Media Bear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

She's apparently on Trump's VP short-list.

---

PLEASE make that happen. It'd take the cray-cray to yet another level … (and to think she's the better of Bama's senatorial representation).

---

She's the Alabama Senator that could spell Senatorial.

whitetrash said:

---

don't forget who gave what was generally regarded as the worst political speech of all time:

Arkansas governor Bill Clinton at the 1988 Democratic convention.

---

What did he do? I haven't paid much attention to Democrat speeches. It is like watching a fire ant mound. You know what they are, you know what they do.

Realitybites said:

---

whitetrash said:

---

don't forget who gave what was generally regarded as the worst political speech of all time:

Arkansas governor Bill Clinton at the 1988 Democratic convention.

---

What did he do? I haven't paid much attention to Democrat speeches. It is like watching a fire ant mound. You know what they are, you know what they do.

---

Bill Clinton was supposed to give a 15-minute nominating speech for Mike Dukakis but went over 33 minutes; the only cheer he got was when he said, "in conclusion,". Folks thought that was the end of his career but over the years Bill could talk his way out of troubles about as easily as he talked his way into them.

whiterock said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Her response was weird and sexist. "Kitchen table"?
Her speech went like this: 'The border crisis. We're all gonna die. Our streets are unsafe we're all gonna die. Food prices are too high. We're all gonna die."
And NOT one policy idea.
And PS we are all gonna die

---

If you are correct, then that would be a winning message. Sadly, you are not correct and the GOP once again snatched failure from the jaws of success. She is handsome, talented, and as a VP nod could pull a percentage point or two in some key races, but was coached by people who had no business coaching such things.

---

It's been reported that it was Trump's hand-picked people that prepared her for the speech, just FYI.

mcleod66 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Since Trump is very unlikely to win the general election; what difference does it make who he picks for his VP or anything else ?

---

His pick of a DeSantis or Tim Scott over an obscure unknown or Yes Man (Or Yes Woman) could mean the difference between winning and losing.

---

Doesn't matter. he's not going to win and Repubs should be ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate.

---

Are you serious? How bout dems being ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate? You've really got to be kidding with that statement.

---

I'm dead serious. And just because I left them out doesn't forgive the Dems for having an equally shameful candidate they're trotting out. The discussion was about the Repubs, so was my comment.

whitetrash said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

In the MAGA era, you find at least some people willing to defend literally anything.

Not Katie Britt’s speech. That was really something special. It took a performance like that to unify everyone in the country around the exact same take. pic.twitter.com/3S57HLXuY2

— Richard Hanania (@RichardHanania) March 9, 2024

---

FWIW, don't forget who gave what was generally regarded as the worst political speech of all time:


Arkansas governor Bill Clinton at the 1988 Democratic convention.

---

He was wordy.

trey3216 said:

---

mcleod66 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Since Trump is very unlikely to win the general election; what difference does it make who he picks for his VP or anything else ?

---

His pick of a DeSantis or Tim Scott over an obscure unknown or Yes Man (Or Yes Woman) could mean the difference between winning and losing.

---

Doesn't matter. he's not going to win and Repubs should be ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate.

---

Are you serious? How bout dems being ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate? You've really got to be kidding with that statement.

---

I'm dead serious. And just because I left them out doesn't forgive the Dems for having an equally shameful candidate they're trotting out. The discussion was about the Repubs, so was my comment.

---

There is a difference. If the Dems were running. Biden AFTER he lost in 2020 (or Hillary after 2016) that would be foolish.

Biden is the incumbent president. Going against him (to me) is like breaking up the Bulls after 6 rings in 8 years.

They haven't sniffed a championship since then.

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

mcleod66 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Since Trump is very unlikely to win the general election; what difference does it make who he picks for his VP or anything else ?

---

His pick of a DeSantis or Tim Scott over an obscure unknown or Yes Man (Or Yes Woman) could mean the difference between winning and losing.

---

Doesn't matter. he's not going to win and Repubs should be ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate.

---

Are you serious? How bout dems being ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate? You've really got to be kidding with that statement.

