I held my nose in 2016 He was surprisingly outstanding on areas important to me But also over the top on a lot of things I'm over the drama but not the underlying intentions
I hope this opens the doors for non-pols to get in the game and tinker with the government machinery. With a sledge hammer and cutting torch. We are in desperate need of some tinkering
Or Cruz / Haley 2024 (or Haley / Cruz, I'm good whichever)
Or Cruz / Crenshaw 2024
Something like that. If Tom Cotton becomes the voice of the GOP we are well and surely screwed as the Dems will get their permanent majority they've been drinking the Kool-Aid about.
Trump even if he manages to get some kind of win, will need a successor. Thinking back to Reagan & George Bush, I think it might be of more importance to pick your successors well then any particular battles.
This Trump voter wants Trump to complete the launch of proper conservative Republicans that are committed to Trump's ideals of Making America Great. It will have to be full MAGA if Biden is installed as POTUS. Trump may in fact be too old by then but he also may not. It is quite likely that he will have moved on to the next new thing too.
If Trump succeeds with the challenges can he swap Cotton in at VP?
Althouse trying to move us all past the sale into her boring voter fraud neocon world of the new normal. First time I've ever felt purposefully manipulated by this blog author.
Bigger issues today:
California Curfew and and Thanksgiving restrictions Milwaukee not allowing for ballot envelope verification ANTIFA now out and about with guns NY Schools Closing Massive Voter Fraud
Not much of a choice. Trump's moment may be gone and hard to get back. He got in because he was different and unexpected. Now that he's a known item, the old hesitations that took some time to overcome are back, along with a sense that expecting things to turn out as well or better is asking too much.
Tom Cotton seems like too much of a neo-con based on his past record. Also conventional candidates are harder to like, post-Trump. There's a sense that they are all repeating the same tired rhetoric that they don't really believe. And there was always that one dolichocephalic kid in school that people laughed at.
Obviously not, Meade. The corrupt influence we get from the D-hack media, leftwing hollywood, etc... the thumb on the scale to produce who the left WANT to face.
Additionally - vote fraud. If the left can manipulate the count in the general, why not a GOP primary?
My vote would go to Cotton if for no other reason than age. His youth and his conservative approach will go a long way in educating future generations.
He only served 1 term, which the Democrats cried and investigated him for a hoax that they perpetrated for 5 years...so he really should get an extra term.
What is most disappointing about watching Baby Boomers and Generation X accept / deny / promote election fraud for their own boring safety, and endless unconstitutional lock downs, along with unhinged ANTIFA / BLM violence, is it’s the six-year-olds like my nephew that will never know the free culture we all enjoyed. Colleges and Public Schools already took that from Generation Z.
Just truly selfish and cowardly. But it doesn’t surprise me. The WWII Generation (my paternal grandfather survived Omaha Beach) set up two generations. And… slopped around in the warm mud, and in our twilight years we’re pissing it away.
I voted for Cotton, not because I think the PDJT will be too old, but because running for, and then serving as, president is not the highest use of his talents. He's much better as a theme-setter, motivational speaker, for the people who make America work. He can make speeches, lead rallies, and generally serve as cheerleader (yell leader for the Aggies) for us Deplorables and our allies around the world. As a bonus, Sen Cotton will make a great president. Win-win. Not tired.
I'd be good with Cotton, Crenshaw, Noem, Scott. Pretty much anybody but the backstabbing Romney. If the Republicans are smart (always a doubtful proposition) they'll redouble their black/Hispanic outreach and work much, much harder for ethnic Asians.
The Democrat coalition now consists of public employee unions, academic/social services professionals, and corporate upper management types. Also social justice warriors/college students who are mostly white and middle to upper middle class brats. Money provided by tech billionaires, public employee unions and lawyers.
The Republican coalition now consists of blue collar workers, rural residents, small business owners and those who prefer traditional morals and mores, and really resent the SJW agenda being forced down their throats.
The GOP candidate in 2024 needs to understand his/her voting base and agree with their agenda. Which is another reason that Romney cannot be that person.
Trump, of course, given those constraints. But, again of course, that won't be the choice.
Trumpism will peter out when he's gone. You think Pence (especially) or Haley will carry it on? Hardly -- they are straight out of central casting Repub establishment and will quickly revert to Republican business as usual -- politics with Democrats holding sway no matter which party is in power.
Pence is no Trump, and he is a paragon of the Republican Curse: pathological propriety and daintiness. He would never sully his knuckles. Haley is competent and fairly tough, but she's not a scrapper. Is there anyone coming up through the ranks that can keep counter-punching? I don't see one.
The only possibility to come close to Trumpness is Mike Pompeo, who will probably be "my" candidate in 2024. He's pugnacious and so will fight back but I haven't detected the vision nor the fervor that Trump has. And I suspect that somewhere deep inside him lies the soul of a Republican company man. There's also Tom Cotton, who clearly has the Oval Office in his sights. I think he's is OK with Trumpism and he is a brawler and could be philosophically the best choice to carry the torch. But he doesn't have the charisma and I think he won't ever be able to achieve his presidential dream.
But Trump cannot possibly be replicated and therefore Trumpism cannot and will not be perpetuated. As I've always said, Trump is merely a speed bump along the way to America as a Leftist country.
And WTH is this "Don Jr '24" business? How utterly absurd! He is *nothing* other than the Master's son, whose sole "qualification" is bearing the same name. Don Jr. talk is the quintessence of that bizarre yearning that Americans have for royalty and dynasty. Stop already...
trump will still win, but if doesn't overcome this obvious vote fraud, I will support him in 2024. He'll only be 78, which is now "Young enough" to be President.
Joe Smith: "The upside of Noem is that if she runs against Harris, she will make Harris look like and old, chewed-up shoe."
I feel I must caution you that any criticism of any democrat on Althouse blog will be met with fierce pushback from at least one fully exposed FakeCon charlatan who calls himself a lifelong republican from MI.
His "pushback" often entails violent rhetoric and attacks on children, women, conservative military members and persons of color who dare to stand against his beloved democratical heroes.
I just thought you should be warned.
In case you missed who that is, his initials are LLR-lefty Chuck.
Grenell has been the most impressive person so far.
Cotton has been fine and Crenshaw is fine but so far they are too much like me and too little like Trump. It takes more than just the right positions for this fight.
Cotton was commissioned too. Republican Supreme Court justices and Commissioned officers show similar long term trends.
We all know why Ann ignores Richard Grenell's existence.
Howard: "The only Democrat I would vote for over Dan Crenshaw is Tulsi Gabbard... because cyclops don't surf"
Dan Crenshaw does seem to garner interesting support from the democratical side of the aisle and only fails to gain support from certain LLR-lefty quarters (Chuck) who absolutely despise with the red hot passion of a thousand suns any conservative with a strong military background who fights back against the craziest of democrat policies.
Crenshaw seems comfortable moving between populist conservative policy positions while bringing aboard more traditional republicans....which of course does not include FakeCon LLR's who have always really been lefty democrats at heart and in practice.
You can't get Trump again, but you can take the good parts (the combativeness and the disdain for the Washington circle-jerk crowd) and build something that moves beyond Trumpism.
I recently learned that Tom Cotton, after 9/11, dropped out of Harvard Law School and joined the army. He became an officer with the 82nd Airborne and served a tour in Iraq where he won a Bronze Star. Good job for the media in keeping this scandal under wraps.....I'd like to vote for Cotton. He would be a throwback to that era in American politics where Presidents did something admirable and brave before getting elected to President....I don't know that much about him or his politics. Again, the media has done a good job keeping us uninformed.
J. Farmer: "Tom Cotton is good on immigration but sucks on foreign policy."
That has often been the concern with Cotton that in matters of foreign policy he would default to the consensus view.
But today is not 4 years ago, and Trump's successful foreign policy positioning has not gone unnoticed and even though FakeCon's like democrat LLR-lefty Chuck would absolutely call Cotton a traitor for daring to defy the Vindman's and the establishment of the world, Cotton would be perfectly positioned to do just if he took the Trump lesson to heart.
I think Cotton knows precisely what these idiots are doing and why in a way that alot of people didn't fully realize 4 years ago. Remember, Cotton now fully understands intelligence and law enforcement agencies along with the military industrial complex chaps all maneuvered with America's adversaries and competitors to attack Trump and he knows clearly how they did it with media and establishment republican support.
He also now fully understands, as I believe Ted Cruz does, what a potential electoral winning populist formula is.
