Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, JDHillFan said:

Scott would be fun. It would be a good chance to see the tolerant and inclusive left show what they are made of. It wouldn’t be pretty, that’s for damn sure. 


Tim Scott is definitely the guy you choose if you want to neutralize any “racist” attacks, while also lowering the temperature for those reluctant to vote for Trump due to his personality.
 

JD Vance is legitimately a strong politician.  Well spoken, articulate and knows how to deal with the media.
 

Both Scott and Vance are heavy hitter fundraisers.
 

Rubio could work.
 

Burgum seems like a Mike Pence type pick, but less weird and rich. 
 

Byron Donalds would be Trump saying F it and risk his campaign becoming unhinged for the chance of sweeping MI, PA and WI and making Dems nervous for future election realignment of a noticeable R pull of black men.  Major risk/reward pick. 
 

 

Edited by SCBills
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

I think Byron Donalds would be a good choice.  I've always been impressed by him whenever I've seen him.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • 3 weeks later...
Posted
4 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said:

Tulsi or Vivek would be my peoples. Or RFK jr would be a curveball

I like Tulsi, Vivek, and Carson, in no particular order.  I'm not a fan of Rubio though.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
On 6/5/2024 at 8:05 PM, JDHillFan said:

Scott would be fun. It would be a good chance to see the tolerant and inclusive left show what they are made of. It wouldn’t be pretty, that’s for damn sure. 

What, everyone on the left (or for that matter, in the middle) would be intolerant for criticizing Tim Scott's stated policy positions?

If so, I guess Trump should pick him.

If I say Jamal Bowman is a fool and that I hope he loses his primary, does that make me "intolerant?"

 

Posted
1 minute ago, The Frankish Reich said:

What, everyone on the left (or for that matter, in the middle) would be intolerant for criticizing Tim Scott's stated policy positions?

If so, I guess Trump should pick him.

If I say Jamal Bowman is a fool and that I hope he loses his primary, does that make me "intolerant?"

 

Even you know that lefties use the race card as a weapon. It’s the sort of thing that leads one of the more unhinged (white) lefty’s of this board to throw “Uncle Tom” around and declare it’s not a slur. If you want to pretend that’s not true, feel free.
 

Lefties also believe all women right up to a certain ideological point. 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Disagree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

What, everyone on the left (or for that matter, in the middle) would be intolerant for criticizing Tim Scott's stated policy positions?

If so, I guess Trump should pick him.

If I say Jamal Bowman is a fool and that I hope he loses his primary, does that make me "intolerant?"

 

Hate to break it to you, but yes, you are intolerant.  Just being honest with you.

Posted
14 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

What, everyone on the left (or for that matter, in the middle) would be intolerant for criticizing Tim Scott's stated policy positions?

If so, I guess Trump should pick him.

If I say Jamal Bowman is a fool and that I hope he loses his primary, does that make me "intolerant?"

 

Everyone in the middle is a "far right" Republican at this point if you watch the news. If you are sensible in the least then you are basically the KKK. And yet we are all willing to have a black VP. Go figure. And of course the hypocrisy of the left media will tear him to shreds

  • Thank you (+1) 2
Posted
7 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said:

And of course the hypocrisy of the left media will tear him to shreds

Over what? Let's say "over his stated position on abortion restrictions."

Look it up.  He's on the record as supporting a federal 15 week ban. Except when he said he supports a 20 week ban. Except when he said he agrees with Trump that it is an issue for the states to decide.

This is kind of important, no? His inability to produce a coherent policy on what role, if any, the federal government has under the constitution with respect to abortion?

Posted
57 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Over what? Let's say "over his stated position on abortion restrictions."

Look it up.  He's on the record as supporting a federal 15 week ban. Except when he said he supports a 20 week ban. Except when he said he agrees with Trump that it is an issue for the states to decide.

This is kind of important, no? His inability to produce a coherent policy on what role, if any, the federal government has under the constitution with respect to abortion?

If they were sensible they would stick to the politics, but then again if they were sensible they wouldn't be lefties. They will call him every name in the book and go after him personally. And if anyone on the Right did that they would be skinhead Nazis. It's hypocrisy 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
1 hour ago, KDIGGZ said:

If they were sensible they would stick to the politics, but then again if they were sensible they wouldn't be lefties. They will call him every name in the book and go after him personally. And if anyone on the Right did that they would be skinhead Nazis. It's hypocrisy 

Would some people do that? Yeah, I'm sure.

Did some people attack Kamala as unqualified? Absolutely. I don't recall any serious opposition to her being based on her race rather than her apparent lack of, for lack of a better word, gravitas.

Posted
22 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Would some people do that? Yeah, I'm sure.

Did some people attack Kamala as unqualified? Absolutely. I don't recall any serious opposition to her being based on her race rather than her apparent lack of, for lack of a better word, gravitas.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/01/11/tim-scott-explains-why-he-corrected-a-troll-who-called-him-a-house-n/


https://www.yahoo.com/news/tim-scott-proves-black-whisperer-185700323.html

 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/tim-scotts-vision-for-america-isnt-for-black-people

 

From the yahoo link:

 

that his whole purpose as a Black Republican is to serve as a Trojan Horse for the GOP, a ***** Whisperer for white supremacists.

 

If Scott is the nominee do you believe we will see more of this kind of thing, or less? It’s a rhetorical question. 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

"Sources" are saying the shortlist is Rubio, Burgum, Vance.

 

Let's assume Little Marco will be eliminated. Among other things, he's a Florida resident and sitting Florida senator, so he is constitutionally ineligible (unless he resigns/moves; Donald is not moving to NY state for obvious reasons)

 

So do you prefer the former McKinsey consultant, Stanford MBA Microsoft officer, half-billionaire as your outsider ready to take on Davos Man?

Or do you prefer the former McKinsey consultant, Yale J.D., Investment Banker, youngster worth about $10 million or more as your outsider to take on Davos Man?

 

(you are being played)

Posted
2 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

"Sources" are saying the shortlist is Rubio, Burgum, Vance.

 

Let's assume Little Marco will be eliminated. Among other things, he's a Florida resident and sitting Florida senator, so he is constitutionally ineligible (unless he resigns/moves; Donald is not moving to NY state for obvious reasons)

 

So do you prefer the former McKinsey consultant, Stanford MBA Microsoft officer, half-billionaire as your outsider ready to take on Davos Man?

Or do you prefer the former McKinsey consultant, Yale J.D., Investment Banker, youngster worth about $10 million or more as your outsider to take on Davos Man?

 

(you are being played)

Who are your sources?

Posted
4 minutes ago, phypon said:

Who are your sources?

 

 

That IS the final three according to multiple sources across the media spectrum.

 

 

 

However, I think that Trump may have other plans.

 

.

×
×
  • Create New...