---

I'm dead serious. And just because I left them out doesn't forgive the Dems for having an equally shameful candidate they're trotting out. The discussion was about the Repubs, so was my comment.

---

There is a difference. If the Dems were running. Biden AFTER he lost in 2020 (or Hillary after 2016) that would be foolish.

Biden is the incumbent president. Going against him (to me) is like breaking up the Bulls after 6 rings in 8 years.

They haven't sniffed a championship since then.

---

I don't think you can compare Biden to the 1990s Bulls

He lost every single national Democratic primary he was in since he started running for President in 1988

Finally winning against a historically weak Dem field, in a Covid year, against a polarizing GOP president, and having been VP under Obama one of the more popular Democratic President's in recent memory.

He then squeaked by in a close 2020 election (after basically not showing his face during the campaign)....wining Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k,

(Not to mention Pennsylvania and Michigan were won by less than 90K votes)

He is not exactly FDR

Redbrickbear said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

mcleod66 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Since Trump is very unlikely to win the general election; what difference does it make who he picks for his VP or anything else ?

---

His pick of a DeSantis or Tim Scott over an obscure unknown or Yes Man (Or Yes Woman) could mean the difference between winning and losing.

---

Doesn't matter. he's not going to win and Repubs should be ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate.

---

Are you serious? How bout dems being ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate? You've really got to be kidding with that statement.

---

I'm dead serious. And just because I left them out doesn't forgive the Dems for having an equally shameful candidate they're trotting out. The discussion was about the Repubs, so was my comment.

---

There is a difference. If the Dems were running. Biden AFTER he lost in 2020 (or Hillary after 2016) that would be foolish.

Biden is the incumbent president. Going against him (to me) is like breaking up the Bulls after 6 rings in 8 years.

They haven't sniffed a championship since then.

---

I don't think you can compare Biden to the 1990s Bulls

He lost every single national Democratic primary he was in since he started running for President in 1988

Finally winning against a historically weak Dem field, in a Covid year, against a polarizing GOP president, and having been VP under Obama one of the more popular Democratic President's in recent memory.

He then squeaked by in a close 2020 election (after basically not showing his face during the campaign)....wining Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k,

(Not to mention Pennsylvania and Michigan were won by less than 90K votes)

He is not exactly FDR

---

He may never be MJ but, don't forget, 90s Bulls were the 80s Bulls that lost to Celtics and Pistons.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

mcleod66 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Since Trump is very unlikely to win the general election; what difference does it make who he picks for his VP or anything else ?

---

His pick of a DeSantis or Tim Scott over an obscure unknown or Yes Man (Or Yes Woman) could mean the difference between winning and losing.

---

Doesn't matter. he's not going to win and Repubs should be ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate.

---

Are you serious? How bout dems being ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate? You've really got to be kidding with that statement.

---

I'm dead serious. And just because I left them out doesn't forgive the Dems for having an equally shameful candidate they're trotting out. The discussion was about the Repubs, so was my comment.

---

There is a difference. If the Dems were running. Biden AFTER he lost in 2020 (or Hillary after 2016) that would be foolish.

Biden is the incumbent president. Going against him (to me) is like breaking up the Bulls after 6 rings in 8 years.

They haven't sniffed a championship since then.

---

I don't think you can compare Biden to the 1990s Bulls

He lost every single national Democratic primary he was in since he started running for President in 1988

Finally winning against a historically weak Dem field, in a Covid year, against a polarizing GOP president, and having been VP under Obama one of the more popular Democratic President's in recent memory.

He then squeaked by in a close 2020 election (after basically not showing his face during the campaign)....wining Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k,

(Not to mention Pennsylvania and Michigan were won by less than 90K votes)

He is not exactly FDR

---

You guys keep talking about a "close 2020" election. He won 306 to 232 electoral votes and Trump would have had to turn 3 close states (AZ, PA, and WI). I know Trump wants us to believe he was right there, but flipping 3 states is massive. If it was 1 state, ok. I guess if it makes people feel better you can say it is only less than 1% of the vote, but that is a lot to move in recounts.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

mcleod66 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Since Trump is very unlikely to win the general election; what difference does it make who he picks for his VP or anything else ?