They know it, but will they have the guts to go all the way with it? If they seize that ring they could build on what already exists. The numbers coming out of the hispanic precincts and cities where african americans are tired of the democraticals and their LLR-lefty lap poodles makes clear what could be a strong play against the globalist pro-ChiCom/Pro-EU morons in the US.
If they don't, they will just be the next wave of republican losers like Romney and McCain and Kasich and Jeb and the rest.
Mr Wibble: "You can't get Trump again, but you can take the good parts (the combativeness and the disdain for the Washington circle-jerk crowd) and build something that moves beyond Trumpism."
Politicians are not lego sets.
You go to war with the army you have, not the one you wish you had.
In order for ANY republican who wants to build on the astonishing early-realignment coalition Trump created, you have to buy all the way in.
This idea that its Trumpism that was unleashed is completely ass-backward.
Trump was a very effective megaphone for a large scale movement that is alive and growing across the entire western world as peoples are seeing global elites decide for them that its time to fundamentally alter the structure of our world which leads to things like unrestricted immigration and turning an economic alliance in the EU into what Verhofstadt and the rest of the idiots really want: a United States of Europe which crushes the member states with all power residing in Brussels.
Trumpism didn't cause Brexit, or what we see in Poland and Hungary. Or the backlash against Brussels in Spain or Italy or Greece. Trumpism didn't cause elections to go the way they did in Brazil and elsewhere.
This battle is galactically larger than Trump, its just that Trump became such a powerful force for it this message in the US that it seems like its all about him.
@Full of Soup, Dan Crenshaw made a wonderful joint campaign ad with five, attractive, like-minded Republicans. The others were Wesley Hunt, August Pfluger, Beth Van Duyne, Tony Gonzales, and Genevieve Collins. Does anyone know how the other five fared in the election? Outside of Genevieve Collins needing to work on getting her adversary's weight up on the leg she's sweeping if she's going to do O Soto Gari, they seemed like really good people.
this is a prevent defense, to discourage others from followings trump path, he was an imperfect vehicle, but that's what was available, you want to make the perfect the enemy of the good, also if this fraudulent system is allowed to stand, they will steal georgia, and put their own obama, in there,
Is the signal getting into court Achilles where it'll actually do some good or is it just getting out on the internet?
As steely Dan once said "in the land of milk and honey you got to put it on the table." All this smoke you people are generating will just blow away unless you can fire it up in court.
The lower classifications can be further broken out as opioid addict/non addict or married to a cousin/not married to a cousin/cohabitating with a cousin etc...
Williamll: "I recently learned that Tom Cotton, after 9/11, dropped out of Harvard Law School and joined the army. He became an officer with the 82nd Airborne and served a tour in Iraq where he won a Bronze Star."
That reason alone is why I predicted way back in 2016/2017 that Cotton would be viciously targeted by LLR-lefty Chuck and I was proven completely correct immediately.
Drago - Why the obsession with Chuck? It's not normal or healthy. Or interesting.
Jealous steve?
Chuck repeatedly claims to be a Republican. There is special attention to people who claim to be on our side. They reflect on us. Just like when today or tomorrow it comes out in court that Kemp and Raffensburger took money to install dominion voting machines and make deals with democrat lawyers that "interpreted" election laws to mean signatures don't matter. There is special hatred of betrayers.
You voted for a rapist. You would never understand the sentiment.
Trump, if he were 10 years younger. He may have 10X the stamina of Biden today, but in 4 years, who knows what kind of shape he'll be in? Of course, when he was first elected, I thought age would prevent him from running for reelection.
Chuck is a Republican. That is not the same as claiming to be on "your side." There are many republicans who detest Trump. They are still Republicans, and their views align with Bush and Bush and Reagan and Nixon and Eisenhower and Romney and McCain and on and on. Trump is the outlier.
Who appointed you and Drago as the final arbiter of what it means to be a Republican? But keep eating your own. You may be surprised how full you get.
Howard said... As steely Dan once said "in the land of milk and honey you got to put it on the table." All this smoke you people are generating will just blow away unless you can fire it up in court.
11/23/20, 10:48 AM
Under the old rules, you'd be right.
But in a country where LEOs are feeling increasingly confident about rejecting their illegal orders, and even endorsing Donald Trump, you'd be betting your life that this stops in the Supreme Court...
Lately, the president is looking like something was knocked out of him. That may only be temporary. He's shown resilience in the past. But that's been because he could move from field to field and venture to venture, taking on new challenges each time. He may not want to repeat the presidency. Been there, done that.
Lurker21: "Lately, the president is looking like something was knocked out of him. That may only be temporary. He's shown resilience in the past. But that's been because he could move from field to field and venture to venture, taking on new challenges each time. He may not want to repeat the presidency. Been there, done that."
It is my belief that Trump and family understood all too well the scale of the corruption on election night and into the next few days and early on recognized that it was going to be impossible to flip this script under these circumstances. However, the fight for voting integrity was something absolutely to be fought for while at the same time I believe Trump immediately moved to thinking about The Next Thing. I suspect that's what he spends most of his time on even as we speak along with taking some final policy steps that he hopes will lock in certain political realities.
I'm thinking primarily in terms of the ChiComs and military deployments.
Lately, the president is looking like something was knocked out of him. That may only be temporary. He's shown resilience in the past. But that's been because he could move from field to field and venture to venture, taking on new challenges each time. He may not want to repeat the presidency. Been there, done that.
Even a single-term as president is merely the last few chapters of his biography. This is basically his retirement. But I wouldn't be surprised if he decides, rather than run again, to work behind the scenes. If Trump decided to spend the next four years rallying supporters and trying to find promising young candidates he could do a lot of damage to the GOP establishment.
Do you think Grenell in 2020 would be a bigger step than Trump in 2016?
Trump was a recognized name in 2016. People felt like they knew him. Also for somebody from metropolitan America he had great rapport with the rest of the country.
People don't know Grennell. He doesn't seem to have a populist appeal. And there's a third thing, too. Do I have to spell it out?
There are many republicans who detest Trump. They are still Republicans, and their views align with Bush and Bush and Reagan and Nixon and Eisenhower and Romney and McCain and on and on. Trump is the outlier.
Other than Reagan and Nixon (maybe), You got the RINOs right. Eisenhower was different and was more of a nonpartisan. The number of Republicans who "detest Trump" is shrinking as the fraud becomes more obvious.
Over at Ricochet, there used to be a lot of NeverTrumpers. Now there are only three or four. You could call the 4% that didn't vote for Trump "a lot."
mccullough: "Reagan gave us Amnesty and tripled the debt"
I don't blame Reagan for the '86 amnesty based on our understanding of things in 2020. I also don't blame Reagan for prioritizing confronting the Soviet Union against the wishes of the democraticals and Bush-y LLR's over budget hawkishness while congress was controlled by the democraticals under Tip O'Neil and Jim Wright.
The office of president is term limited. Trump will not be eligible to run for office in 2024. Four more years to unwind the Obama/Biden/Clinton legacy of constitutional, economic, social, and global transgressions.
Trump is a family man and I think he will be concerned about the effect of another run on his family. Especially after seeing what happened to poor Hunter Biden.
Here's my rating of the president's of my lifetime.
Richard Nixon. I was a teenager when he was impeached. I thought that was justified at the time. Now, I'm not quite so sure. The problem is Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. Why is it okay to run candidates for office, who have done worse things than what Nixon did? How is this progress?
What does it mean when there was in one law for Republicans and a completely different law for Democrats?
Gerald Ford. He was kind of a placeholder.
Jimmy Carter. I don't think he was a good president. But I do think he was a good man.
Ronald Reagan. We wouldn't be where we are if it weren't for Ronald Reagan. He changed things for the better. This is despite my belief is that he never really recovered from being shot in the second year of his presidency. Shot by the left. One person was prosecuted but a huge number of people were vicariously responsible.
George Bush the 1st. He wasn't that bad. He was a Washington, DC insider that was fairly competent, and was right-wing in the sense of not being left-wing.
Bill Clinton. I think more bad things happened under his presidency than most people realize.
George Bush the 2nd. Not nearly as competent as his father. Right-wing in the sense mainly of not being left-wing. His presidency was defined by 9/11 which he didn't choose. Real problems were left to fester while the country's energy was spent on wars in the Middle East that didn't accomplish much.
Barack Obama. Lots of bad things happened in his presidency. Most of which were barely discussed or not even discussed when they happened. He set us up for the nightmare we are in now. But on the other hand I don't know how much of that was actually coming from Barack Obama, the man himself. A lot of it was really coming from the Democratic Party getting the executive branch and from people from the far left getting into institutional positions of power in that executive branch.
