 Mick Bricker
Michigan State Senate District 22 Mike Detmer
U.S. House SC-01 Katie Arrington
U.S. House WA-04 Loren Culp
Wisconsin State Assembly District 63 Adam Steen

WON
Arizona State Senate District 9 Robert Scantlebury
Michigan State Senate District 17 Jonathan Lindsey
U.S. House MI-03 John Gibbs
U.S. House SC-07 Russell Fry
U.S. House WA-03 Joe Kent
U.S. House WY-AL Harriet Hageman (Defeated Liz Cheney)

Draw
Kelly Tshibaka Advanced along with incumbent Lisa Murkowski

---

Your comment in bold is probably accurate, but qualified by context. No, MAGA-forever-and-ever is not a majority of the GOP. Probably isn't a plurality. But it's closer to plurality than your statement allows. it is a VERY big part of the GOP base...a third or more. Even more importantly, it is a rock-solid constituency. You win them over, and they will crawl the proverbial glass for you, on hands & knees. More importantly, we are NOT going to win in purple states without them. Just can't do it. The bluer the state, the more imperative it is to have 101% turnout from team red.

I make that point because your arguments are falling into the false-dilemma construction that characterizes the neverTrumper argument - that the MAGA are the problem, that they must be driven from the party, that we do not need them. That is not just wrong, it's fatally wrong. We can't look at a quarter or more of our base and say "Shut up or go away....I don't give a (scheisse) what you do."

The guy I want to see is the one who is GENUINELY comfortable with all parts of the GOP base, and ADDS to the MAGA base rather than dividing it up in a fit of frustration. DeSantis seems to understand that, based upon his record of governance and campaigning. For sure, you do not deliver a 20-pt general election victory margin without accomplishing it (purposely or by accident). The only real question is, can he do it elsewhere? I think it's possible. but there will be different sets of problems to work = what works with latinos in FL will not seamlessly overlap with latinos in the RGV. Not identical subsets. And how does he address the lily white blue states....where virtue signalling moderates are convinced they know more about diversity than those of us who actually do live in places of diversity (to include diversity of thought)? We will need to compete in places like MN and NH....

Right, from the guy in charge of the Senate debacle who singlehandedly brought social security and medicare cuts into the campaign. I've seen the data and most of it is now public. We had record turnout and will have a record national margin lead even after California is done. The #1 problem by far was Independents. The last 3 midterms, GOP took the Indies by 12-18 points. This time, with a hugely unpopular Dem President, Dems took the Indies, and in the key state, did so by historically wide margins. - 16-20% in PA; 25-30% in both AZ and GA.

You're also wrong on Trump campaigning. He held multiple rallies in PA, OH, GA, AZ, and NV and was all over talk radio in those states. Again, the only thing he did not do was spend the money he raised.

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Yes, some of Trump's highest profile picks lost. But, his overall record was like 170-something to 9. In no serious discussion could he be the totality of the problem.

---

Of the 170, how many were incumbents in a ruby red state, e.g. Paxton?
How many of his high profile senate candidates won? How much of his PAC money did he send them? McConnell spent over $200 million trying to get Rs elected.
Trump is out for Trump. He may still have a majority in a GOP primary, but he can't win a general election. Maybe Republicans should nominate him so he can lose and Rs can move on.

From Strassel in WSJ yesterday:
Pennsylvanians preferred to elect a recent stroke victim rather than take a chance on an untested TV doctor. New Hampshire returned the generally disliked Maggie Hassan to the Senate rather than roll the dice on Don Bolduc, who couldn't decide two years later if the 2020 election was stolen. Arizonans appear not to have been sold on an unknown venture capitalist named Blake Masters. Georgians have sent scandal-plagued Herschel Walker to a Senate runoff, but he ran behind every other statewide GOP candidate. TV personality Tudor Dixon got crushed in the Michigan governor's race. Doug Mastriano got routed in Pennsylvania.

