The Frankish Reich Posted June 27 Posted June 27 9 minutes ago, phypon said: Who are your sources? Here's one (many report likewise): https://www.yahoo.com/news/jd-vance-other-trump-vp-151841705.html 1
phypon Posted June 27 Posted June 27 5 minutes ago, B-Man said: That IS the final three according to multiple sources across the media spectrum. However, I think that Trump may have other plans. . I see. It is what it is, but I hope he has other plans. I'm not keen on those 3 options. Hope Trump doesn't drop the ball on this one. 1 minute ago, The Frankish Reich said: Here's one (many report likewise): https://www.yahoo.com/news/jd-vance-other-trump-vp-151841705.html Thank you.
Big Blitz Posted June 27 Posted June 27 Well if he announces it tonight - he’s got a scheduled rally in Virginia tomorrow. 1
B-Man Posted July 13 Posted July 13 11 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Well, now we know who the left fears the most. . 1
Tiberius Posted July 13 Posted July 13 13 minutes ago, B-Man said: Well, now we know who the left fears the most. . Ignorance is scary, yes
Doc Posted July 13 Posted July 13 1 hour ago, Tiberius said: Jennifer Rubin is awesome! Kamala is the least qualified running mate ever. 1 2 1
The Frankish Reich Posted July 13 Posted July 13 What you miss if you do the whole "I never read the mainstream media" - a pretty interesting/fair discussion of JD Vance from a NYT columnist who obviously likes him. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/13/opinion/jd-vance-interview.html Or even better, this audio discussion: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/21/opinion/jd-vance-populism.html I don't like how Vance pivoted to sucking up to Trump. But hey, it's working, isn't it ... but take away that sycophantic tendency and there's a pretty interesting guy who is starting to see what a "populist" vision means in terms of actual policy. I’ve known the senator since long before he was a senator. He’s first very culturally interesting because he’s someone who rose to prominence as a memoirist of working class life, white working class life, who was sort of taken up by the liberal intelligentsia in 2016, 2017, as someone who explained the pathologies and cultural disarray that led to Trumpism, but who then sort of became a leading Trumpist himself. That is, to begin with, a kind of fascinating transformation of his sort of place in American culture. But then he’s also interesting because he is much more than most people, most Republican politicians, who have sort of adopted populism. He’s someone who’s really interested in the policy dilemmas around populism that we were talking about earlier, right, that show up in the United States, as well as Europe. The question of, can populism actually offer solutions to the mix of economic and cultural problems it’s interested in? So to the extent that there’s sort of a place where a populist agenda might come from in a second Trump term or over the next 10 or 15 years, it’s probably going to come from someone like Vance.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted July 13 Posted July 13 2 hours ago, Tiberius said: Ignorance is scary, yes Recognition of your challenge is the first step in overcoming it. You are your own hero, Tibsy!
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted July 13 Posted July 13 16 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: What you miss if you do the whole "I never read the mainstream media" - a pretty interesting/fair discussion of JD Vance from a NYT columnist who obviously likes him. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/13/opinion/jd-vance-interview.html Or even better, this audio discussion: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/21/opinion/jd-vance-populism.html I don't like how Vance pivoted to sucking up to Trump. But hey, it's working, isn't it ... but take away that sycophantic tendency and there's a pretty interesting guy who is starting to see what a "populist" vision means in terms of actual policy. I’ve known the senator since long before he was a senator. He’s first very culturally interesting because he’s someone who rose to prominence as a memoirist of working class life, white working class life, who was sort of taken up by the liberal intelligentsia in 2016, 2017, as someone who explained the pathologies and cultural disarray that led to Trumpism, but who then sort of became a leading Trumpist himself. That is, to begin with, a kind of fascinating transformation of his sort of place in American culture. But then he’s also interesting because he is much more than most people, most Republican politicians, who have sort of adopted populism. He’s someone who’s really interested in the policy dilemmas around populism that we were talking about earlier, right, that show up in the United States, as well as Europe. The question of, can populism actually offer solutions to the mix of economic and cultural problems it’s interested in? So to the extent that there’s sort of a place where a populist agenda might come from in a second Trump term or over the next 10 or 15 years, it’s probably going to come from someone like Vance. It’s not about consuming material offered by the MSM, it’s about identifying agenda-based reporting and calling out reporting (or lack thereof) that is untrue, one-sided, or manipulative. Of course, word is that some see the much bigger problem as the “scum” not in the msm. Regarding sycophantic tendencies—isn’t that really the role of the VP, to abandon autonomy and fall in line with the president they hope to serve?
The Frankish Reich Posted July 13 Posted July 13 10 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: It’s not about consuming material offered by the MSM, it’s about identifying agenda-based reporting and calling out reporting (or lack thereof) that is untrue, one-sided, or manipulative. Of course, word is that some see the much bigger problem as the “scum” not in the msm. Regarding sycophantic tendencies—isn’t that really the role of the VP, to abandon autonomy and fall in line with the president they hope to serve? First point: yeah, I get that. But the MSM isn't purely one-sided. There is clearly a mainstream liberal/Democratic bias to the NYT and the Wash Post, but there's also some good discussion from the other side. That's why I share the Ross Douthut pieces on JD Vance. Second point: also true. JD could've taken his time and been his own man for 2028 ...
SCBills Posted July 13 Author Posted July 13 Lots of reporter chatter growing for Youngkin. Election is a wrap if that happens. Which means it won’t.. and Trump will pick someone like meh Burgum.