Donald Trump. The best president of my lifetime. He has done a lot of good so far, and far more than these other presidents. It is just astonishing. And yes I do see his very real flaws.
Readering: "Trump is a family man and I think he will be concerned about the effect of another run on his family. Especially after seeing what happened to poor Hunter Biden."
LOL
Let me get this straight: it was Joe Biden's running for President that made Hunter into a crack smoking, underage Chinese girl dabbling, Navy dishonorable discharged, brothers wife dabbling while still married to first wife, biological child and child support denying, ChiCom military funded, Putin oligarch pal funded miscreant and Donald Trump should, what? Be concerned that his children could fall prey to all of that?
Do go on, because as of 2 weeks ago none of that was true in the slightest and Hunter was the "smartest guy" Joe Biden ever met.
There will be investigations by journalists into the election fraud claims. When it is written at length that there was no there there and that Trump's entourage fully knew that, support for Trump 2024 will fade away like support for Palin 2012.
mandrewa said...Here's my rating of the president's of my lifetime.
I think your assessments are pretty good.
However, Carter was not a good man. He was a rigid, self-righteous control freak that I voted for in 1976.
Reagan was the best POTUS of my lifetime because he helped me see the light and learn to love America again. He stopped the leftward surge from the Sixties and Seventies. Both Bushes were mediocrities at best, but slightly better than the alternatives. Clinton was a much more vicious and evil person than people realize, but he was a master politician.
Historians will never give Trump credit, but he also helped people see the light when it comes to the establishment media. He briefly stopped the surge towards a totalitarian leftwing state. However, that surge will continue unless good people take a stand and forswear affectations such as indifference and cruel neutrality.
Noem is in the same category as Scott Walker. Effective mid-west Governor. "hero" to conservatives for standing up to the liberal/progressive blob.
Hubby and I were on the Walker for President train from the very start - and the train stopped a mere 6 months later. And it was all about money - he simply could not raise what was required to compete in a 15 person primary and he was not willing to go into debt to stay in the race.
Who was out campaigning with (I think) 20+ GOP Congressional (non-incumbent) candidates this year - building up political IOUs along the way? Who helped raise money for candidates? Who was a Governor with international bona fides?
Those of you saying Noem need to cool your jets. She's not term-limited out of the governorship until 2026, and you can't have her until we're done with her.
Readering: "There will be investigations by journalists into the election fraud claims."
The same ones who told us the hoax dossier was real and verified, Putin changed vote totals to elect Trump, Trump stole the 2016 election and Kavanaugh was a rape gang leader?
Gee, I wonder what these "journalists" will come up with.
Blogger mccullough said... Reagan gave us Amnesty and tripled the debt.
No, I think what happened was that Tip let him win the Cold War as long as he let the Democrats spend. A lot of Tip's Democrats were commies but he kept them under control.
"People don't know Grennell. He doesn't seem to have a populist appeal. And there's a third thing, too. Do I have to spell it out?"
Grenell is in the Trump mold...damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead. My impression is that he is very much a populist, small-government, no bullshit kind of guy.
And being gay these days is a plus to Democrats. How in the hell can they attack him on that when they've spend the last two years (metaphorically) sucking Boot-edge-edge's cock?
Republicans (especially Trump Republicans) have no issue with gays. Trump was for gay marriage before both Joe, Hilary, and the Enlightened One.
At 8:47 I posted a comment about the poll. Nothing critical of Althouse; no mentioning any other commenter. A straight comment, about the subject of the blog post. The sort of comment that Althouse claims to want. On topic; no personal attacks; no cluttering back-and-forth.
I then saw that my comment had been removed, and so left the page.
I come back to this page at the end of the day, and see my name called out about dozen times for personal attacks, abuse, etc. Nothing really informative about the subject of the blog post.
This is "moderation" at the Althouse blog. And note well, newer readers. My minor feud with Meade and Althouse arose when I implored Althouse to do MORE moderation consistent with what her avowed (at the time) rules on commenting were. I was getting so many personal attacks for simply expressing criticism of Trump and Trumpism, I pleaded with Althouse to crack down on them. Instead, she cracked down on me.
Might have been said in the comments previously, but the 2024 R nominee will be the one that treats the MSM the same as Trump did. It won't be a Bush or Romney or Never Trumper.
Crenshaw has a podcast that's rated very highly. I've listened to it several times and he impresses me. But when was the last time a House member received a major party endorsement for president?
At 8:47 I posted a comment about the poll. Nothing critical of Althouse; no mentioning any other commenter. A straight comment, about the subject of the blog post. The sort of comment that Althouse claims to want. On topic; no personal attacks; no cluttering back-and-forth."
Is it really? Because here's what I see. And I have seen the same pattern for years now. You try hard to start fights and you do it routinely. A high percentage of your comments are nothing but insults, either direct or indirect. Your indirect insults often take the form of implying that people believe things they have never said and then attacking your strawman.
Given the chance, you have and will fill up a forum with your many insults both direct and indirect. You all by yourself will end up writing a high percentage of the messages.
You seem to relish conflict, but in addition to that I can't help but notice that when you fill up a forum with this crap it shuts down the conversation and people go away.
You're too smart to not know this is what your doing and I can't help but wonder if this is your intent. Or in other words, you aren't here to have a conversation or an argument but really to shut down the conversation.
Alternatively you are here because you have some kind of emotional need for conflict. But even if that is the case, it doesn't change the consequences of the acting out of your issues.
The amazing thing is how often, over and over, on different forums I have seen this same pattern by different people. There will be several dozen people talking. Most of them are pretty well behaved, or at least tolerable. And you have one or two, almost always from the left, filling up the forum with relatively content-free messages of hate that incidentally chase people away from the forum.
Now you are plenty smart enough to say interesting and relevant things when you want to -- which isn't exactly the case for everyone I've seen displaying this pattern -- but despite your capacity for doing this, this is hardly what you normally do.
At 8:47 I posted a comment about the poll. Nothing critical of Althouse; no mentioning any other commenter. A straight comment, about the subject of the blog post. The sort of comment that Althouse claims to want. On topic; no personal attacks; no cluttering back-and-forth.
I then saw that my comment had been removed, and so left the page.
I come back to this page at the end of the day, and see my name called out about dozen times for personal attacks, abuse, etc. Nothing really informative about the subject of the blog post.
This is "moderation" at the Althouse blog. And note well, newer readers. My minor feud with Meade and Althouse arose when I implored Althouse to do MORE moderation consistent with what her avowed (at the time) rules on commenting were. I was getting so many personal attacks for simply expressing criticism of Trump and Trumpism, I pleaded with Althouse to crack down on them. Instead, she cracked down on me." Because you're a c#*t, Chuck. A lying, totally dishonorable c#*t. And probably more than a little disturbed. I mean crazy. A crazy c#*t. Not too terribly bright either. A stupid crazy c#*t.
Blogger mandrewa said... ... ... ... A high percentage of your comments are nothing but insults, either direct or indirect. Your indirect insults often take the form of implying that people believe things they have never said and then attacking your strawman.
Given the chance, you have and will fill up a forum with your many insults both direct and indirect. You all by yourself will end up writing a high percentage of the messages.
You seem to relish conflict, but in addition to that I can't help but notice that when you fill up a forum with this crap it shuts down the conversation and people go away.
Remarkably, the commenter you have just described to near-perfection is... my antagonist “Drago.” One of the main reasons I wrote directly to Althouse years ago, to ask her to actually apply her own commenting rules. And Exhibit 1 for my argument in that regard is the preceding comments on this very page.
If you seriously paid close attention, you’d know that I have ignored about 95% of Drago’s wild personal attacks on me. As on this page.
I don’t personally hold any unusual political views. Not for a Republican, at least. Althouse knows as well as anyone that I was an ordinary conservative commenter here in the halcyon day’s of Scott Walker and Justice Prosser. But I hate Trump. No; I HAAAATE Trump. And so for people who love Trump, that’s going to be an issue.
What I don't understand, Chuck, is why you post here at all? You must be either a paid troll or a masochist. You come here to be insulted--like in the Monty Python skit--and then you complain about it. Strange.
This is "moderation" at the Althouse blog. And note well, newer readers. My minor feud with Meade and Althouse arose when I implored Althouse to do MORE moderation consistent with what her avowed (at the time) rules on commenting were. I was getting so many personal attacks for simply expressing criticism of Trump and Trumpism, I pleaded with Althouse to crack down on them. Instead, she cracked down on me.
Poor Chuck! You really are the best.
Althouse is just going to ban you again because you really are terrible. As far as Ann is concerned you add nothing to this blog which from her POV is true.
