I don't follow politics closely, and I didn't actually know who JD Vance was when Trump picked him. My understanding is that your VP pick is there to kind of help you secure votes from demographics that you wouldn't normally get votes from. JD Vance is basically another small town blue collar dude, but Trump already dominates that demographic, so I kind of don't understand the pick. Personally, I think he should've gone with Ramaswami, Nikki Haley, a black guy, or someone that will help him with the demographics that he doesn't really appeal to. But I know Trump has people smarter than I am that are advising him, so what do I know

Oldbear83 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

You should consider the advice of George Washington:

"Do not take counsel of your fears."

There is a very big reason Democrats did not want to have Harris for their nominee, and that reason will show up.

---

I agree would agree with you if this was a full election cycle, Dems only have to keep her up for 90+ days and they get the Convention in the middle. This was the strategy by the Obamas the whole time, shorten the time that people can pick her apart.

---

Disagree.

First, consider that the Obamas reportedly did not want Harris to be the nominee, which is why Barack's first several messages did not refer to Harris by name.

Second, everybody has turned 2020 into some incredible magic trick by the Democrats, when a simple look at the polls showed Biden led wire to wire, something completely lacking this year.

Third, the media has been suppressing focus groups in swing states big-time. The problem is not just Harris' record and style of speaking, it's also that she is clearly a California politico and that does not sell well in the Rust Belt. Also, consider that Harris spent a lot of time in the early summer selling Biden as focused and in control, which is hurting her now.

The short cycle is not as good for Harris as people think. Her bump will fade and she will have to defend the Biden-Harris record, and there's a lot of danger for her in the debate as well.

Short version, the Democrats did not exercise some grand strategy, they got caught by surprise when Biden's competency crashed sooner than expected and they had to dump him.

---

You keep thinking the remaining people on the fence think like you do. All the people that think like you are already Trump votes. Your logic is not going to hold. The latest numbers in MN say it all, Harris has 65% of the Suburban women to Trump 35%. This fight is not based on the whole, but the uncommitted. Trump has to get something to convince them to join him and they do listen to the View, Jennifer Aniston and Michelle Obama.

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Vance talks too much crap for the VP choice. He needs to smile, be polite to everybody and when he has a debate, if he does, then he needs to explain his policy stances.

He was an underwhelming pick.

Still should have gone with Tulsi.

That said, the VP won't lose an election, that will be on Trump.

---

This is where I'm at based on what little I know of Vance and what little I've seen of him so far. I liked Mike Pence, because at least the dude is a true conservative that took strong and unpopular stances against abortion and other key issues without giving the other side unnecessary ammo, at least from what I can remember

Daveisabovereproach said:

---

I don't follow politics closely, and I didn't actually know who JD Vance was when Trump picked him. My understanding is that your VP pick is there to kind of help you secure votes from demographics that you wouldn't normally get votes from. JD Vance is basically another small town blue collar dude, but Trump already dominates that demographic, so I kind of don't understand the pick. Personally, I think he should've gone with Ramaswami, Nikki Haley, a black guy, or someone that will help him with the demographics that he doesn't really appeal to. But I know Trump has people smarter than I am that are advising him, so what do I know

---

My understanding is that Trump picked his VP with interest on support during his second term, not in hopes of gaining temporary support in a given battleground state.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Daveisabovereproach said:

---

I don't follow politics closely, and I didn't actually know who JD Vance was when Trump picked him. My understanding is that your VP pick is there to kind of help you secure votes from demographics that you wouldn't normally get votes from. JD Vance is basically another small town blue collar dude, but Trump already dominates that demographic, so I kind of don't understand the pick. Personally, I think he should've gone with Ramaswami, Nikki Haley, a black guy, or someone that will help him with the demographics that he doesn't really appeal to. But I know Trump has people smarter than I am that are advising him, so what do I know

---

My understanding is that Trump picked his VP with interest on support during his second term, not in hopes of gaining temporary support in a given battleground state.

---

The guy is an anchor...

FLBear5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

You should consider the advice of George Washington:

"Do not take counsel of your fears."

There is a very big reason Democrats did not want to have Harris for their nominee, and that reason will show up.

---

I agree would agree with you if this was a full election cycle, Dems only have to keep her up for 90+ days and they get the Convention in the middle. This was the strategy by the Obamas the whole time, shorten the time that people can pick her apart.

---

Disagree.

First, consider that the Obamas reportedly did not want Harris to be the nominee, which is why Barack's first several messages did not refer to Harris by name.

