Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-21-2019, 04:07 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,780

Could Pence or McConnell (or maybe Ryan or even Romney) challenge Trump for the nomination?


If you told me right now Putin's true long game goal was to destroy the Republican Party, I could almost believe it. (Didn't see that last twist coming, didja?)

The GOP brand may now be stained for years, longer than Watergate. Anyone who stands behind this man is irrevocably tainted by history as having been in league with an obscene madman.

That remains true even if you are the staunchest conservative from the reddest state, by the way. This has gone way, waaay beyond party or ideology. Basic, basic decency is what is at stake here.

This is true, for instance, of Mike Pence. He can be "primaried", sure. But he can't be fired. And I think he must now know he is completely hosed no matter how he plays it. The only option he has now is to take a different place in the history books if he speaks out, or even runs against Trump. And this is true to a degree of McConnell and other Senate GOP leaders. It's time to take a stand.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #2  
Old 03-21-2019, 04:19 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,780
And Pence does have that tiebreaking Senate vote. Trump cannot order him to vote the way he wants.
I can see the speeches he could give on the well of the Senate: "Good, hardworking, God-fearing Americans, including Main Street Republicans like myself, have had enough. America has had enough. It's time for healing, yadda yadda yadda".
It's a moment of truth for McConnell and other GOP leaders (Romney, maybe Paul Ryan?). By making their move now, they just might just pull off the electoral triple bank shot. But even if they don't, they HAVE to know that history is watching. That's got to be more important for the guys at the very top, ones who don't actually work for the White House, than short term political considerations...right? Or is it just frozen-in-the-headlights, irrational fear that prevents them from getting out of a defensive crouch? I mean, we're all SEEING this, right?

I know we've defined deviance down, gotten used to a "new normal"...but what does it take? This, again, goes far beyond partisan politics or issues of judges, climate change, taxes, any of that.

Wake up.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc

Last edited by SlackerInc; 03-21-2019 at 04:23 AM.
  #3  
Old 03-21-2019, 04:34 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 6,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
The GOP brand may now be stained for years, longer than Watergate. Anyone who stands behind this man is irrevocably tainted by history as having been in league with an obscene madman.
This is incredibly optimistic. They may be tainted by history, but their careers and lives will be just fine.

The Watergate stain lasted, what, a few months? Republicans won three of the next four presidential elections, and the one they lost was a squeaker even though their candidate had literally pardoned Nixon.

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 03-21-2019 at 04:36 AM.
  #4  
Old 03-21-2019, 04:40 AM
glee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Obama country
Posts: 15,349

"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters"


From my point of view here in the UK, the USA is badly split.

It appears that there is a solid Republican base who will vote for anyone who isn't a Democrat.
So unfortunately I don't think any Republican hopeful will challenge Trump.
And I don't think the base care what anyone else thinks.
  #5  
Old 03-21-2019, 04:42 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 6,304
I was going to say that Mitch McConnell was obviously too unpopular among Republicans for anything like this, but he's way more popular than I thought. Evidently Brett Kavanaugh's good image rubbed off on him.
  #6  
Old 03-21-2019, 04:51 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Feldon View Post
This is incredibly optimistic. They may be tainted by history, but their careers and lives will be just fine.

The Watergate stain lasted, what, a few months? Republicans won three of the next four presidential elections, and the one they lost was a squeaker even though their candidate had literally pardoned Nixon.

Watergate was NOTHING compared to this.

I'm saying imagine even if somehow Trump was truly "not a crook". Nothing in the Mueller report. The SDNY comes up empty. The crimes we saw admitted to on national TV are erased from history. But otherwise, we still have a President Trump who acts this way.

Says these things.

Nixon was awkward. Said some cavalier things. But he never composed himself this way. Different times, yes. But that also applies to you (who brought up the comparison).

And if we go back to crimes: these dwarf Watergate both in scope and pure quantity.

The GOP's only chance is going to be to rebrand, perhaps with a new name, and make the malefactors lurk in the shadows while new or untainted faces try to sell their repackaged conservative goods to the center of the electorate. They are like Democrats after the Civil War. We sort of brush it all off as sort of late-nineteenth, early twentieth century, but that was the better part of a century that the GOP dominated, even after Confederate voting rights were restored, because they could "wave the bloody flag". We have a surfeit of flags to wave. ("Let a thousand flags wave.") It's a target rich environment!