---

Look at the analysis. Where his MAGA Candidate took on a GOP incumbent his success rate was 35%. That number I agree, about 35% of the Conservative vote aligns with MAGA. When given the choice between Moderate or non-MAGA candidate versus a Donald Trump hand selected MAGA candidate, he hit 35% of the time. Murkowski still may pull it out. MAGA is NOT the choice of the majority of Republicans. If you want to go into how many were unopposed or versus Dems, ok. I am interested in what does the GOP Party of Lincoln, Eisenhower, and Reagan want. I do not believe it is Trump.


LOST
Georgia Attorney General John Gordon
Georgia Insurance and Safety Fire Commissioner Patrick Witt
Georgia Secretary of State Jody Hice
Georgia Governor David Perdue
Idaho Governor Janice McGeachin
Michigan State House District 88 Mick Bricker
Michigan State Senate District 22 Mike Detmer
U.S. House SC-01 Katie Arrington
U.S. House WA-04 Loren Culp
Wisconsin State Assembly District 63 Adam Steen

WON
Arizona State Senate District 9 Robert Scantlebury
Michigan State Senate District 17 Jonathan Lindsey
U.S. House MI-03 John Gibbs
U.S. House SC-07 Russell Fry
U.S. House WA-03 Joe Kent
U.S. House WY-AL Harriet Hageman (Defeated Liz Cheney)

Draw
Kelly Tshibaka Advanced along with incumbent Lisa Murkowski

---

Your comment in bold is probably accurate, but qualified by context. No, MAGA-forever-and-ever is not a majority of the GOP. Probably isn't a plurality. But it's closer to plurality than your statement allows. it is a VERY big part of the GOP base...a third or more. Even more importantly, it is a rock-solid constituency. You win them over, and they will crawl the proverbial glass for you, on hands & knees. More importantly, we are NOT going to win in purple states without them. Just can't do it. The bluer the state, the more imperative it is to have 101% turnout from team red.

I make that point because your arguments are falling into the false-dilemma construction that characterizes the neverTrumper argument - that the MAGA are the problem, that they must be driven from the party, that we do not need them. That is not just wrong, it's fatally wrong. We can't look at a quarter or more of our base and say "Shut up or go away....I don't give a (scheisse) what you do."

The guy I want to see is the one who is GENUINELY comfortable with all parts of the GOP base, and ADDS to the MAGA base rather than dividing it up in a fit of frustration. DeSantis seems to understand that, based upon his record of governance and campaigning. For sure, you do not deliver a 20-pt general election victory margin without accomplishing it (purposely or by accident). The only real question is, can he do it elsewhere? I think it's possible. but there will be different sets of problems to work = what works with latinos in FL will not seamlessly overlap with latinos in the RGV. Not identical subsets. And how does he address the lily white blue states....where virtue signalling moderates are convinced they know more about diversity than those of us who actually do live in places of diversity (to include diversity of thought)? We will need to compete in places like MN and NH....

---

You would still have Kevin Steele coaching at Baylor

Canada2017 said:

---

J.R. said:

---

Again, you MAGA clowns.... I'm just a simple guy. Here is what Trumpy has deliver for you guys. He lost, the Presidency , lost the Congress, lost the Senate and presided over the Red Wave that wasn't and he gives you Lake (she cray) and Hershel (he dumb). Nice that this is what Trump has delivered! pathetic . Go away, Fat Orange!

---

Fat Orange is just getting warmed up .

As Trump fades into political obscurity…..he will do everything possible to 'revenge ' himself on the Republican Party .

Going to be epic .

---

Oh, Yeah, he is going to go Sherman's March to the Sea on the US. He is done. The best we can hope for is one of the charges against him to stick and eliminate him from running

RMF5630 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

J.R. said:

---

Again, you MAGA clowns.... I'm just a simple guy. Here is what Trumpy has deliver for you guys. He lost, the Presidency , lost the Congress, lost the Senate and presided over the Red Wave that wasn't and he gives you Lake (she cray) and Hershel (he dumb). Nice that this is what Trump has delivered! pathetic . Go away, Fat Orange!

---

Fat Orange is just getting warmed up .

As Trump fades into political obscurity…..he will do everything possible to 'revenge ' himself on the Republican Party .