Second, everybody has turned 2020 into some incredible magic trick by the Democrats, when a simple look at the polls showed Biden led wire to wire, something completely lacking this year.

Third, the media has been suppressing focus groups in swing states big-time. The problem is not just Harris' record and style of speaking, it's also that she is clearly a California politico and that does not sell well in the Rust Belt. Also, consider that Harris spent a lot of time in the early summer selling Biden as focused and in control, which is hurting her now.

The short cycle is not as good for Harris as people think. Her bump will fade and she will have to defend the Biden-Harris record, and there's a lot of danger for her in the debate as well.

Short version, the Democrats did not exercise some grand strategy, they got caught by surprise when Biden's competency crashed sooner than expected and they had to dump him.

---

You keep thinking the remaining people on the fence think like you do. All the people that think like you are already Trump votes. Your logic is not going to hold. The latest numbers in MN say it all, Harris has 65% of the Suburban women to Trump 35%. This fight is not based on the whole, but the uncommitted. Trump has to get something to convince them to join him and they do listen to the View, Jennifer Aniston and Michelle Obama.

---

There are not as many voters 'on the fence' as MSNBC would have you believe.

And only a complete idiot would count on single women to secure a GOP victory. That is not the battleground, it's a place Harris needs to secure to have a chance.

If Harris is going to win, she has to get under 40 year old voters up to Biden's 2020 numbers, and she doesn't have much time to win them over.

Redbrickbear said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

So he was going to choose Burgum, which as we said would have made a lot of sense, but the sons called him "stupid" and wouldn't shut up until they got Vance.

— Richard M. Nixon (@dick_nixon) July 26, 2024

---

Not sure how a Billionaire Governor from North Dakota helps his campaign.

At least Vance can talk about being born a poor kid from a broken home in the Rust Belt/Appalachia

I doubt Doug Burgum is a liability on a ticket...but he certainly does not seem to be a asset

---

Maybe that makes burgham better? I didn't really like him or Vance

Johnny Bear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

You are going to tell women that they are are not understanding his comments on women correctly? They are falling for a misrepresentation? This is going to go over well...

Why don't you just tell them to they should go ask a man to explain how JT Vance is good for them, they just dont understand. Wow, you guys are going from bad to worse.

Vance is going to be a negative. You cannot tell people what they are supposed to hear...

---

If the comment is being deliberately distorted and mischaracterized then by all means the record should be corrected. What's so hard to understand about that?

Furthermore, if referring to certain political figures as "childless cat ladies" is enough cause a material number of emotion based voters to vote for continued inflation, continued open borders, continued stupid energy policies, continued exploding crime, continued endless wars and the risk of WWIII, etc. to the point that it swings the election then let's just surrender now because it's over for America.

---

It is.

I"m wondering if the powers that be in the Democratic party, the Clinton's, Peloshi, Schumer, the Obamas, Jeffries and Schiff handn't already agreed with Biden back in June that he would withdraw AFTER the GOP Convention.

They left Trump thinking he might be running against Harris but unsure at the time of the convention. Then they were handed an unexpected gift when Trump picked Vance.

#New Favorability Poll

🔵 Harris
Favourable 43% (+8 From last poll)
Unfavorable 42% (-4)

🔴 Trump
Favourable 36% (-4)
Unfavorable 52% (+1)

🔴 Vance
Favourable 24%
Unfavorable 39%

IPSOS - 1200 RV

— Political Polls (@PpollingNumbers) July 28, 2024

Oldbear83 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

You should consider the advice of George Washington:

"Do not take counsel of your fears."

There is a very big reason Democrats did not want to have Harris for their nominee, and that reason will show up.

---

I agree would agree with you if this was a full election cycle, Dems only have to keep her up for 90+ days and they get the Convention in the middle. This was the strategy by the Obamas the whole time, shorten the time that people can pick her apart.

---

Disagree.

First, consider that the Obamas reportedly did not want Harris to be the nominee, which is why Barack's first several messages did not refer to Harris by name.

Second, everybody has turned 2020 into some incredible magic trick by the Democrats, when a simple look at the polls showed Biden led wire to wire, something completely lacking this year.

Third, the media has been suppressing focus groups in swing states big-time. The problem is not just Harris' record and style of speaking, it's also that she is clearly a California politico and that does not sell well in the Rust Belt. Also, consider that Harris spent a lot of time in the early summer selling Biden as focused and in control, which is hurting her now.