I am an asshole too and I go right at Ann. But I am honest about it and she is generally not an intellectual coward.
The only reason I want you here is because your posts make people hate everyone associated with you.
I cannot vote on this one. Trump will be too old in 4 years. I know this from experience. Every year after 70 gets harder. No reason to put him through all that hate again. As for Tom Cotton, maybe, and maybe a better candidate will show up.
mandrewa (to LLR-lefty Chuck): "You're too smart to not know this is what your doing and I can't help but wonder if this is your intent. Or in other words, you aren't here to have a conversation or an argument but really to shut down the conversation."
LLR-lefty Chuck made very, explicitly and literally, clear years ago that he was only at Althouse for the following 2 purposes:
1) Smear and lie about Trump 2) Drive a wedge between Althouse and her readers
These were 2 of the several reasons for which LLR-lefty Chuck was banned from Althouse blog.
Interestingly, over time and every now and again when he thinks he can get away with it, LLR-lefty Chuck will attempt a "Great Reset" where he pretends he knows nothing about any of his previous, no doubt drunken, proud boasts/admissions and has no idea where anyone would get the idea he was only here at Althouse to smear and drive wedges.
This usually results in others posting the direct quotes which demonstrate those very things, along with some of LLR-lefty Chuck's other greatest hits, which include racist attacks and threats against women and children, at which point LLR-lefty Chuck, the Banned Commenter, begins demanding Blog Moderation to shut the others down.
LLR-lefty and #StrongWhitmerFanboy Chuck: "I don’t personally hold any unusual political views. Not for a Republican, at least"
LLR-lefty Chuck thinks its quite common for republicans to have common cause with the most radical, far left activist legal buffoons and their policies. This includes Benjamin Wittes of Lawfare Blog, Lawrence Tribe and Andrew Weissman.
It can sometimes be difficult to recall these specific leftist radicals that LLR-lefty Chuck strongly supports and quotes approvingly because, in fact, there are almost no far left radical democratical/marxist ideologues that LLR-lefty Chuck has not praised and lauded.
Repeatedly.
And passionately.
Because that's what "normal republicans" do........
This is a testimony that I will tell everyone to hear. i have been married for 4 years and on the fifth year of my marriage, another woman had a spell to take my lover away from me and my husband left me and the kids and we have suffered for 2 years until i meant a post where this man Dr.Wealthy have helped someone and i decided to give him a try to help me bring my love Husband home and believe me i just send my picture to him and that of my husband and after 48 hours as he have told me, i saw a car drove into the house and behold it was my husband and he have come to me and the kids and that is why i am happy to make everyone of you in similar issues to meet with this man and have your lover back to your self His email: wealthylovespell@gmail.com or you can also contact him or whatsapp him on this +2348105150446..... thank so much Dr.Wealthy. ...
Support the Althouse blog by doing your Amazon shopping going in through the Althouse Amazon link.
Amazon
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Support this blog with PayPal
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
174 comments:
Won't Trump be term limited?
Black Americans won’t pick Cotton.
(Who did I steal that joke from? RH?)
Trump, Jr. You didn't say which Trump!
Tom Cotton and Ted Cruise
Neither.
Jr. for the win!
Ivanka.
"Won't Trump be term limited?"
Exactly!
will it matter?
The vote fraud in now installed.
Neither of the above.
My own governor, if they fix the system.
Kristi Noem.
Trump will be way too old in 2024. He's full of energy now, but aging isn't linear.
Do our own polls? Well, I usually win in my own polls. Usually.
Hostess: Posts poll with only two choices, tells readers too bad if you don't like it
Me: Declines to vote.
The eternal question: Why is Chuck still here?
Let's do a poll on that one.
Chuck - you can vote for Kamala.... and the punitive party who enrich themselves in secret.
I'd vote for Trump, but he'll be too old.
I held my nose in 2016
He was surprisingly outstanding on areas important to me
But also over the top on a lot of things
I'm over the drama but not the underlying intentions
I hope this opens the doors for non-pols to get in the game and tinker with the government machinery.
With a sledge hammer and cutting torch.
We are in desperate need of some tinkering
Tim Scott and Nikki Haley, if we can separate their home jurisdictions, then Kristi Noem and Cotton.
Yes kristi would have a chance, but the odds of exploding harridans would be high (thats not a argument against)
Okay. Trump from prison like a mafia don, because if he loses now the Left won't rest until he's locked away.
Note who the left want to push. That's when you know the fix is in.
I hope the base are allowed to chose who they want without corrupt leftwing interference.
Haley / Crenshaw 2024
Or Cruz / Haley 2024 (or Haley / Cruz, I'm good whichever)
Or Cruz / Crenshaw 2024
Something like that. If Tom Cotton becomes the voice of the GOP we are well and surely screwed as the Dems will get their permanent majority they've been drinking the Kool-Aid about.
Trump even if he manages to get some kind of win, will need a successor. Thinking back to Reagan & George Bush, I think it might be of more importance to pick your successors well then any particular battles.
Tim Scott's seat was stolen by white left in MI.
Tim Scott would be great!
I went with Cotton only because Trump will be too old.
Trump/Noem '24, followed by Noem/Grennell or Noem/Cotton in '28.
Good one Brand, and you too Meade!
This Trump voter wants Trump to complete the launch of proper conservative Republicans that are committed to Trump's ideals of Making America Great. It will have to be full MAGA if Biden is installed as POTUS. Trump may in fact be too old by then but he also may not. It is quite likely that he will have moved on to the next new thing too.
If Trump succeeds with the challenges can he swap Cotton in at VP?
Althouse trying to move us all past the sale into her boring voter fraud neocon world of the new normal. First time I've ever felt purposefully manipulated by this blog author.
Bigger issues today:
California Curfew and and Thanksgiving restrictions
Milwaukee not allowing for ballot envelope verification
ANTIFA now out and about with guns
NY Schools Closing
Massive Voter Fraud
I like Tom Cotton. He's a good egg.
Why not an option for both? New York and Arkansas may be in separate countries.
“I hope the base are allowed to chose who they want without corrupt leftwing interference.”
??? Corrupt leftwing IS their base.
This Cotton pickin' poll.
Trump will be too old. Biden is a corrupt freak show. The media will continue to treat Boring like a boring good ole' boy...
What about Hunter's laptop. They never denied it is his. Because it is his.
Not much of a choice. Trump's moment may be gone and hard to get back. He got in because he was different and unexpected. Now that he's a known item, the old hesitations that took some time to overcome are back, along with a sense that expecting things to turn out as well or better is asking too much.
Tom Cotton seems like too much of a neo-con based on his past record. Also conventional candidates are harder to like, post-Trump. There's a sense that they are all repeating the same tired rhetoric that they don't really believe. And there was always that one dolichocephalic kid in school that people laughed at.
Obviously not, Meade. The corrupt influence we get from the D-hack media, leftwing hollywood, etc... the thumb on the scale to produce who the left WANT to face.
Additionally - vote fraud. If the left can manipulate the count in the general, why not a GOP primary?
Not good for Republicans if we think Tim Scott and John James are the same person ...
I'd like to know more from Bobolinksi. Where is the press on Bobolinski?
you said pick NOW
so i picked the CURRENT Trump, not the four years from now Trump
(who might be Even Better! or might be senile)
My vote would go to Cotton if for no other reason than age. His youth and his conservative approach will go a long way in educating future generations.
Donn said...
"Won't Trump be term limited?"
Exactly!
11/23/20, 8:42 AM
He only served 1 term, which the Democrats cried and investigated him for a hoax that they perpetrated for 5 years...so he really should get an extra term.
Of course,
All this is assuming that President For LIFE Commie Law Harris will permit mock elections
Note pollcode.com’s disclaimer: “Polls are subject to error and are for entertainment only”
Hey, just like the “real” polls in Milwaukee Philadelphia Detroit Atlanta!
I fear that Cotton will become a target of assassination by Muslin extremists.
Breaking News from 2026
With an astonishingly strong 126% turnout, voters have reelected President Harris to a 2nd term
What is most disappointing about watching Baby Boomers and Generation X accept / deny / promote election fraud for their own boring safety, and endless unconstitutional lock downs, along with unhinged ANTIFA / BLM violence, is it’s the six-year-olds like my nephew that will never know the free culture we all enjoyed. Colleges and Public Schools already took that from Generation Z.
Just truly selfish and cowardly. But it doesn’t surprise me. The WWII Generation (my paternal grandfather survived Omaha Beach) set up two generations. And… slopped around in the warm mud, and in our twilight years we’re pissing it away.