---

His pick of a DeSantis or Tim Scott over an obscure unknown or Yes Man (Or Yes Woman) could mean the difference between winning and losing.

---

Doesn't matter. he's not going to win and Repubs should be ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate.

---

Are you serious? How bout dems being ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate? You've really got to be kidding with that statement.

---

I'm dead serious. And just because I left them out doesn't forgive the Dems for having an equally shameful candidate they're trotting out. The discussion was about the Repubs, so was my comment.

---

There is a difference. If the Dems were running. Biden AFTER he lost in 2020 (or Hillary after 2016) that would be foolish.

Biden is the incumbent president. Going against him (to me) is like breaking up the Bulls after 6 rings in 8 years.

They haven't sniffed a championship since then.

---

I don't think you can compare Biden to the 1990s Bulls

He lost every single national Democratic primary he was in since he started running for President in 1988

Finally winning against a historically weak Dem field, in a Covid year, against a polarizing GOP president, and having been VP under Obama one of the more popular Democratic President's in recent memory.

He then squeaked by in a close 2020 election (after basically not showing his face during the campaign)....wining Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k,

(Not to mention Pennsylvania and Michigan were won by less than 90K votes)

He is not exactly FDR

---

You guys keep talking about a "close 2020" election. He won 306 to 232 electoral votes and Trump would have had to turn 3 close states (AZ, PA, and WI). I know Trump wants us to believe he was right there, but flipping 3 states is massive. If it was 1 state, ok. I guess if it makes people feel better you can say it is only less than 1% of the vote, but that is a lot to move in recounts.

---

And that is why I gave you 3 close States.

"Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k"

In PA it was about 80k

So in all 4 major swing State races decided by close margins

TWD 1974 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Meh. Let's hope not.

That was not a good speech, or approach. She's sounded like she was whispering to the kids in her kitchen. WTH?

The GOP too often shoots itself in the foot. This was yet another example.

---

It was not good at all. I kept waiting for the line, "and for just $1 a day you can save a child..."

---

At one point, I expected her to get up and take some cookies out of the oven.

---

before or after the dishes were dried?

---

After
https://www.drnancyoreilly.com/how-to-be-a-good-wife-1950s-style/

---

If they want to recast the original Omen movie, she's the perfect governess.

---

She would have been perfectly cast in the series "Why Women Kill". Spot on for one of those parts.

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

mcleod66 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Since Trump is very unlikely to win the general election; what difference does it make who he picks for his VP or anything else ?

---

His pick of a DeSantis or Tim Scott over an obscure unknown or Yes Man (Or Yes Woman) could mean the difference between winning and losing.

---

Doesn't matter. he's not going to win and Repubs should be ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate.

---

Are you serious? How bout dems being ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate? You've really got to be kidding with that statement.

---

I'm dead serious. And just because I left them out doesn't forgive the Dems for having an equally shameful candidate they're trotting out. The discussion was about the Repubs, so was my comment.

---

There is a difference. If the Dems were running. Biden AFTER he lost in 2020 (or Hillary after 2016) that would be foolish.

Biden is the incumbent president. Going against him (to me) is like breaking up the Bulls after 6 rings in 8 years.

They haven't sniffed a championship since then.

---

I don't think you can compare Biden to the 1990s Bulls

He lost every single national Democratic primary he was in since he started running for President in 1988

Finally winning against a historically weak Dem field, in a Covid year, against a polarizing GOP president, and having been VP under Obama one of the more popular Democratic President's in recent memory.

He then squeaked by in a close 2020 election (after basically not showing his face during the campaign)....wining Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k,

(Not to mention Pennsylvania and Michigan were won by less than 90K votes)

He is not exactly FDR

---

You guys keep talking about a "close 2020" election. He won 306 to 232 electoral votes and Trump would have had to turn 3 close states (AZ, PA, and WI). I know Trump wants us to believe he was right there, but flipping 3 states is massive. If it was 1 state, ok. I guess if it makes people feel better you can say it is only less than 1% of the vote, but that is a lot to move in recounts.

---

And that is why I gave you 3 close States.

"Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k"

In PA it was about 80k

So in all 4 major swing State races decided by close margins

---

And how many recounts have ever gone 20k, 12k, 11k in one state, never mind 3? What you are saying is an immense swing and Trump is framing it as a thumbnail. It is misleading. Just to put into perspective for how big it is.

The biggest swing in modern US election history came in Florida's 2000 presidential election recount, when Al Gore cut 1,247 votes off George W. Bush's lead. That went to the Supreme Court.

Remember how much went into that? That was about 10% of what 1 state would need. For Wisconsin, it was 5% of what would have been needed.

It is not in the same universe to overturn an election. People just don't know the scale of what they are talking about. (Not meant as a cut, I see it all the time in transportation. Scale is word people need to think about more.)

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

mcleod66 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Since Trump is very unlikely to win the general election; what difference does it make who he picks for his VP or anything else ?

---

His pick of a DeSantis or Tim Scott over an obscure unknown or Yes Man (Or Yes Woman) could mean the difference between winning and losing.

---

Doesn't matter. he's not going to win and Repubs should be ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate.

---

Are you serious? How bout dems being ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate? You've really got to be kidding with that statement.

---

I'm dead serious. And just because I left them out doesn't forgive the Dems for having an equally shameful candidate they're trotting out. The discussion was about the Repubs, so was my comment.

---

There is a difference. If the Dems were running. Biden AFTER he lost in 2020 (or Hillary after 2016) that would be foolish.

Biden is the incumbent president. Going against him (to me) is like breaking up the Bulls after 6 rings in 8 years.

They haven't sniffed a championship since then.

---

I don't think you can compare Biden to the 1990s Bulls

He lost every single national Democratic primary he was in since he started running for President in 1988

Finally winning against a historically weak Dem field, in a Covid year, against a polarizing GOP president, and having been VP under Obama one of the more popular Democratic President's in recent memory.

He then squeaked by in a close 2020 election (after basically not showing his face during the campaign)....wining Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k,

(Not to mention Pennsylvania and Michigan were won by less than 90K votes)

He is not exactly FDR

---

You guys keep talking about a "close 2020" election. He won 306 to 232 electoral votes and Trump would have had to turn 3 close states (AZ, PA, and WI). I know Trump wants us to believe he was right there, but flipping 3 states is massive. If it was 1 state, ok. I guess if it makes people feel better you can say it is only less than 1% of the vote, but that is a lot to move in recounts.

---

And that is why I gave you 3 close States.

"Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k"

In PA it was about 80k

So in all 4 major swing State races decided by close margins

---

And how many recounts have ever gone 20k, 12k, 11k in one state, never mind 3?

---

I am not making any argument about recounts in the 2020 election.

Simply pointing out that is was not a blow out win by Biden in 2020

But in fact a narrow win in 4 swing States...3 of those States by less than 20k in votes.

Biden is not exactly a massively popular person with Democratic voters.

Compared to say the 2012 Presidential election where Obama crushed Romney by 200,000 votes in Wisconsin and 310,000 votes in Pennsylvania. And while Trump one Ohio both times...Romney lost it to Obama by almost 200,000 votes.

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

mcleod66 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Since Trump is very unlikely to win the general election; what difference does it make who he picks for his VP or anything else ?

---

His pick of a DeSantis or Tim Scott over an obscure unknown or Yes Man (Or Yes Woman) could mean the difference between winning and losing.

---

Doesn't matter. he's not going to win and Repubs should be ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate.

---

Are you serious? How bout dems being ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate? You've really got to be kidding with that statement.

---

I'm dead serious. And just because I left them out doesn't forgive the Dems for having an equally shameful candidate they're trotting out. The discussion was about the Repubs, so was my comment.

---

There is a difference. If the Dems were running. Biden AFTER he lost in 2020 (or Hillary after 2016) that would be foolish.

Biden is the incumbent president. Going against him (to me) is like breaking up the Bulls after 6 rings in 8 years.

They haven't sniffed a championship since then.

---

I don't think you can compare Biden to the 1990s Bulls

He lost every single national Democratic primary he was in since he started running for President in 1988

Finally winning against a historically weak Dem field, in a Covid year, against a polarizing GOP president, and having been VP under Obama one of the more popular Democratic President's in recent memory.