The Frankish Reich Posted July 13 Posted July 13 9 minutes ago, SCBills said: Lots of reporter chatter growing for Youngkin. Election is a wrap if that happens. Which means it won’t.. and Trump will pick someone like meh Burgum. Although the schedule is making it look like Rubio v. Vance, I still predict Burgum. Burgum is a secular Pence. No charisma, hence no threat to Trump. Virtually no chance of catching on as a VP and planning his own 2028 run, so no incentive to try to distinguish himself (even in subtle ways) from The Boss.
Doc Posted July 13 Posted July 13 24 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: Although the schedule is making it look like Rubio v. Vance, I still predict Burgum. Burgum is a secular Pence. No charisma, hence no threat to Trump. Virtually no chance of catching on as a VP and planning his own 2028 run, so no incentive to try to distinguish himself (even in subtle ways) from The Boss. Why do you think Trump wouldn't want his VP pick to then become President? He'd obviously campaign for him/her and take credit for their success.
SCBills Posted July 13 Author Posted July 13 36 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: Although the schedule is making it look like Rubio v. Vance, I still predict Burgum. Burgum is a secular Pence. No charisma, hence no threat to Trump. Virtually no chance of catching on as a VP and planning his own 2028 run, so no incentive to try to distinguish himself (even in subtle ways) from The Boss. My biggest fear in terms of Trump/VP is similar to what you say here.. his ego. Youngkin would definitely take up some of the Trump oxygen, and in a Trump campaign where the brand is “Trump”, I’m not sure he can handle that. Vance is a Trump understudy and no threat to his ego, Burgum is exactly what you said he is and Rubio is an election move to boost Hispanic support. Youngkin would immediately be seen as “the guy” in 2028 and with that, comes a lot of hype and attention. Can Trump handle that in the campaign and during a lame duck 4 years where he would be - in part - building a platform for Youngkin to run on, as opposed to solely a 4 year legacy run to write/rewrite his own personal history? 1
The Frankish Reich Posted July 13 Posted July 13 1 minute ago, SCBills said: My biggest fear in terms of Trump/VP is similar to what you say here.. his ego. Youngkin would definitely take up some of the Trump oxygen, and in a Trump campaign where the brand is “Trump”, I’m not sure he can handle that. Vance is a Trump understudy and no threat to his ego, Burgum is exactly what you said he is and Rubio is an election move to boost Hispanic support. Youngkin would immediately be seen as “the guy” in 2028 and with that, comes a lot of hype and attention. Can Trump handle that in the campaign and during a lame duck 4 years where he would be - in part - building a platform for Youngkin to run on, as opposed to solely a 4 year legacy run to write/rewrite his own personal history? I'm not sure Vance is a Trump understudy. He's a very smart guy and to some extent he's been playing the role of Trump understudy to put himself in line for 2028. But if Trump be inevitable (I still have hope for a Biden replacement), at least he is genuinely interested in policy and governance. Maybe, just maybe, Trump could focus on the public stuff while Vance actually put things on a sound policy path?
SCBills Posted July 13 Author Posted July 13 3 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: I'm not sure Vance is a Trump understudy. He's a very smart guy and to some extent he's been playing the role of Trump understudy to put himself in line for 2028. But if Trump be inevitable (I still have hope for a Biden replacement), at least he is genuinely interested in policy and governance. Maybe, just maybe, Trump could focus on the public stuff while Vance actually put things on a sound policy path? I like Vance, but I feel like that’s how he’s seen. I do think he helps Trump govern, if elected, but he has to get elected, and I don’t know that Vance helps him there.. and that’s why I view him as a pick reflective of Trump’s confidence level in this election. If Biden stays in and Georgia, Arizona, Nevada and Pennsylvania polling is remotely accurate, this election is over regardless of who Trump picks. I just don’t trust anything anymore. Regardless of polling, Dems have an infinitely more effective ballot harvesting operation .. and I don’t say that in a conspiratorial way.. they just do.. and R’s are way behind the curve on that.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted July 13 Posted July 13 4 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said: First point: yeah, I get that. But the MSM isn't purely one-sided. There is clearly a mainstream liberal/Democratic bias to the NYT and the Wash Post, but there's also some good discussion from the other side. That's why I share the Ross Douthut pieces on JD Vance. Agreed, not purely one-sided, but on the political spectrum the percentage is quite high. Dangerously high, I would say, if the goal is to approximate a free and fair independent press worthy of the phrase “Democracy dies in darkness”. Thank you though for acknowledging and the piece on Vance. 4 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said: Second point: also true. JD could've taken his time and been his own man for 2028 ... Recent history suggests there may be a price to pay for taking ones time and being one’s own person. Joe Biden was never a civil rights politician—he was the guy blue collar families looked to as the guardian at the gate to keep neighborhoods safe and the right people on the outside looking in. He morphed, of course, into BOs VP, the jocular tough guy who bridged the gap between the old and New Democrat party. That worked out well for a guy laughed out of a couple WH runs for his general dunderheadedness and penchant for saying/doing dumb things. Kamala Harris was widely rejected as a serious candidate for president, viewed as unlikable generally, yet sits now where one bad Biden stutter after another has her positioned to be the savior of the Democrat party. Vance with Trump in 2024 could well lead to Vance and running mate in 2028. Let’s not forget that in spite of handwringing and some low info d voters seeing Russians in the WH, Trump was very well positioned for reelection pre-COVID. 1
Recommended Posts