Dan Crenshaw
I voted for Cotton, not because I think the PDJT will be too old, but because running for, and then serving as, president is not the highest use of his talents. He's much better as a theme-setter, motivational speaker, for the people who make America work. He can make speeches, lead rallies, and generally serve as cheerleader (yell leader for the Aggies) for us Deplorables and our allies around the world.
As a bonus, Sen Cotton will make a great president.
Win-win. Not tired.
I'd be good with Cotton, Crenshaw, Noem, Scott. Pretty much anybody but the backstabbing Romney. If the Republicans are smart (always a doubtful proposition) they'll redouble their black/Hispanic outreach and work much, much harder for ethnic Asians.
The Democrat coalition now consists of public employee unions, academic/social services professionals, and corporate upper management types. Also social justice warriors/college students who are mostly white and middle to upper middle class brats. Money provided by tech billionaires, public employee unions and lawyers.
The Republican coalition now consists of blue collar workers, rural residents, small business owners and those who prefer traditional morals and mores, and really resent the SJW agenda being forced down their throats.
The GOP candidate in 2024 needs to understand his/her voting base and agree with their agenda. Which is another reason that Romney cannot be that person.
Trump, of course, given those constraints. But, again of course, that won't be the choice.
Trumpism will peter out when he's gone. You think Pence (especially) or Haley will carry it on? Hardly -- they are straight out of central casting Repub establishment and will quickly revert to Republican business as usual -- politics with Democrats holding sway no matter which party is in power.
Pence is no Trump, and he is a paragon of the Republican Curse: pathological propriety and daintiness. He would never sully his knuckles. Haley is competent and fairly tough, but she's not a scrapper. Is there anyone coming up through the ranks that can keep counter-punching? I don't see one.
The only possibility to come close to Trumpness is Mike Pompeo, who will probably be "my" candidate in 2024. He's pugnacious and so will fight back but I haven't detected the vision nor the fervor that Trump has. And I suspect that somewhere deep inside him lies the soul of a Republican company man. There's also Tom Cotton, who clearly has the Oval Office in his sights. I think he's is OK with Trumpism and he is a brawler and could be philosophically the best choice to carry the torch. But he doesn't have the charisma and I think he won't ever be able to achieve his presidential dream.
But Trump cannot possibly be replicated and therefore Trumpism cannot and will not be perpetuated. As I've always said, Trump is merely a speed bump along the way to America as a Leftist country.
The only Democrat I would vote for over Dan Crenshaw is Tulsi Gabbard... because cyclops don't surf
In 2024 I would vote for any Republican with courage to fight the cultural Left.
I guess that means I will exercising "cruel neutrality" in 2024 and not voting.
"Black Americans won’t pick Cotton."
Historically, this is inaccurate.
But our great-great grandfathers should have picked it themselves...
Kristi Noem/Ric Grenell (either way on the ticket).
I don't give a damn about the woman/gay thing.
They are both conservative, and in Grenell's case, a bulldog.
Anyone who has been in DC at a high level for more than 5 years should be ineligible for office on the Republican ticket.
Brand said...
Won't Trump be term limited?
Will there be an election if Trump is term limited?
Will there be an election if Trump is not term limited?
If Trump is too old, so is Romney. I can't see him running again, but if he does, he won't get anywhere.
The upside of Noem is that if she runs against Harris, she will make Harris look like and old, chewed-up shoe.
Noem is very camera-friendly...
Shop Amazon or your local book store for Christmas gifts for your family and friends.
Here is a great gift idea.
And WTH is this "Don Jr '24" business? How utterly absurd! He is *nothing* other than the Master's son, whose sole "qualification" is bearing the same name. Don Jr. talk is the quintessence of that bizarre yearning that Americans have for royalty and dynasty. Stop already...
That's the Christmas spirit bleach bit bimbo from Boulder. For the folks who deserve less than coal in their stocking.
Ann:
1. Do you consider it an election if one side kicks poll observers out of voting stations?
2. Will you consider it an election if Republicans kick democrats out of their polling stations?
trump will still win, but if doesn't overcome this obvious vote fraud, I will support him in 2024. He'll only be 78, which is now "Young enough" to be President.
Joe Smith: "The upside of Noem is that if she runs against Harris, she will make Harris look like and old, chewed-up shoe."
I feel I must caution you that any criticism of any democrat on Althouse blog will be met with fierce pushback from at least one fully exposed FakeCon charlatan who calls himself a lifelong republican from MI.
His "pushback" often entails violent rhetoric and attacks on children, women, conservative military members and persons of color who dare to stand against his beloved democratical heroes.
I just thought you should be warned.
In case you missed who that is, his initials are LLR-lefty Chuck.
Tom Cotton, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Nikki Haley, Josh Hawley, Mike Pence, Greg Abbott, Mike Pompeo, Donald Trump Jr. ...
vs.
Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Andrew Cuomo, Stacey Abrams, Corey Booker, Pete Buttigieg, Jay Inslee, Amy Klobuchar, Gavin Newsom, AOC ...
Grenell should definitely be on the list. He fights.
Grenell has been the most impressive person so far.
Cotton has been fine and Crenshaw is fine but so far they are too much like me and too little like Trump. It takes more than just the right positions for this fight.
Cotton was commissioned too. Republican Supreme Court justices and Commissioned officers show similar long term trends.
We all know why Ann ignores Richard Grenell's existence.
Tom Cotton is good on immigration but sucks on foreign policy.
Howard: "The only Democrat I would vote for over Dan Crenshaw is Tulsi Gabbard... because cyclops don't surf"
Dan Crenshaw does seem to garner interesting support from the democratical side of the aisle and only fails to gain support from certain LLR-lefty quarters (Chuck) who absolutely despise with the red hot passion of a thousand suns any conservative with a strong military background who fights back against the craziest of democrat policies.
Crenshaw seems comfortable moving between populist conservative policy positions while bringing aboard more traditional republicans....which of course does not include FakeCon LLR's who have always really been lefty democrats at heart and in practice.
You can't get Trump again, but you can take the good parts (the combativeness and the disdain for the Washington circle-jerk crowd) and build something that moves beyond Trumpism.
I recently learned that Tom Cotton, after 9/11, dropped out of Harvard Law School and joined the army. He became an officer with the 82nd Airborne and served a tour in Iraq where he won a Bronze Star. Good job for the media in keeping this scandal under wraps.....I'd like to vote for Cotton. He would be a throwback to that era in American politics where Presidents did something admirable and brave before getting elected to President....I don't know that much about him or his politics. Again, the media has done a good job keeping us uninformed.
J. Farmer said...
Tom Cotton is good on immigration but sucks on foreign policy.
He doesn't seem to have gotten the memo.
I also see a lot of mentions of Cruz and Haley and such above. It seems that people are slow learners.
J. Farmer: "Tom Cotton is good on immigration but sucks on foreign policy."
That has often been the concern with Cotton that in matters of foreign policy he would default to the consensus view.
But today is not 4 years ago, and Trump's successful foreign policy positioning has not gone unnoticed and even though FakeCon's like democrat LLR-lefty Chuck would absolutely call Cotton a traitor for daring to defy the Vindman's and the establishment of the world, Cotton would be perfectly positioned to do just if he took the Trump lesson to heart.
I think Cotton knows precisely what these idiots are doing and why in a way that alot of people didn't fully realize 4 years ago. Remember, Cotton now fully understands intelligence and law enforcement agencies along with the military industrial complex chaps all maneuvered with America's adversaries and competitors to attack Trump and he knows clearly how they did it with media and establishment republican support.
He also now fully understands, as I believe Ted Cruz does, what a potential electoral winning populist formula is.
They know it, but will they have the guts to go all the way with it? If they seize that ring they could build on what already exists. The numbers coming out of the hispanic precincts and cities where african americans are tired of the democraticals and their LLR-lefty lap poodles makes clear what could be a strong play against the globalist pro-ChiCom/Pro-EU morons in the US.
If they don't, they will just be the next wave of republican losers like Romney and McCain and Kasich and Jeb and the rest.
Mr Wibble: "You can't get Trump again, but you can take the good parts (the combativeness and the disdain for the Washington circle-jerk crowd) and build something that moves beyond Trumpism."
Politicians are not lego sets.
You go to war with the army you have, not the one you wish you had.
In order for ANY republican who wants to build on the astonishing early-realignment coalition Trump created, you have to buy all the way in.
This idea that its Trumpism that was unleashed is completely ass-backward.