He then squeaked by in a close 2020 election (after basically not showing his face during the campaign)....wining Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k,

(Not to mention Pennsylvania and Michigan were won by less than 90K votes)

He is not exactly FDR

---

You guys keep talking about a "close 2020" election. He won 306 to 232 electoral votes and Trump would have had to turn 3 close states (AZ, PA, and WI). I know Trump wants us to believe he was right there, but flipping 3 states is massive. If it was 1 state, ok. I guess if it makes people feel better you can say it is only less than 1% of the vote, but that is a lot to move in recounts.

---

And that is why I gave you 3 close States.

"Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k"

In PA it was about 80k

So in all 4 major swing State races decided by close margins

---

And how many recounts have ever gone 20k, 12k, 11k in one state, never mind 3?

---

I am not making any argument about recounts in the 2020 election.

Simply pointing out that is was not a blow out win by Biden in 2020

But in fact a narrow win in 4 swing States...3 of those States by less than 20k in votes.

Biden is not exactly a massively popular person with Democratic voters.

Compared to say the 2012 Presidential election where Obama crushed Romney by 200,000 votes in Wisconsin and 310,000 votes in Pennsylvania. And while Trump one Ohio both times...Romney lost it to Obama by almost 200,000 votes.

---

Ok, closer than Romney vs Obama. But, Trump lost. And it may have been numerically closer, but in terms of changing the outcome. No way, Trump by too much. But, why focus on the 2020 election? The Biden's term is about over, he is in the stretch run.

What is Trump going to do? That should be the discussion, not 2020. On both sides. I liked Haley because she talked about the future, not rehashing old wounds.

I have heard little about what Trump wants to do. Make America Great Again is a slogan, not plan. What is his vision and how is he going to accomplish it? What is his Platform? I know it is early for a platform, but some ideas besides slogans. I feel like he had more of a plan in 2015. This just feels like retribution, which is good for some on here. Whiskey, OldBear want retribution. Ok, Get it. But, I would love to discuss his policies.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

mcleod66 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Since Trump is very unlikely to win the general election; what difference does it make who he picks for his VP or anything else ?

---

His pick of a DeSantis or Tim Scott over an obscure unknown or Yes Man (Or Yes Woman) could mean the difference between winning and losing.

---

Doesn't matter. he's not going to win and Repubs should be ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate.

---

Are you serious? How bout dems being ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate? You've really got to be kidding with that statement.

---

I'm dead serious. And just because I left them out doesn't forgive the Dems for having an equally shameful candidate they're trotting out. The discussion was about the Repubs, so was my comment.

---

There is a difference. If the Dems were running. Biden AFTER he lost in 2020 (or Hillary after 2016) that would be foolish.

Biden is the incumbent president. Going against him (to me) is like breaking up the Bulls after 6 rings in 8 years.

They haven't sniffed a championship since then.

---

I don't think you can compare Biden to the 1990s Bulls

He lost every single national Democratic primary he was in since he started running for President in 1988

Finally winning against a historically weak Dem field, in a Covid year, against a polarizing GOP president, and having been VP under Obama one of the more popular Democratic President's in recent memory.

He then squeaked by in a close 2020 election (after basically not showing his face during the campaign)....wining Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k,

(Not to mention Pennsylvania and Michigan were won by less than 90K votes)

He is not exactly FDR

---

You guys keep talking about a "close 2020" election. He won 306 to 232 electoral votes and Trump would have had to turn 3 close states (AZ, PA, and WI). I know Trump wants us to believe he was right there, but flipping 3 states is massive. If it was 1 state, ok. I guess if it makes people feel better you can say it is only less than 1% of the vote, but that is a lot to move in recounts.

---

And that is why I gave you 3 close States.

"Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k"

In PA it was about 80k

So in all 4 major swing State races decided by close margins

---

And how many recounts have ever gone 20k, 12k, 11k in one state, never mind 3?

---

I am not making any argument about recounts in the 2020 election.

Simply pointing out that is was not a blow out win by Biden in 2020

But in fact a narrow win in 4 swing States...3 of those States by less than 20k in votes.