Except in the deepest red recesses of the South and Mountain West, in five or ten years no GOP campaign committee is going to want candidates whose opponents can use now-oppo footage of them at a MAGA rally as the centerpiece of their attack ads. You can take that to the bank.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc

Last edited by SlackerInc; 03-21-2019 at 04:56 AM.
  #7  
Old 03-21-2019, 04:54 AM
Chad Sudan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 52
I too used to think that in a democracy, scoundrel politicians, and their parties, would inevitably be punished at the ballot box.

It turns out, however, that voters' memories are exceedingly short.

I expect that some form of Trumpism will be the new normal in the Republican Party. Or (best-case scenario) that Trump will be conveniently forgotten as soon as he leaves the political stage - just as George W. Bush was.

Republicans will never hold themselves accountable or learn anything from the appalling acts of this administration.
  #8  
Old 03-21-2019, 05:56 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,780
But former swing voters can become "independents" who are basically no-GOP or rare-GOP. They's gold in them thar' hills.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #9  
Old 03-21-2019, 08:24 AM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
If you told me right now Putin's true long game goal was to destroy the Republican Party, I could almost believe it. (Didn't see that last twist coming, didja?)

The GOP brand may now be stained for years, longer than Watergate. Anyone who stands behind this man is irrevocably tainted by history as having been in league with an obscene madman.

That remains true even if you are the staunchest conservative from the reddest state, by the way. This has gone way, waaay beyond party or ideology. Basic, basic decency is what is at stake here.

This is true, for instance, of Mike Pence. He can be "primaried", sure. But he can't be fired. And I think he must now know he is completely hosed no matter how he plays it. The only option he has now is to take a different place in the history books if he speaks out, or even runs against Trump. And this is true to a degree of McConnell and other Senate GOP leaders. It's time to take a stand.
IMHO the recent attacks Trump has made against McCain just make it more obvious that we’ve already passed a tipping point. Things like being stained for years, being looked at well by future historians, and even basic decency, no longer matter to Republicans. ISTM that the only thing they care about is Trump winning and their reelection chances.

If anyone wants to argue the “both sides do it” then picture this hypothetical. Imagine that Obama had treated Ted Kennedy the way Trump is treating McCain. There’s no way Obama would have won in 2012. The criticism from other Democrats would have been coming in from all corners, not just from John Kerry (the Mitt Romney of this scenario). Obama would have been challenged by serious candidates in the 2012 primary. It’s likely the pressure would have been significant enough that he would have had to resign even before the 2012 elections. In addition it’s likely that 2012 would have been a bad year for Democrats in general, not just Obama, as many disillusioned Democrats would have stayed home or even voted Republican.
  #10  
Old 03-21-2019, 08:36 AM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,626
Apologies for the double post. To address the OP question directly, sure, they could challenge Trump, but they won't, not even Romney. If any prominent Republican does challenge him, it'll be Kasich, but even then I think the chances are less than 50/50.
  #11  
Old 03-21-2019, 08:38 AM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 38,915
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Anyone who stands behind this man is irrevocably tainted by history as having been in league with an obscene madman.

That remains true even if you are the staunchest conservative from the reddest state, by the way.
Which staunch conservatives from red states have been defeated for re-election based on their association with Trump?
Quote:
This is true, for instance, of Mike Pence. He can be "primaried", sure. But he can't be fired. And I think he must now know he is completely hosed no matter how he plays it. The only option he has now is to take a different place in the history books if he speaks out, or even runs against Trump.
I think Pence's options as to his place in the history books are either to be like Jerry Ford, or like GHW Bush.

If Pence runs against Trump, he won't be like either.

Regards,
Shodan
  #12  
Old 03-21-2019, 09:05 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,780
“Irrevocably tainted by history” is independent of re-election chances. If the GOP wants to be a rump national party with a fighting chance only in the Senate, they can have that. But in 5-10 years the party will be trying to distance itself from Trump. We should be charged with political malpractice if we don’t make that shit stick to them like skunk spray.
  #13  
Old 03-21-2019, 09:40 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,418
If Pence runs against Trump, I suspect that Trump
1. Will blame everything that has gone wrong to date on him
2. Not include him on any meetings of importance, and
3. Send him off on long "diplomatic" duties of no real impact.
aka The "Dave" Gambit.
  #14  
Old 03-21-2019, 09:54 AM
CaptMurdock's Avatar
CaptMurdock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Evildrome Boozerama
Posts: 1,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
Which staunch conservatives from red states have been defeated for re-election based on their association with Trump?
Roy Moore.
Quote:
I think Pence's options as to his place in the history books are either to be like Jerry Ford, or like GHW Bush.