Going to be epic .

---

Oh, Yeah, he is going to go Sherman's March to the Sea on the US. He is done. The best we can hope for is one of the charges against him to stick and eliminate him from running

---

Hell no. Charging Trump makes him a martyr and would embolden Democrats to get charges placed against anyone they feared.

Trump goes away when no one responds to him. Your plan is 'pour gas on fire'.

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

J.R. said:

---

Again, you MAGA clowns.... I'm just a simple guy. Here is what Trumpy has deliver for you guys. He lost, the Presidency , lost the Congress, lost the Senate and presided over the Red Wave that wasn't and he gives you Lake (she cray) and Hershel (he dumb). Nice that this is what Trump has delivered! pathetic . Go away, Fat Orange!

---

Fat Orange is just getting warmed up .

As Trump fades into political obscurity…..he will do everything possible to 'revenge ' himself on the Republican Party .

Going to be epic .

---

Oh, Yeah, he is going to go Sherman's March to the Sea on the US. He is done. The best we can hope for is one of the charges against him to stick and eliminate him from running

---

Hell no. Charging Trump makes him a martyr and would embolden Democrats to get charges placed against anyone they feared.

Trump goes away when no one responds to him. Your plan is 'pour gas on fire'.

---

Trump does not go away until he is disgraced. That is what knocked him down after the Atlantic City fiasco, the courts put him on his back foot. He needs to unsure or you will get him going on and on. He does not go away on his own, ever...

"Trump does not go away until he is disgraced. "


That's DNC thinking. It's absolutely not true.

Trump feeds off emotion. Any emotion.

Oldbear83 said:

---

"Trump does not go away until he is disgraced. "


That's DNC thinking. It's absolutely not true.

Trump feeds off emotion. Any emotion.

---

He does not go away. There is no ignoring him, he will up the ante until he is noticed. Short of putting him in jail, he will not stop or go away. He will bring down the GOP.

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

"Trump does not go away until he is disgraced. "


That's DNC thinking. It's absolutely not true.

Trump feeds off emotion. Any emotion.

---

He does not go away. There is no ignoring him, he will up the ante until he is noticed. Short of putting him in jail, he will not stop or go away. He will bring down the GOP.

---

More BS.

Provide a better alternative, voters will head there. Trump will become like LaRouche.

Put Trump in jail, you guarantee his supporters will not desert him.

Leave your hate behind and seek better ways.

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

"Trump does not go away until he is disgraced. "


That's DNC thinking. It's absolutely not true.

Trump feeds off emotion. Any emotion.

---

He does not go away. There is no ignoring him, he will up the ante until he is noticed. Short of putting him in jail, he will not stop or go away. He will bring down the GOP.

---

More BS.

Provide a better alternative, voters will head there. Trump will become like LaRouche.

Put Trump in jail, you guarantee his supporters will not desert him.

Leave your hate behind and seek better ways.

---

You think he will go away if the GOP supports, say DeSantis or even a Noem? No way. He will continue to up the ante. I would not put him above releasing information against GOP candidates. He will never become LaRouche. This time, I do believe he will lead an insurrection!

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

"Trump does not go away until he is disgraced. "


That's DNC thinking. It's absolutely not true.

Trump feeds off emotion. Any emotion.

---

He does not go away. There is no ignoring him, he will up the ante until he is noticed. Short of putting him in jail, he will not stop or go away. He will bring down the GOP.

---

More BS.

Provide a better alternative, voters will head there. Trump will become like LaRouche.

Put Trump in jail, you guarantee his supporters will not desert him.

Leave your hate behind and seek better ways.

---

You think he will go away if the GOP supports, say DeSantis or even a Noem? No way. He will continue to up the ante. I would not put him above releasing information against GOP candidates. He will never become LaRouche. This time, I do believe he will lead an insurrection!

---

Nope. Think it through.

I will be back later, if you are still stuck.

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

"Trump does not go away until he is disgraced. "


That's DNC thinking. It's absolutely not true.

Trump feeds off emotion. Any emotion.