Biden is not exactly a massively popular person with Democratic voters.

Compared to say the 2012 Presidential election where Obama crushed Romney by 200,000 votes in Wisconsin and 310,000 votes in Pennsylvania. And while Trump one Ohio both times...Romney lost it to Obama by almost 200,000 votes.

---

Ok, closer than Romney vs Obama. But, Trump lost.

What is Trump going to do? That should be the discussion, not 2020..

---

No idea

But while Trump might not be the answer to the GOP presidential problem…but running back to the mainstream establishment pushovers like Romney is obviously not the answer either.

Romney types lose elections by even bigger percentages

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

mcleod66 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Since Trump is very unlikely to win the general election; what difference does it make who he picks for his VP or anything else ?

---

His pick of a DeSantis or Tim Scott over an obscure unknown or Yes Man (Or Yes Woman) could mean the difference between winning and losing.

---

Doesn't matter. he's not going to win and Repubs should be ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate.

---

Are you serious? How bout dems being ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate? You've really got to be kidding with that statement.

---

I'm dead serious. And just because I left them out doesn't forgive the Dems for having an equally shameful candidate they're trotting out. The discussion was about the Repubs, so was my comment.

---

There is a difference. If the Dems were running. Biden AFTER he lost in 2020 (or Hillary after 2016) that would be foolish.

Biden is the incumbent president. Going against him (to me) is like breaking up the Bulls after 6 rings in 8 years.

They haven't sniffed a championship since then.

---

I don't think you can compare Biden to the 1990s Bulls

He lost every single national Democratic primary he was in since he started running for President in 1988

Finally winning against a historically weak Dem field, in a Covid year, against a polarizing GOP president, and having been VP under Obama one of the more popular Democratic President's in recent memory.

He then squeaked by in a close 2020 election (after basically not showing his face during the campaign)....wining Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k,

(Not to mention Pennsylvania and Michigan were won by less than 90K votes)

He is not exactly FDR

---

You guys keep talking about a "close 2020" election. He won 306 to 232 electoral votes and Trump would have had to turn 3 close states (AZ, PA, and WI). I know Trump wants us to believe he was right there, but flipping 3 states is massive. If it was 1 state, ok. I guess if it makes people feel better you can say it is only less than 1% of the vote, but that is a lot to move in recounts.

---

And that is why I gave you 3 close States.

"Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k"

In PA it was about 80k

So in all 4 major swing State races decided by close margins

---

And how many recounts have ever gone 20k, 12k, 11k in one state, never mind 3?

---

I am not making any argument about recounts in the 2020 election.

Simply pointing out that is was not a blow out win by Biden in 2020

But in fact a narrow win in 4 swing States...3 of those States by less than 20k in votes.

Biden is not exactly a massively popular person with Democratic voters.

Compared to say the 2012 Presidential election where Obama crushed Romney by 200,000 votes in Wisconsin and 310,000 votes in Pennsylvania. And while Trump one Ohio both times...Romney lost it to Obama by almost 200,000 votes.

---

Ok, closer than Romney vs Obama. But, Trump lost.

What is Trump going to do? That should be the discussion, not 2020..

---

No idea

But while Trump might not be the answer to the GOP presidential problem…but running back to the mainstream establishment pushovers like Romney is obviously not the answer either.

Romney types lose elections by even bigger percentages

---

OK, I get that. Right now, we have Trump vs Biden. And neither seems interested in doing anything but talking about 2020 and bad mouthing the other. I hope Kennedy gets on more ballots, at least add SOME policy/platform discussion to this mess.

I do appreciate for the most part you talk issues, not just juvenile attacks. Gotta learn to take the high road and ignore *******s, been a failure of mine for years. Funny, I never have that problem face to face, only here.

She strikes me as a milquetoast version of Palin. Some kind of a gambit to try to get suburban housewives back on the boat. Bad idea.

One party or the other is going to figure out that putting forth soemone on the moderate side of their party who is nevertheless an actual D or R is going to mop the floor with the other side. Like both houses and the executive for 8 years. It is there for the taking. Let's see who is able to figure it out first.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

mcleod66 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Since Trump is very unlikely to win the general election; what difference does it make who he picks for his VP or anything else ?