If Pence runs against Trump, he won't be like either.
Frankly, I'm hoping him ending up like Spiro Agnew

Regurgitations,
CaptMurdock
__________________
____________________________
Coin-operated self-destruct...not one of my better ideas.
-- Planckton (Spongebob Squarepants)
  #15  
Old 03-21-2019, 10:14 AM
Icarus's Avatar
Icarus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In front of my PC, y tu?
Posts: 5,062
Regarding the OP, while I would applaud any and all successes in destroying the GOP (through legal, non-violent means!) your suggestions sound like science fiction fever dreams. I see no evidence that the base of the GOP considers the current occupant to be worth dumping. Somehow all of the crazy shenanigans are dismissed/ignored/not-my-problem/"fake news".

So, COULD any of those individuals challenge? Well, technically yes, it is possible. But it is not within any realm of reality to think that they will.

As for McConnell, he understands that as leader of the Senate he has more power than the President to affect change, why would he take a demotion? Ryan/Romney/Pence will wait until Trump is done (however that works out).
  #16  
Old 03-21-2019, 02:11 PM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 38,915
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptMurdock View Post
Roy Moore.
Roy Moore wasn't running for re-election, and I suspect the other allegations against him had a bit more effect than his affiliations with Trump.

Regards,
Shodan
  #17  
Old 03-22-2019, 10:03 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,176
No way in hell. The Republican Party is now the private property of Orange Julius Caesar. The Republican base is incapable of rational thinking, it has become a personality cult. It could only be captured by someone with charisma. Let's face it, Mike Pence makes Dukakis look like Elvis. McConnell is perfectly happy doing what he can to transform the federal judiciary into a right wing echo chamber. Paul Ryan couldn't legislate to save his soul, he's even more poorly equipped for the executive role.
  #18  
Old 03-22-2019, 10:23 AM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is offline
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 14,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
No way in hell. The Republican Party is now the private property of Orange Julius Caesar. The Republican base is incapable of rational thinking, it has become a personality cult. It could only be captured by someone with charisma. Let's face it, Mike Pence makes Dukakis look like Elvis. McConnell is perfectly happy doing what he can to transform the federal judiciary into a right wing echo chamber. Paul Ryan couldn't legislate to save his soul, he's even more poorly equipped for the executive role.
Totally agreed. Any GOP challenger who would hope to mount anything more than a quixotic challenge to Trump would need a rock-solid plan for peeling off a substantial proportion of Trump's hardcore base, who have truly become fact-resistent humans.

That person would also need to be willing to accept that failure would likely mean the end of their career, as Trump would focus his tweetstorms on doing all that he could to destroy the challenger's credibility among Republican voters.
  #19  
Old 03-22-2019, 11:03 AM
Lemur866's Avatar
Lemur866 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Middle of Puget Sound
Posts: 22,371
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
Which staunch conservatives from red states have been defeated for re-election based on their association with Trump?
Dude, that's exactly the point. The Republican party is now the Trump party. You know it. I know it. The American people know it.

The thing is, Trump is an Antichrist. But you're willing to support an Antichrist as long as he can win an election.
  #20  
Old 03-23-2019, 09:43 AM
dalej42 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 14,015
The only realistic challenger would be Romney. I don’t think, at his age, he’s really planning a long term career in the Senate where it takes years to build up seniority. Plus, as a candidate and nominee, he’s been vetted. I’m sure Romney is keeping an eye on the Mueller report to see how damagingly it is.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42
  #21  
Old 03-23-2019, 01:07 PM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,176
I'll say this about Romney- if it comes down to a vote in the Senate, he's going to follow his conscience and not his party. If there were more Republicans like him, the party wouldn't have to be destroyed.
  #22  
Old 04-01-2019, 03:37 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 27,878
Trump's approval rating with Republicans, according to Gallup, is around 85-90% depending on the poll. That's not a formula for a primary challenge from within the party. And as we move more into a heated election season, they'll coalesce around Trump even more, especially if the Democrats run some far-left quasi socialist.

Two major things would have helped a primary challenger to Trump - a recession, or a Mueller report that found serious collusion with the Russians.

The Mueller report looks to be a wet firecracker so far, although we will no doubt find out if there is anything juicy in it that looks bad but didn't rise to the level of a crime. Still, I wouldn't pin my hopes on it.