Trump was a very effective megaphone for a large scale movement that is alive and growing across the entire western world as peoples are seeing global elites decide for them that its time to fundamentally alter the structure of our world which leads to things like unrestricted immigration and turning an economic alliance in the EU into what Verhofstadt and the rest of the idiots really want: a United States of Europe which crushes the member states with all power residing in Brussels.
Trumpism didn't cause Brexit, or what we see in Poland and Hungary. Or the backlash against Brussels in Spain or Italy or Greece. Trumpism didn't cause elections to go the way they did in Brazil and elsewhere.
This battle is galactically larger than Trump, its just that Trump became such a powerful force for it this message in the US that it seems like its all about him.
"In case you missed who that is, his initials are LLR-lefty Chuck."
I am well aware of the LLR guy...but I have at least 50 IQ points on him so no worries, but thanks.
"Grenell should definitely be on the list. He fights."
Exactly this...
Tom Cotton is good on immigration but sucks on foreign policy.
In fairness, according to J. Farmer the only person in the United States who does not suck on foreign policy is ... J. Farmer.
The "only Trump can save us" crowd can be as annoying as Never-Trumpers.
Trump didn't drain the swamp and the swamp over-whelmed him.
Ann Coulter knew.
The signal is getting out.
Deal with it. There is eye witness testimony of fraud. Massive fraud.
@Full of Soup, Dan Crenshaw made a wonderful joint campaign ad with five, attractive, like-minded Republicans. The others were Wesley Hunt, August Pfluger, Beth Van Duyne, Tony Gonzales, and Genevieve Collins. Does anyone know how the other five fared in the election? Outside of Genevieve Collins needing to work on getting her adversary's weight up on the leg she's sweeping if she's going to do O Soto Gari, they seemed like really good people.
Cotton isn’t too bad.
He needs to say pull our troops out of Afghanistan and the Middle East.
He’s also combative and intelligent.
No to Haley and any other GOP Senator.
We live in the slow Learners universe Achilles. Entropy it's what's for dinner
this is a prevent defense, to discourage others from followings trump path, he was an imperfect vehicle, but that's what was available, you want to make the perfect the enemy of the good, also if this fraudulent system is allowed to stand, they will steal georgia, and put their own obama, in there,
Why is BM always constipated?
I'm voting for This guy
Grennell could be secretary of state, but the country probably isn't ready for him to be president.
Way too early and way to many things to play out. I know Althouse is doing her best to create the illusion that this is over, but it’s not.
But here is something interesting:
Thao Nguyen@nguyenthevote
·
Nov 19
california has finally stopped moving left
this is the first election in a quarter century in which the state has trended right relative to the country
they voted 25.6% to the left of the national popular vote this year after voting 28.0% to the left in 2016
https://twitter.com/nguyenthevote/status/1329552701173231618
If all of the honest votes had been honestly counted, this was a wave election for Republicans.
Is the signal getting into court Achilles where it'll actually do some good or is it just getting out on the internet?
As steely Dan once said "in the land of milk and honey you got to put it on the table." All this smoke you people are generating will just blow away unless you can fire it up in court.
Lurker21 said...
Grennell could be secretary of state, but the country probably isn't ready for him to be president.
Do you think Grenell in 2020 would be a bigger step than Trump in 2016?
You wisely left the first name off the Trump choice.
How about a poll for non-Trump voters.
Maybe you could have the following poll classifications instead:
28+ Teeth
20 - 27 Teeth
10 - 19 Teeth (non-meth smoker)
10 - 19 Teeth (meth smoker)
0 - 9 Teeth (non-meth smoker)
0 - 9 Teeth (meth smoker)
The lower classifications can be further broken out as opioid addict/non addict or married to a cousin/not married to a cousin/cohabitating with a cousin etc...
Drago - Why the obsession with Chuck? It's not normal or healthy. Or interesting.
T J Sawyer said...
You wisely left the first name off the Trump choice.
Is this a joke? Which one just out of curiosity?
Williamll: "I recently learned that Tom Cotton, after 9/11, dropped out of Harvard Law School and joined the army. He became an officer with the 82nd Airborne and served a tour in Iraq where he won a Bronze Star."
That reason alone is why I predicted way back in 2016/2017 that Cotton would be viciously targeted by LLR-lefty Chuck and I was proven completely correct immediately.
But only immediately....and only completely.
Chuck is an apostate
steve uhr: "Drago - Why the obsession with Chuck? It's not normal or healthy. Or interesting."
Your natural affinity and concern for your fellow lefty is duly noted.
Git your cotton picking hands off my gin. (old joke)
steve uhr said...
Drago - Why the obsession with Chuck? It's not normal or healthy. Or interesting.
Jealous steve?
Chuck repeatedly claims to be a Republican. There is special attention to people who claim to be on our side. They reflect on us. Just like when today or tomorrow it comes out in court that Kemp and Raffensburger took money to install dominion voting machines and make deals with democrat lawyers that "interpreted" election laws to mean signatures don't matter. There is special hatred of betrayers.
You voted for a rapist. You would never understand the sentiment.
Crenshaw..because the one-eyed man is king in the land of the blind.
Trump, if he were 10 years younger. He may have 10X the stamina of Biden today, but in 4 years, who knows what kind of shape he'll be in? Of course, when he was first elected, I thought age would prevent him from running for reelection.
Howard: "Chuck is an apostate"
Technical correction: Mobys cannot be apostates, by definition.
Of course, in writing that I realize that as a lefty, you lack the capacity to apply logic....and logic we all now know is actually white supremacy.
So, I suppose congratulations are due you for not "falling for" that white supremacy logic stuff.
Howard said...
Chuck is an apostate
Betrayer.
Our party generally has a religion that is separate from our government preferences.
It is democrat atheists that worship government and make it their religion.
why engage with Howard? He's the on-line embodiment of fop-sweat.
All this assumes there will be another Presidential election.
Four years is a long time.
1917 to 1921
1932 to 1936
1988 to 1992
Achilles.
Chuck is a Republican. That is not the same as claiming to be on "your side." There are many republicans who detest Trump. They are still Republicans, and their views align with Bush and Bush and Reagan and Nixon and Eisenhower and Romney and McCain and on and on. Trump is the outlier.
Who appointed you and Drago as the final arbiter of what it means to be a Republican? But keep eating your own. You may be surprised how full you get.
Ann, Good poll. Interesting result. Keep doing these from time to time.
Cotton needs to learn how to smile. Trump has a great smile. And that's important.
He's the on-line embodiment of fop-sweat.
Not endorsing the opinion yea or nay, but I love that typo!
Looking past the 2020 election today is lame. Let's wait until we have a result.
Do your own commenting if you don't like me being unconstrained...
steve uhr: "Chuck is a Republican."
No. He's not.
What else you got?
Howard said...
As steely Dan once said "in the land of milk and honey you got to put it on the table." All this smoke you people are generating will just blow away unless you can fire it up in court.
11/23/20, 10:48 AM
Under the old rules, you'd be right.
But in a country where LEOs are feeling increasingly confident about rejecting their illegal orders, and even endorsing Donald Trump, you'd be betting your life that this stops in the Supreme Court...
Lately, the president is looking like something was knocked out of him. That may only be temporary. He's shown resilience in the past. But that's been because he could move from field to field and venture to venture, taking on new challenges each time. He may not want to repeat the presidency. Been there, done that.
steve uhr: "But keep eating your own."
They are not our "own".
They are your own.
Enjoy!
Lurker21: "Lately, the president is looking like something was knocked out of him. That may only be temporary. He's shown resilience in the past. But that's been because he could move from field to field and venture to venture, taking on new challenges each time. He may not want to repeat the presidency. Been there, done that."
It is my belief that Trump and family understood all too well the scale of the corruption on election night and into the next few days and early on recognized that it was going to be impossible to flip this script under these circumstances. However, the fight for voting integrity was something absolutely to be fought for while at the same time I believe Trump immediately moved to thinking about The Next Thing. I suspect that's what he spends most of his time on even as we speak along with taking some final policy steps that he hopes will lock in certain political realities.
I'm thinking primarily in terms of the ChiComs and military deployments.
Lately, the president is looking like something was knocked out of him. That may only be temporary. He's shown resilience in the past. But that's been because he could move from field to field and venture to venture, taking on new challenges each time. He may not want to repeat the presidency. Been there, done that.
Even a single-term as president is merely the last few chapters of his biography. This is basically his retirement. But I wouldn't be surprised if he decides, rather than run again, to work behind the scenes. If Trump decided to spend the next four years rallying supporters and trying to find promising young candidates he could do a lot of damage to the GOP establishment.
Do you think Grenell in 2020 would be a bigger step than Trump in 2016?