The short cycle is not as good for Harris as people think. Her bump will fade and she will have to defend the Biden-Harris record, and there's a lot of danger for her in the debate as well.

Short version, the Democrats did not exercise some grand strategy, they got caught by surprise when Biden's competency crashed sooner than expected and they had to dump him.

---

You keep thinking the remaining people on the fence think like you do. All the people that think like you are already Trump votes. Your logic is not going to hold. The latest numbers in MN say it all, Harris has 65% of the Suburban women to Trump 35%. This fight is not based on the whole, but the uncommitted. Trump has to get something to convince them to join him and they do listen to the View, Jennifer Aniston and Michelle Obama.

---

There are not as many voters 'on the fence' as MSNBC would have you believe.

And only a complete idiot would count on single women to secure a GOP victory. That is not the battleground, it's a place Harris needs to secure to have a chance.

If Harris is going to win, she has to get under 40 year old voters up to Biden's 2020 numbers, and she doesn't have much time to win them over.

---

Then there are no more to get... Anyone that was remotely Trump, that would be swayed by your arguments (people like you) are already on board. The ones in play are the people that don't think like you. How does Trump get them and he needs them. VP pick was an F-you to that group. Latest speech saying that you won't have to vote again reassured their fears he is a Fascist. What doe he have? I really hope he is NOT following your line of thought, if that is the case we are looking at 2020 all over...

Lindsey Graham is asked on CBS if Trump regrets picking JD Vance pic.twitter.com/Z5vMiPzcGg

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 28, 2024

boognish_bear said:

---

Seeing lots of reactions like this...

According to J.D. Vance, my wife, who has two B.A.s and 2 Masters Degrees, and has served needy populations, including children, for 30 years, "does not have a stake" in the country because we don't have children.

Fuck J.D. Vance and Fuck Trump.

Sorry, I'm livid.

— Brandon Unger 🌎🇺🇲 🇺🇦🌊 (@ungerbn103) July 23, 2024

---

Pretty positive that there was never a chance for that person to vote for Trump anyway.

You guys are so upset that Vance is losing votes that Trump was never going to win in the first place. Maybe you should clutch your pearls over the loss of French voters support as well? LOL

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Vance talks too much crap for the VP choice. He needs to smile, be polite to everybody and when he has a debate, if he does, then he needs to explain his policy stances.

He was an underwhelming pick.

Still should have gone with Tulsi.

That said, the VP won't lose an election, that will be on Trump.

---

Agree that Tulsi would have been a better pick. Hopefully Trump will wait until October to announce a cabinet position for Tulsi. Maybe Sec of State or Sec Def or Sec of Transportation. He should do the same for Vivek and maybe Tim Scott.

The biggest coup would be to announce RFK Jr for HHS or Surgeon General. Getting RFK to take a cabinet position would completely end the election overnight. I doubt it will happen... but it would be impossible for Harris to overcome something like that.

boognish_bear said:

---

I have been trying to warn every conservative man I know - these JD comments are activating women across all sides, including my most conservative Trump supporting friends.

These comments have caused real pain and are just innately unchristian.

This is not who we are. https://t.co/VBpmDlzgEo

— Meghan McCain (@MeghanMcCain) July 25, 2024

---

yeah right.... Megan McCain and Jennifer Anniston are giving us the pulse of the conservative women in America.... LOL

Anyone who believes that a McCain or a Hollywood cat lady are a good representation of conservatives, is just a total idiot.

ShooterTX said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Seeing lots of reactions like this...

According to J.D. Vance, my wife, who has two B.A.s and 2 Masters Degrees, and has served needy populations, including children, for 30 years, "does not have a stake" in the country because we don't have children.

Fuck J.D. Vance and Fuck Trump.

Sorry, I'm livid.

— Brandon Unger 🌎🇺🇲 🇺🇦🌊 (@ungerbn103) July 23, 2024

---

Pretty positive that there was never a chance for that person to vote for Trump anyway.

You guys are so upset that Vance is losing votes that Trump was never going to win in the first place. Maybe you should clutch your pearls over the loss of French voters support as well? LOL

---

How does Trump win without moderates or "those he will never get"? If he can never get them AND there are not enough GOP voters to beat the Dems Trump is a stupid choice. How does he win with just "those that would vote for him anyway"?

FLBear5630 said:

---

BearWithMe said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

My wife was pretty excited when Vance was first announced....but the more she hears now though the less enthusiasm she's having for the pick.

Agree that the top ticket is what really matters....but in a race that may end up having pretty tight margins any slight negative could be damaging.