The recession could still happen - it sure looks like a global downturn is starting. And debt levels around the world have been spiralling out of control ever since the geniuses in the various central banks decided that a very long period of no interest rates was a good idea. So there WILL likely be a recession in the fairly near future - but time is running out for it to affect the next election. The people who are going to make a serious run at 2020 will need to have support and funding in place by the end of the year, and even if a recession was starting now it will take longer than that before it's official. A financial crisis this year could do it, but let's not hope for that.

So I don't see anyone on the right successfully mounting a primary challenge against Trump. Someone might try it as a show of defiance or something, but they'll never win the nomination unless something really bad happens between now and the Republican convention.
  #23  
Old 04-01-2019, 03:58 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,666
How do you have any idea what the Mueller report looks like? Have you seen it?
  #24  
Old 04-01-2019, 04:17 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 27,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
How do you have any idea what the Mueller report looks like? Have you seen it?
Not at all, which is why I said, "we will no doubt find out IF there is anything juicy in it that looks bad but didn't rise to the level of a crime. Still, I wouldn't pin my hopes on it."

In other words, if you need that explained further, what we know about the Mueller report SO FAR is that no indictments have been recommended, so nothing 'rises to the level of a crime'. Or at least it currently looks that way, as I said. But as I also said, there could be juicy stuff in there for Democrats that just doesn't rise to the level of a crime. Since I haven't read it, I said "We will no no doubt found out IF", which is the way you talk about things that you aren't certain about but will be revealed in the future.

And I wouldn't pin my hopes on it, because Barr is not stupid, and he has to know that if he made a wildly inaccurate summary of the contents of the report he would be held accountable for that either when the full report comes out, or is leaked, or Mueller issues a statement slapping him down. So I'm assuming that Barr's summary is at least accurate from the way he sees it, although he may be looking through a partisan lens. But I would be willing to lay a 50-50 bet with you that after the full report is released there will be no indictments brought down based on it.

I'm sure the report will contain some stuff that the left can use against Trump, because Trump can't go a day without saying or doing something the left can use against him. I wouldn't be surprised if the report concluded that Trump is careless, that he doesn't vet his people well, that he says things that aren't true, and that sort of thing. Red meat for the Democrats, but unfortunately already baked into Trump's approval ratings, since everyone knows all this about him already - even the people who support him strongly. They just don't care.
  #25  
Old 04-01-2019, 04:25 PM
Try2B Comprehensive's Avatar
Try2B Comprehensive is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,383
Can you go into more detail about how Pence is "completely hosed"? There aren't enough positive stories in the news these days.

In exchange, I'll offer this article about how the GOP self-destructed in California, and how they appear to be using those same techniques nationally.
  #26  
Old 04-01-2019, 04:39 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 27,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
I'll say this about Romney- if it comes down to a vote in the Senate, he's going to follow his conscience and not his party. If there were more Republicans like him, the party wouldn't have to be destroyed.
He could have been President, and would probably be in his second term now or a Democrat would be in the White House and Trump would be the also-ran joke he was in past elections. But the Democrats, including most of this board, decided that full character assassination was the way to go, and by the time of the election Romney went from being an honorable, serious man who cares about his country and has good executive skills, to being a horrible, dog abusing, high school bully, women-in-binders misogynist whose thinking was so outdated that he could be mocked in a debate for his insane notion that Russia was a geopolitical threat. Remember?

Last edited by Sam Stone; 04-01-2019 at 04:40 PM.
  #27  
Old 04-01-2019, 04:45 PM
CaptMurdock's Avatar
CaptMurdock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Evildrome Boozerama
Posts: 1,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
He could have been President, and would probably be in his second term now or a Democrat would be in the White House and Trump would be the also-ran joke he was in past elections. But the Democrats, including most of this board, decided that full character assassination was the way to go, and by the time of the election Romney went from being an honorable, serious man who cares about his country and has good executive skills, to being a horrible, dog abusing, high school bully, women-in-binders misogynist whose thinking was so outdated that he could be mocked in a debate for his insane notion that Russia was a geopolitical threat. Remember?
Oh, play it with strings, fer cryin' out loud. The Democrats would have to dig through about fifty feet of fetid waste to reach the depths of "full character assassination" that the GOP practices as de rigeur. And as far as Romney's "insane notion"? That's because he was trying to treat Russia as if it were still The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The guy was stuck in the 80's.
__________________
____________________________
Coin-operated self-destruct...not one of my better ideas.
-- Planckton (Spongebob Squarepants)
  #28  
Old 04-01-2019, 07:04 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,780
My OP certainly doesn't look as good now as when Trump was in full meltdown mode, attacking McCain, Mueller, and his top advisor's husband. OTOH even after (perhaps) dodging a Mueller bullet (and falsely complaining "total exoneration"), he has completely flummoxed Republicans by quixotically attempting to destroy Obamacare--even after health care was the GOP's Waterloo last November.