---

He does not go away. There is no ignoring him, he will up the ante until he is noticed. Short of putting him in jail, he will not stop or go away. He will bring down the GOP.

---

More BS.

Provide a better alternative, voters will head there. Trump will become like LaRouche.

Put Trump in jail, you guarantee his supporters will not desert him.

Leave your hate behind and seek better ways.

---

You think he will go away if the GOP supports, say DeSantis or even a Noem? No way. He will continue to up the ante. I would not put him above releasing information against GOP candidates. He will never become LaRouche. This time, I do believe he will lead an insurrection!

---

Third party
He'll do Perot, except Trump won't self fund

Osodecentx said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

"Trump does not go away until he is disgraced. "


That's DNC thinking. It's absolutely not true.

Trump feeds off emotion. Any emotion.

---

He does not go away. There is no ignoring him, he will up the ante until he is noticed. Short of putting him in jail, he will not stop or go away. He will bring down the GOP.

---

More BS.

Provide a better alternative, voters will head there. Trump will become like LaRouche.

Put Trump in jail, you guarantee his supporters will not desert him.

Leave your hate behind and seek better ways.

---

You think he will go away if the GOP supports, say DeSantis or even a Noem? No way. He will continue to up the ante. I would not put him above releasing information against GOP candidates. He will never become LaRouche. This time, I do believe he will lead an insurrection!

---

Third party
He'll do Perot, except Trump won't self fund

---

He will make money

RMF5630 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

"Trump does not go away until he is disgraced. "


That's DNC thinking. It's absolutely not true.

Trump feeds off emotion. Any emotion.

---

He does not go away. There is no ignoring him, he will up the ante until he is noticed. Short of putting him in jail, he will not stop or go away. He will bring down the GOP.

---

More BS.

Provide a better alternative, voters will head there. Trump will become like LaRouche.

Put Trump in jail, you guarantee his supporters will not desert him.

Leave your hate behind and seek better ways.

---

You think he will go away if the GOP supports, say DeSantis or even a Noem? No way. He will continue to up the ante. I would not put him above releasing information against GOP candidates. He will never become LaRouche. This time, I do believe he will lead an insurrection!

---

Third party
He'll do Perot, except Trump won't self fund

---

He will make money

---

HUGE!

Osodecentx said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

"Trump does not go away until he is disgraced. "


That's DNC thinking. It's absolutely not true.

Trump feeds off emotion. Any emotion.

---

He does not go away. There is no ignoring him, he will up the ante until he is noticed. Short of putting him in jail, he will not stop or go away. He will bring down the GOP.

---

More BS.

Provide a better alternative, voters will head there. Trump will become like LaRouche.

Put Trump in jail, you guarantee his supporters will not desert him.

Leave your hate behind and seek better ways.

---

You think he will go away if the GOP supports, say DeSantis or even a Noem? No way. He will continue to up the ante. I would not put him above releasing information against GOP candidates. He will never become LaRouche. This time, I do believe he will lead an insurrection!

---

Third party
He'll do Perot, except Trump won't self fund

---

He will make money

---

HUGE!

---

Most in history! Will break all records and I he is the most popular ever...

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Yes, some of Trump's highest profile picks lost. But, his overall record was like 170-something to 9. In no serious discussion could he be the totality of the problem.

---

Of the 170, how many were incumbents in a ruby red state, e.g. Paxton?
How many of his high profile senate candidates won? How much of his PAC money did he send them? McConnell spent over $200 million trying to get Rs elected.
Trump is out for Trump. He may still have a majority in a GOP primary, but he can't win a general election. Maybe Republicans should nominate him so he can lose and Rs can move on.

From Strassel in WSJ yesterday:
Pennsylvanians preferred to elect a recent stroke victim rather than take a chance on an untested TV doctor. New Hampshire returned the generally disliked Maggie Hassan to the Senate rather than roll the dice on Don Bolduc, who couldn't decide two years later if the 2020 election was stolen. Arizonans appear not to have been sold on an unknown venture capitalist named Blake Masters. Georgians have sent scandal-plagued Herschel Walker to a Senate runoff, but he ran behind every other statewide GOP candidate. TV personality Tudor Dixon got crushed in the Michigan governor's race. Doug Mastriano got routed in Pennsylvania.