---

This is how I feel as well. We can argue and debate whose worse between Trump & Kamala, but the average American has a poor opinion on both, making the VP picks way more consequential than a typical election.

IMO Vance was a terrible pick from a strategic front, as all he really does is represent the voter base that was already voting Trump to begin with.

---

Vance was a hubris pick that is going to come back and bite Trump. Scott, Haley, Burchum, even Gabbard would have been good picks as they bring something to the table. Vance brings nothing and even looks like a grooming to continue 8 more years of Trump after he is done. That is going to be deterrent to vote for them.

---

I thought about this, but 4 years is not enough for a Trump VP to run for President in 2028. Vance has no chance to win the primaries if people with experience show up... and they will. Ron Desantis, Tim Scott, Ted Cruz... any of the usual suspects will have a much better chance to raise funds, build a campaign team, and win the primary.

I think the future plans for Vance are to run for governor of Kentucky. Think about how much time he spent talking about his Kentucky roots, and his plans to be buried there in the family plot. Perhaps Dewine will retire in 2028, and announce Vance as his successor. Even then, I think Vance would have a hard time winning a general election in Ohio, compared with Kentucky.

Kentucky has had a run of bad leadership in the governor's mansion recently. The current dem governor has obvious ambitions for higher office, and is just salivating at the chance to go to Washington.

So I think it's much more likely that Vance will seek a governorship, rather than a failed primary for the Presidency. There is really no chance for him to win the Republican primary in 2028, much less the general election.

FLBear5630 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Seeing lots of reactions like this...

According to J.D. Vance, my wife, who has two B.A.s and 2 Masters Degrees, and has served needy populations, including children, for 30 years, "does not have a stake" in the country because we don't have children.

Fuck J.D. Vance and Fuck Trump.

Sorry, I'm livid.

— Brandon Unger 🌎🇺🇲 🇺🇦🌊 (@ungerbn103) July 23, 2024

---

Pretty positive that there was never a chance for that person to vote for Trump anyway.

You guys are so upset that Vance is losing votes that Trump was never going to win in the first place. Maybe you should clutch your pearls over the loss of French voters support as well? LOL

---

How does Trump win without moderates or "those he will never get"? If he can never get them AND there are not enough GOP voters to beat the Dems Trump is a stupid choice. How does he win with just "those that would vote for him anyway"?

---

There is a massive difference between people who are undecided, and winning people who are "vote blue no matter who".
All I'm saying is that this person does NOT present as someone who was on the fence about Trump, until they heard this comment from JD Vance. This person has all the classic signs of a "vote blue no matter who", TDS victim.

You comments about Anniston and McCain being representative of moderates, has more merit than this argument here.

I agree that these comments from Vance are going to hurt Trump with moderate women... but only if they are voting for VP instead of President. In the end, the VP has rarely done anything to win or lose a presidency.

You may not be old enough to remember how the media destroyed Dan Quayle in 1988. He looked terrible in the VP debate, and the media did everything they could to make him look like an idiot. And yet Bush beat Dukakis in a massive landslide election.... the last one we have seen in America.

I seriously doubt that anyone will say that Biden won anything for Obama. Nor did Pence win the election in 2016.

If someone is really going to base their vote for President, upon the comments of a VP nominee... then they are probably too stupid to have ever been won over to the Republican side. Republicans don't appeal to emotions, but to logic & reason. To do otherwise would be to become democrats.... and that isn't going to happen.

So if you want to be the party of emotional, cat ladies... go vote blue. If you want to be the party that puts logic & reason over feelings... vote for Trump. Being overly concerned about what Jennifer Anniston thinks, is just not a winning strategy. There are far fewer Jennifer Annistons in this nation, than there are blue collar workers who need a strong economy and a secure border.

ShooterTX said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Seeing lots of reactions like this...

According to J.D. Vance, my wife, who has two B.A.s and 2 Masters Degrees, and has served needy populations, including children, for 30 years, "does not have a stake" in the country because we don't have children.

Fuck J.D. Vance and Fuck Trump.

Sorry, I'm livid.

— Brandon Unger 🌎🇺🇲 🇺🇦🌊 (@ungerbn103) July 23, 2024

---

Pretty positive that there was never a chance for that person to vote for Trump anyway.

You guys are so upset that Vance is losing votes that Trump was never going to win in the first place. Maybe you should clutch your pearls over the loss of French voters support as well? LOL

---

Dude is bluer than a hypothermia victim

He was never ever ever gonna vote for Trump

ShooterTX said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Seeing lots of reactions like this...