Trump was a recognized name in 2016. People felt like they knew him. Also for somebody from metropolitan America he had great rapport with the rest of the country.
People don't know Grennell. He doesn't seem to have a populist appeal. And there's a third thing, too. Do I have to spell it out?
There are many republicans who detest Trump. They are still Republicans, and their views align with Bush and Bush and Reagan and Nixon and Eisenhower and Romney and McCain and on and on. Trump is the outlier.
Other than Reagan and Nixon (maybe), You got the RINOs right. Eisenhower was different and was more of a nonpartisan. The number of Republicans who "detest Trump" is shrinking as the fraud becomes more obvious.
Over at Ricochet, there used to be a lot of NeverTrumpers. Now there are only three or four. You could call the 4% that didn't vote for Trump "a lot."
"Tom Cotton, after 9/11, dropped out of Harvard Law School and joined the army."
No he didn't. I think he's a good guy but let's not get carried away.
Reagan gave us Amnesty and tripled the debt.
The Reagan Myth is dead.
"Big Mike said...
In fairness, according to J. Farmer the only person in the United States who does not suck on foreign policy is ... J. Farmer."
But he does suck on....nah, too easy.
mccullough: "Reagan gave us Amnesty and tripled the debt"
I don't blame Reagan for the '86 amnesty based on our understanding of things in 2020. I also don't blame Reagan for prioritizing confronting the Soviet Union against the wishes of the democraticals and Bush-y LLR's over budget hawkishness while congress was controlled by the democraticals under Tip O'Neil and Jim Wright.
Grenell wants to move federal agencies out of DC, something I have long believed should happen. So, yeah, Grenell/Noem.
3rd circuit offers expedited review of pennsylvania case.
Why Tom Cotton? Not my pick.
Cotton is the closest to Trump’s policies.
Barron 2028!!
The office of president is term limited. Trump will not be eligible to run for office in 2024. Four more years to unwind the Obama/Biden/Clinton legacy of constitutional, economic, social, and global transgressions.
n.n: "The office of president is term limited. Trump will not be eligible to run for office in 2024."
That's not how term limits work.
Noem 2024.
I will never vote for a guy who majored in government. Cotton clearly has aspirations to make a career out being a politician. No thanks.
Noem 2024- nom!
Trump is a family man and I think he will be concerned about the effect of another run on his family. Especially after seeing what happened to poor Hunter Biden.
Here's my rating of the president's of my lifetime.
Richard Nixon. I was a teenager when he was impeached. I thought that was justified at the time. Now, I'm not quite so sure. The problem is Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. Why is it okay to run candidates for office, who have done worse things than what Nixon did? How is this progress?
What does it mean when there was in one law for Republicans and a completely different law for Democrats?
Gerald Ford. He was kind of a placeholder.
Jimmy Carter. I don't think he was a good president. But I do think he was a good man.
Ronald Reagan. We wouldn't be where we are if it weren't for Ronald Reagan. He changed things for the better. This is despite my belief is that he never really recovered from being shot in the second year of his presidency. Shot by the left. One person was prosecuted but a huge number of people were vicariously responsible.
George Bush the 1st. He wasn't that bad. He was a Washington, DC insider that was fairly competent, and was right-wing in the sense of not being left-wing.
Bill Clinton. I think more bad things happened under his presidency than most people realize.
George Bush the 2nd. Not nearly as competent as his father. Right-wing in the sense mainly of not being left-wing. His presidency was defined by 9/11 which he didn't choose. Real problems were left to fester while the country's energy was spent on wars in the Middle East that didn't accomplish much.
Barack Obama. Lots of bad things happened in his presidency. Most of which were barely discussed or not even discussed when they happened. He set us up for the nightmare we are in now. But on the other hand I don't know how much of that was actually coming from Barack Obama, the man himself. A lot of it was really coming from the Democratic Party getting the executive branch and from people from the far left getting into institutional positions of power in that executive branch.
Donald Trump. The best president of my lifetime. He has done a lot of good so far, and far more than these other presidents. It is just astonishing. And yes I do see his very real flaws.
Readering: "Trump is a family man and I think he will be concerned about the effect of another run on his family. Especially after seeing what happened to poor Hunter Biden."
LOL
Let me get this straight: it was Joe Biden's running for President that made Hunter into a crack smoking, underage Chinese girl dabbling, Navy dishonorable discharged, brothers wife dabbling while still married to first wife, biological child and child support denying, ChiCom military funded, Putin oligarch pal funded miscreant and Donald Trump should, what? Be concerned that his children could fall prey to all of that?
Do go on, because as of 2 weeks ago none of that was true in the slightest and Hunter was the "smartest guy" Joe Biden ever met.
mandrewa: "Jimmy Carter. I don't think he was a good president. But I do think he was a good man."
His pure hatred of Israel and the jews is disqualifying all by itself as far as I'm concerned.
There will be investigations by journalists into the election fraud claims. When it is written at length that there was no there there and that Trump's entourage fully knew that, support for Trump 2024 will fade away like support for Palin 2012.
Ron DeSantis.
mandrewa said...Here's my rating of the president's of my lifetime.
I think your assessments are pretty good.
However, Carter was not a good man. He was a rigid, self-righteous control freak that I voted for in 1976.
Reagan was the best POTUS of my lifetime because he helped me see the light and learn to love America again. He stopped the leftward surge from the Sixties and Seventies. Both Bushes were mediocrities at best, but slightly better than the alternatives. Clinton was a much more vicious and evil person than people realize, but he was a master politician.
Historians will never give Trump credit, but he also helped people see the light when it comes to the establishment media. He briefly stopped the surge towards a totalitarian leftwing state. However, that surge will continue unless good people take a stand and forswear affectations such as indifference and cruel neutrality.
Fwiw, I've been getting server errors over the last couple of months when I try to vote in your polls.
I'm good with Cotton. Trump will be too old. I'll probably be good with anyone not supported by a Never Trumper. That bridge is burned.
Kristi Noem.
It probably won't matter because there will be a new Party and the Republican Party will run a distant 3rd.
Noem is in the same category as Scott Walker. Effective mid-west Governor. "hero" to conservatives for standing up to the liberal/progressive blob.
Hubby and I were on the Walker for President train from the very start - and the train stopped a mere 6 months later. And it was all about money - he simply could not raise what was required to compete in a 15 person primary and he was not willing to go into debt to stay in the race.
Who was out campaigning with (I think) 20+ GOP Congressional (non-incumbent) candidates this year - building up political IOUs along the way? Who helped raise money for candidates? Who was a Governor with international bona fides?
Answer: Nikki Haley. Crenshaw for Veep.
Those of you saying Noem need to cool your jets. She's not term-limited out of the governorship until 2026, and you can't have her until we're done with her.
Drago - Why the obsession with Chuck?
Because he doesn't have Inga to kick around?
Readering: "There will be investigations by journalists into the election fraud claims."
The same ones who told us the hoax dossier was real and verified, Putin changed vote totals to elect Trump, Trump stole the 2016 election and Kavanaugh was a rape gang leader?
Gee, I wonder what these "journalists" will come up with.
aww, a poll, bless your heart
I already told you.
Won't matter. No Republican will EVER be elected President.
Blogger mccullough said...
Reagan gave us Amnesty and tripled the debt.
No, I think what happened was that Tip let him win the Cold War as long as he let the Democrats spend. A lot of Tip's Democrats were commies but he kept them under control.
"People don't know Grennell. He doesn't seem to have a populist appeal. And there's a third thing, too. Do I have to spell it out?"
Grenell is in the Trump mold...damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead. My impression is that he is very much a populist, small-government, no bullshit kind of guy.
And being gay these days is a plus to Democrats. How in the hell can they attack him on that when they've spend the last two years (metaphorically) sucking Boot-edge-edge's cock?
Republicans (especially Trump Republicans) have no issue with gays. Trump was for gay marriage before both Joe, Hilary, and the Enlightened One.
This is so ironic.
At 8:47 I posted a comment about the poll. Nothing critical of Althouse; no mentioning any other commenter. A straight comment, about the subject of the blog post. The sort of comment that Althouse claims to want. On topic; no personal attacks; no cluttering back-and-forth.
I then saw that my comment had been removed, and so left the page.
I come back to this page at the end of the day, and see my name called out about dozen times for personal attacks, abuse, etc. Nothing really informative about the subject of the blog post.
This is "moderation" at the Althouse blog. And note well, newer readers. My minor feud with Meade and Althouse arose when I implored Althouse to do MORE moderation consistent with what her avowed (at the time) rules on commenting were. I was getting so many personal attacks for simply expressing criticism of Trump and Trumpism, I pleaded with Althouse to crack down on them. Instead, she cracked down on me.