---

Look at the analysis. Where his MAGA Candidate took on a GOP incumbent his success rate was 35%. That number I agree, about 35% of the Conservative vote aligns with MAGA. When given the choice between Moderate or non-MAGA candidate versus a Donald Trump hand selected MAGA candidate, he hit 35% of the time. Murkowski still may pull it out. MAGA is NOT the choice of the majority of Republicans. If you want to go into how many were unopposed or versus Dems, ok. I am interested in what does the GOP Party of Lincoln, Eisenhower, and Reagan want. I do not believe it is Trump.


LOST
Georgia Attorney General John Gordon
Georgia Insurance and Safety Fire Commissioner Patrick Witt
Georgia Secretary of State Jody Hice
Georgia Governor David Perdue
Idaho Governor Janice McGeachin
Michigan State House District 88 Mick Bricker
Michigan State Senate District 22 Mike Detmer
U.S. House SC-01 Katie Arrington
U.S. House WA-04 Loren Culp
Wisconsin State Assembly District 63 Adam Steen

WON
Arizona State Senate District 9 Robert Scantlebury
Michigan State Senate District 17 Jonathan Lindsey
U.S. House MI-03 John Gibbs
U.S. House SC-07 Russell Fry
U.S. House WA-03 Joe Kent
U.S. House WY-AL Harriet Hageman (Defeated Liz Cheney)

Draw
Kelly Tshibaka Advanced along with incumbent Lisa Murkowski

---

Your comment in bold is probably accurate, but qualified by context. No, MAGA-forever-and-ever is not a majority of the GOP. Probably isn't a plurality. But it's closer to plurality than your statement allows. it is a VERY big part of the GOP base...a third or more. Even more importantly, it is a rock-solid constituency. You win them over, and they will crawl the proverbial glass for you, on hands & knees. More importantly, we are NOT going to win in purple states without them. Just can't do it. The bluer the state, the more imperative it is to have 101% turnout from team red.

I make that point because your arguments are falling into the false-dilemma construction that characterizes the neverTrumper argument - that the MAGA are the problem, that they must be driven from the party, that we do not need them. That is not just wrong, it's fatally wrong. We can't look at a quarter or more of our base and say "Shut up or go away....I don't give a (scheisse) what you do."

The guy I want to see is the one who is GENUINELY comfortable with all parts of the GOP base, and ADDS to the MAGA base rather than dividing it up in a fit of frustration. DeSantis seems to understand that, based upon his record of governance and campaigning. For sure, you do not deliver a 20-pt general election victory margin without accomplishing it (purposely or by accident). The only real question is, can he do it elsewhere? I think it's possible. but there will be different sets of problems to work = what works with latinos in FL will not seamlessly overlap with latinos in the RGV. Not identical subsets. And how does he address the lily white blue states....where virtue signalling moderates are convinced they know more about diversity than those of us who actually do live in places of diversity (to include diversity of thought)? We will need to compete in places like MN and NH....

---

You would still have Kevin Steele coaching at Baylor

---

So you don't agree with that part in bold yet call someone who dies a "Kevin Steele."

I know you're on an adrenaline high after helping Liz Cheney save the Senate for the Democrats, but it's clouding you're thinking.

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Yes, some of Trump's highest profile picks lost. But, his overall record was like 170-something to 9. In no serious discussion could he be the totality of the problem.

---

Of the 170, how many were incumbents in a ruby red state, e.g. Paxton?
How many of his high profile senate candidates won? How much of his PAC money did he send them? McConnell spent over $200 million trying to get Rs elected.
Trump is out for Trump. He may still have a majority in a GOP primary, but he can't win a general election. Maybe Republicans should nominate him so he can lose and Rs can move on.