According to J.D. Vance, my wife, who has two B.A.s and 2 Masters Degrees, and has served needy populations, including children, for 30 years, "does not have a stake" in the country because we don't have children.

Fuck J.D. Vance and Fuck Trump.

Sorry, I'm livid.

— Brandon Unger 🌎🇺🇲 🇺🇦🌊 (@ungerbn103) July 23, 2024

---

Pretty positive that there was never a chance for that person to vote for Trump anyway.

You guys are so upset that Vance is losing votes that Trump was never going to win in the first place. Maybe you should clutch your pearls over the loss of French voters support as well? LOL

---

How does Trump win without moderates or "those he will never get"? If he can never get them AND there are not enough GOP voters to beat the Dems Trump is a stupid choice. How does he win with just "those that would vote for him anyway"?

---

There is a massive difference between people who are undecided, and winning people who are "vote blue no matter who".
All I'm saying is that this person does NOT present as someone who was on the fence about Trump, until they heard this comment from JD Vance. This person has all the classic signs of a "vote blue no matter who", TDS victim.

You comments about Anniston and McCain being representative of moderates, has more merit than this argument here.

I agree that these comments from Vance are going to hurt Trump with moderate women... but only if they are voting for VP instead of President. In the end, the VP has rarely done anything to win or lose a presidency.

You may not be old enough to remember how the media destroyed Dan Quayle in 1988. He looked terrible in the VP debate, and the media did everything they could to make him look like an idiot. And yet Bush beat Dukakis in a massive landslide election.... the last one we have seen in America.

I seriously doubt that anyone will say that Biden won anything for Obama. Nor did Pence win the election in 2016.

If someone is really going to base their vote for President, upon the comments of a VP nominee... then they are probably too stupid to have ever been won over to the Republican side. Republicans don't appeal to emotions, but to logic & reason. To do otherwise would be to become democrats.... and that isn't going to happen.

So if you want to be the party of emotional, cat ladies... go vote blue. If you want to be the party that puts logic & reason over feelings... vote for Trump. Being overly concerned about what Jennifer Anniston thinks, is just not a winning strategy. There are far fewer Jennifer Annistons in this nation, than there are blue collar workers who need a strong economy and a secure border.

---

I have an autographed book by Quaile and knew some people on his Staff.

There is a difference between no harm and hurting. Palin hurt McCain. Quayle never recovered. Quayle's biggest screw up was just being over sensitive and not a good debater. Vance is toxic, that is a difference

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

If you believe the rumors it was Peter Thiel who had a big influence on Trump to select his buddy Vance. I had no idea Thiel was a homosexual. I was reading today about the sordid past of his infidelity and suicide of a lover. One of the founders of Chatcpt is gay too and both are huge money backers of Trump.

Thiel was the sole contributor to Vance's career and advancement in the crypto world and influence over possible legislation regarding AI.

There is no doubt Thiel is responsible for Vance being elected Senator in Ohio. The money rolled in. Peter is the othersides Soros

---

Peter Thiel is an interesting figure... I cant tell if he is a good guy like Elon Musk or a bad guy like George Soros.

He only has 5 days to do that and there is no way he will admit he made a wrong choice.

— Rachel Vindman 🌻 (@natsechobbyist) August 2, 2024

Tulsi tore Kamala a new one in the 2020 debates but the MAGA backers do not want to win. They just want to ***** and whine.

And then when he loses it will be because it was rigged… Not because Trump continued to make reckless unforced errors.

Here is Gov. Andy Beshear on how to win back Trump voters to the Democratic Party. Out of all of the potential VP messaging… this is by FAR the best I’ve seen. 👏

The Walz “weirdo” thing is funny and rallies the base, but it’s not going to hit well with most swing voters. pic.twitter.com/AkoMqTE0cy

— dan green (@DanGreenMN) August 2, 2024

NEWS: Harris and @PeteButtigieg met today for about 90 minutes about the VP job, sources tell me. The meeting was not at Harris's home in Washington.

— Jarrett Renshaw (@JarrettRenshaw) August 2, 2024

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Tulsi tore Kamala a new one in the 2020 debates but the MAGA backers do not want to win. They just want to ***** and whine.

---

So, so true. She would have been amazing. She is sooooooooo much better than JD.

handing out YOU’RE FIRED signs to people standing behind vance is a democrat-level unforced error pic.twitter.com/2EK6KXa1ux

— Bill Hanstock (@sundownmotel) August 3, 2024