---

His pick of a DeSantis or Tim Scott over an obscure unknown or Yes Man (Or Yes Woman) could mean the difference between winning and losing.

---

Doesn't matter. he's not going to win and Repubs should be ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate.

---

Are you serious? How bout dems being ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate? You've really got to be kidding with that statement.

---

I'm dead serious. And just because I left them out doesn't forgive the Dems for having an equally shameful candidate they're trotting out. The discussion was about the Repubs, so was my comment.

---

There is a difference. If the Dems were running. Biden AFTER he lost in 2020 (or Hillary after 2016) that would be foolish.

Biden is the incumbent president. Going against him (to me) is like breaking up the Bulls after 6 rings in 8 years.

They haven't sniffed a championship since then.

---

I don't think you can compare Biden to the 1990s Bulls

He lost every single national Democratic primary he was in since he started running for President in 1988

Finally winning against a historically weak Dem field, in a Covid year, against a polarizing GOP president, and having been VP under Obama one of the more popular Democratic President's in recent memory.

He then squeaked by in a close 2020 election (after basically not showing his face during the campaign)....wining Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k,

(Not to mention Pennsylvania and Michigan were won by less than 90K votes)

He is not exactly FDR

---

You guys keep talking about a "close 2020" election. He won 306 to 232 electoral votes and Trump would have had to turn 3 close states (AZ, PA, and WI). I know Trump wants us to believe he was right there, but flipping 3 states is massive. If it was 1 state, ok. I guess if it makes people feel better you can say it is only less than 1% of the vote, but that is a lot to move in recounts.

---

44k votes.

that was the margin. very small five digit numbers in a handful of states.

Way closer than you are portraying it.

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

mcleod66 said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

Since Trump is very unlikely to win the general election; what difference does it make who he picks for his VP or anything else ?

---

His pick of a DeSantis or Tim Scott over an obscure unknown or Yes Man (Or Yes Woman) could mean the difference between winning and losing.

---

Doesn't matter. he's not going to win and Repubs should be ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate.

---

Are you serious? How bout dems being ashamed with the inability to trot out a better platform/candidate? You've really got to be kidding with that statement.

---

I'm dead serious. And just because I left them out doesn't forgive the Dems for having an equally shameful candidate they're trotting out. The discussion was about the Repubs, so was my comment.

---

There is a difference. If the Dems were running. Biden AFTER he lost in 2020 (or Hillary after 2016) that would be foolish.

Biden is the incumbent president. Going against him (to me) is like breaking up the Bulls after 6 rings in 8 years.

They haven't sniffed a championship since then.

---

I don't think you can compare Biden to the 1990s Bulls

He lost every single national Democratic primary he was in since he started running for President in 1988

Finally winning against a historically weak Dem field, in a Covid year, against a polarizing GOP president, and having been VP under Obama one of the more popular Democratic President's in recent memory.

He then squeaked by in a close 2020 election (after basically not showing his face during the campaign)....wining Wisconsin by 20k votes, Georgia by 12K, and Arizona by 11k,

(Not to mention Pennsylvania and Michigan were won by less than 90K votes)

He is not exactly FDR

---

You guys keep talking about a "close 2020" election. He won 306 to 232 electoral votes and Trump would have had to turn 3 close states (AZ, PA, and WI). I know Trump wants us to believe he was right there, but flipping 3 states is massive. If it was 1 state, ok. I guess if it makes people feel better you can say it is only less than 1% of the vote, but that is a lot to move in recounts.

---

44k votes.

that was the margin. very small five digit numbers in a handful of states.

Way closer than you are portraying it.

---

Yet, 2016 was a Trump major win? They were mirror images of each other. Electoral votes were about the same and the same number of States. Yet, Trump's victory in 2016 is monumental and Biden's is so close it is almost a push?

You really believe that 2020 was that close? Trump would have had to turn 3 States. Same with 2016, Clinton would have had to turn 3 States. There are articles in 2016 showing how 2016 is bad news for Dems. Yet, the same situation is a nailbiter for Trump... You guys do like spinning.