Might have been said in the comments previously, but the 2024 R nominee will be the one that treats the MSM the same as Trump did. It won't be a Bush or Romney or Never Trumper.
Chuck do you think people are staring at you?
Is anyone hanging around your apartment ?
When you go to the market, do you see a lot of familiar faces ?
I like Tom Cotton. I worry a conservative white male from Arkansas will be destroyed by the MSM.
The FL Gov seems pretty solid.
Neither.
Rand Paul.
"There will be investigations by journalists into the election fraud claims."
Yeah, sure. By the same journalists who couldn't find their asses with both hands in broad daylight, no doubt.
Crenshaw has a podcast that's rated very highly. I've listened to it several times and he impresses me. But when was the last time a House member received a major party endorsement for president?
"This is so ironic.
At 8:47 I posted a comment about the poll. Nothing critical of Althouse; no mentioning any other commenter. A straight comment, about the subject of the blog post. The sort of comment that Althouse claims to want. On topic; no personal attacks; no cluttering back-and-forth."
Is it really? Because here's what I see. And I have seen the same pattern for years now. You try hard to start fights and you do it routinely. A high percentage of your comments are nothing but insults, either direct or indirect. Your indirect insults often take the form of implying that people believe things they have never said and then attacking your strawman.
Given the chance, you have and will fill up a forum with your many insults both direct and indirect. You all by yourself will end up writing a high percentage of the messages.
You seem to relish conflict, but in addition to that I can't help but notice that when you fill up a forum with this crap it shuts down the conversation and people go away.
You're too smart to not know this is what your doing and I can't help but wonder if this is your intent. Or in other words, you aren't here to have a conversation or an argument but really to shut down the conversation.
Alternatively you are here because you have some kind of emotional need for conflict. But even if that is the case, it doesn't change the consequences of the acting out of your issues.
The amazing thing is how often, over and over, on different forums I have seen this same pattern by different people. There will be several dozen people talking. Most of them are pretty well behaved, or at least tolerable. And you have one or two, almost always from the left, filling up the forum with relatively content-free messages of hate that incidentally chase people away from the forum.
Now you are plenty smart enough to say interesting and relevant things when you want to -- which isn't exactly the case for everyone I've seen displaying this pattern -- but despite your capacity for doing this, this is hardly what you normally do.
Chuck said...
"This is so ironic.
At 8:47 I posted a comment about the poll. Nothing critical of Althouse; no mentioning any other commenter. A straight comment, about the subject of the blog post. The sort of comment that Althouse claims to want. On topic; no personal attacks; no cluttering back-and-forth.
I then saw that my comment had been removed, and so left the page.
I come back to this page at the end of the day, and see my name called out about dozen times for personal attacks, abuse, etc. Nothing really informative about the subject of the blog post.
This is "moderation" at the Althouse blog. And note well, newer readers. My minor feud with Meade and Althouse arose when I implored Althouse to do MORE moderation consistent with what her avowed (at the time) rules on commenting were. I was getting so many personal attacks for simply expressing criticism of Trump and Trumpism, I pleaded with Althouse to crack down on them. Instead, she cracked down on me."
Because you're a c#*t, Chuck. A lying, totally dishonorable c#*t. And probably more than a little disturbed. I mean crazy. A crazy c#*t. Not too terribly bright either. A stupid crazy c#*t.
Coulter has become a #OneNoteAnnie.
@Big Mike:
In fairness, according to J. Farmer the only person in the United States who does not suck on foreign policy is ... J. Farmer.
Why does “big” always mean fat cunt?
@Curious George:
nah, too easy
Leave your mother out of this.
Blogger mandrewa said...
...
...
... A high percentage of your comments are nothing but insults, either direct or indirect. Your indirect insults often take the form of implying that people believe things they have never said and then attacking your strawman.
Given the chance, you have and will fill up a forum with your many insults both direct and indirect. You all by yourself will end up writing a high percentage of the messages.
You seem to relish conflict, but in addition to that I can't help but notice that when you fill up a forum with this crap it shuts down the conversation and people go away.
Remarkably, the commenter you have just described to near-perfection is... my antagonist “Drago.” One of the main reasons I wrote directly to Althouse years ago, to ask her to actually apply her own commenting rules. And Exhibit 1 for my argument in that regard is the preceding comments on this very page.
If you seriously paid close attention, you’d know that I have ignored about 95% of Drago’s wild personal attacks on me. As on this page.
I don’t personally hold any unusual political views. Not for a Republican, at least. Althouse knows as well as anyone that I was an ordinary conservative commenter here in the halcyon day’s of Scott Walker and Justice Prosser. But I hate Trump. No; I HAAAATE Trump. And so for people who love Trump, that’s going to be an issue.
DavidD said...
Neither.
Rand Paul.
Too nice.
Gandhi only won because he was fighting the Brits.
Gandhi would have had his organs harvested in China.
The people running the democrat party are not the Brits.
What I don't understand, Chuck, is why you post here at all? You must be either a paid troll or a masochist. You come here to be insulted--like in the Monty Python skit--and then you complain about it. Strange.
Chuck said...
This is "moderation" at the Althouse blog. And note well, newer readers. My minor feud with Meade and Althouse arose when I implored Althouse to do MORE moderation consistent with what her avowed (at the time) rules on commenting were. I was getting so many personal attacks for simply expressing criticism of Trump and Trumpism, I pleaded with Althouse to crack down on them. Instead, she cracked down on me.
Poor Chuck! You really are the best.
Althouse is just going to ban you again because you really are terrible. As far as Ann is concerned you add nothing to this blog which from her POV is true.
I am an asshole too and I go right at Ann. But I am honest about it and she is generally not an intellectual coward.
The only reason I want you here is because your posts make people hate everyone associated with you.
@Farmer, got under you prickly skin, did I?
I cannot vote on this one. Trump will be too old in 4 years. I know this from experience. Every year after 70 gets harder. No reason to put him through all that hate again. As for Tom Cotton, maybe, and maybe a better candidate will show up.
mandrewa (to LLR-lefty Chuck): "You're too smart to not know this is what your doing and I can't help but wonder if this is your intent. Or in other words, you aren't here to have a conversation or an argument but really to shut down the conversation."
LLR-lefty Chuck made very, explicitly and literally, clear years ago that he was only at Althouse for the following 2 purposes:
1) Smear and lie about Trump
2) Drive a wedge between Althouse and her readers
These were 2 of the several reasons for which LLR-lefty Chuck was banned from Althouse blog.
Interestingly, over time and every now and again when he thinks he can get away with it, LLR-lefty Chuck will attempt a "Great Reset" where he pretends he knows nothing about any of his previous, no doubt drunken, proud boasts/admissions and has no idea where anyone would get the idea he was only here at Althouse to smear and drive wedges.
This usually results in others posting the direct quotes which demonstrate those very things, along with some of LLR-lefty Chuck's other greatest hits, which include racist attacks and threats against women and children, at which point LLR-lefty Chuck, the Banned Commenter, begins demanding Blog Moderation to shut the others down.
Yes, its both ironic and amusing.
LLR-lefty and #StrongWhitmerFanboy Chuck: "I don’t personally hold any unusual political views. Not for a Republican, at least"
LLR-lefty Chuck thinks its quite common for republicans to have common cause with the most radical, far left activist legal buffoons and their policies. This includes Benjamin Wittes of Lawfare Blog, Lawrence Tribe and Andrew Weissman.
It can sometimes be difficult to recall these specific leftist radicals that LLR-lefty Chuck strongly supports and quotes approvingly because, in fact, there are almost no far left radical democratical/marxist ideologues that LLR-lefty Chuck has not praised and lauded.
Repeatedly.
And passionately.
Because that's what "normal republicans" do........
.........(wink wink)
LOL
This is a testimony that I will tell everyone to hear. i have been married for 4 years and on the fifth year of my marriage, another woman had a spell to take my lover away from me and my husband left me and the kids and we have suffered for 2 years until i meant a post where this man Dr.Wealthy have helped someone and i decided to give him a try to help me bring my love Husband home and believe me i just send my picture to him and that of my husband and after 48 hours as he have told me, i saw a car drove into the house and behold it was my husband and he have come to me and the kids and that is why i am happy to make everyone of you in similar issues to meet with this man and have your lover back to your self His email: wealthylovespell@gmail.com or you can also contact him or whatsapp him on this +2348105150446..... thank so much Dr.Wealthy. ...
Post a Comment