From Strassel in WSJ yesterday:
Pennsylvanians preferred to elect a recent stroke victim rather than take a chance on an untested TV doctor. New Hampshire returned the generally disliked Maggie Hassan to the Senate rather than roll the dice on Don Bolduc, who couldn't decide two years later if the 2020 election was stolen. Arizonans appear not to have been sold on an unknown venture capitalist named Blake Masters. Georgians have sent scandal-plagued Herschel Walker to a Senate runoff, but he ran behind every other statewide GOP candidate. TV personality Tudor Dixon got crushed in the Michigan governor's race. Doug Mastriano got routed in Pennsylvania.

---

Look at the analysis. Where his MAGA Candidate took on a GOP incumbent his success rate was 35%. That number I agree, about 35% of the Conservative vote aligns with MAGA. When given the choice between Moderate or non-MAGA candidate versus a Donald Trump hand selected MAGA candidate, he hit 35% of the time. Murkowski still may pull it out. MAGA is NOT the choice of the majority of Republicans. If you want to go into how many were unopposed or versus Dems, ok. I am interested in what does the GOP Party of Lincoln, Eisenhower, and Reagan want. I do not believe it is Trump.


LOST
Georgia Attorney General John Gordon
Georgia Insurance and Safety Fire Commissioner Patrick Witt
Georgia Secretary of State Jody Hice
Georgia Governor David Perdue
Idaho Governor Janice McGeachin
Michigan State House District 88 Mick Bricker
Michigan State Senate District 22 Mike Detmer
U.S. House SC-01 Katie Arrington
U.S. House WA-04 Loren Culp
Wisconsin State Assembly District 63 Adam Steen

WON
Arizona State Senate District 9 Robert Scantlebury
Michigan State Senate District 17 Jonathan Lindsey
U.S. House MI-03 John Gibbs
U.S. House SC-07 Russell Fry
U.S. House WA-03 Joe Kent
U.S. House WY-AL Harriet Hageman (Defeated Liz Cheney)

Draw
Kelly Tshibaka Advanced along with incumbent Lisa Murkowski

---

Your comment in bold is probably accurate, but qualified by context. No, MAGA-forever-and-ever is not a majority of the GOP. Probably isn't a plurality. But it's closer to plurality than your statement allows. it is a VERY big part of the GOP base...a third or more. Even more importantly, it is a rock-solid constituency. You win them over, and they will crawl the proverbial glass for you, on hands & knees. More importantly, we are NOT going to win in purple states without them. Just can't do it. The bluer the state, the more imperative it is to have 101% turnout from team red.

I make that point because your arguments are falling into the false-dilemma construction that characterizes the neverTrumper argument - that the MAGA are the problem, that they must be driven from the party, that we do not need them. That is not just wrong, it's fatally wrong. We can't look at a quarter or more of our base and say "Shut up or go away....I don't give a (scheisse) what you do."

The guy I want to see is the one who is GENUINELY comfortable with all parts of the GOP base, and ADDS to the MAGA base rather than dividing it up in a fit of frustration. DeSantis seems to understand that, based upon his record of governance and campaigning. For sure, you do not deliver a 20-pt general election victory margin without accomplishing it (purposely or by accident). The only real question is, can he do it elsewhere? I think it's possible. but there will be different sets of problems to work = what works with latinos in FL will not seamlessly overlap with latinos in the RGV. Not identical subsets. And how does he address the lily white blue states....where virtue signalling moderates are convinced they know more about diversity than those of us who actually do live in places of diversity (to include diversity of thought)? We will need to compete in places like MN and NH....

---

You would still have Kevin Steele coaching at Baylor

---

So you don't agree with that part in bold yet call someone who dies a "Kevin Steele."

I know you're on an adrenaline high after helping Liz Cheney save the Senate for the Democrats, but it's clouding you're thinking.

---

DeSantis can win. He only fights the stupid stuff and is willing to go to the "mattresses" if it requires, ask Disney. But, he will also be reasonable and will not pick a fight for the sake of picking a fight. His policies are conservative and he can govern. His weakness, he is not charismatic and he can be mean. He lacks Reagan's warmth, even if the actions are just as mean (see Air Traffic Controllers).