And although the usual caveats apply, that it's just one poll, this certainly didn't NOT make my day: https://politicalwire.com/2019/03/31...-large-margin/
Quote:
A new Baldwin Wallace University poll finds just 39% of Ohio adults approve of President Trump’s job performance, with almost three times more saying that they they “strongly disapprove” of Trump’s handling of the presidency than those who said they “strongly approve.”

As we've talked about on other threads, taking Ohio away from Trump pretty much checkmates him.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
He could have been President, and would probably be in his second term now or a Democrat would be in the White House and Trump would be the also-ran joke he was in past elections. But the Democrats, including most of this board, decided that full character assassination was the way to go, and by the time of the election Romney went from being an honorable, serious man who cares about his country and has good executive skills, to being a horrible, dog abusing, high school bully, women-in-binders misogynist whose thinking was so outdated that he could be mocked in a debate for his insane notion that Russia was a geopolitical threat. Remember?

This is a reasonably well-aimed broadside as far as it goes, but I still think it's a leap to say it would have been better to elect Romney than to reelect Obama--even if I'd much rather have Romney as president now than Trump.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #29  
Old 04-01-2019, 07:19 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,237
I'm guessing somebody will decide they'd rather look good in the history books than have a career as a Republican politician. That person will not win or come close to it, barring some major unexpected development.

Romney would probably be the best choice in terms of credibility. He is widely respected within the party. Also, I think Utah will keep re-electing him as long as he likes no matter what Trump tweets, so it's not even much of a risk for him. Run Mitt Run!
  #30  
Old 04-01-2019, 07:38 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,237
Polls here, if anyone wants to have the conventional wisdom confirmed. One poll does have Romney beating Trump by 18 points...in Utah.
  #31  
Old 04-02-2019, 06:59 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,176
Sure, Romney is more popular than Donald in Utah. Mormons have a great tradition of religious tolerance, having often been the objects of religious bigotry themselves. They really don't fit well with the current Republican anti-Muslim fervor.
  #32  
Old 04-02-2019, 07:35 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,666
Democrats didn't go full character-assassination on Romney. Romney did that all by himself. Remember, the way we found out about the dog-abusing was because Romney told us about it, because he thought it made for a funny story that would make him seem more like ordinary folk. Binders full of women? The 47%? Corporations are people, my friend, and I like firing people? Those were also straight from his own mouth.
  #33  
Old 04-02-2019, 07:30 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,780
The "binders full of women" thing always seemed like a nothingburger to me at the time--not that I was outraged by it if it was going to help Obama get reelected. But it really looks very nitpicky and petty now, after everything that's happened in the past few years.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #34  
Old 04-02-2019, 09:56 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 27,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Democrats didn't go full character-assassination on Romney. Romney did that all by himself. Remember, the way we found out about the dog-abusing was because Romney told us about it, because he thought it made for a funny story that would make him seem more like ordinary folk. Binders full of women? The 47%? Corporations are people, my friend, and I like firing people? Those were also straight from his own mouth.
Ridiculous. None of these things were self-inflicted character assassination. They were small matters blown wildly out of proportion by the Democrats with the help of the media.

The dog thing was from decades earlier, and what he did was strap a dog crate to the top of the car, then put the dog in it. Depending on the crate and the weather and how fast he was driving, the dog may have been just fine, and may have enjoyed it. It's certainly better than letting dogs ride in the back of an open pickup bed, which an awful lot of people then did - and still do. We have no way of knowing if it was at all abusive to the dog. And in any event, it was a very small thing blown way out of proportion.

'Binders full of women' was a complete, ridiculous smear. Romney actually said that he felt there weren't enough women in the executive leadership, and so he asked his staff to bring him a list of women who might be qualified to move up. And they brought him binders full. It's actually the exact opposite of the way it was spun by the Democrats - it was an example of Romney trying to do then what everyone is trying to do now - increase the percentage of women in leadership roles. But 'binders full of women' as a phrase was just too juicy to pass up, so the Democrats turned Romney's story on its head to smear him.

The 47% thing was just a statement of fact. His point was that when you get more than 50% of the people not paying federal taxes but demanding benefits, it's not a good thing for democracy. And if it was a gaffe in the political sense (a politician accidentally caught telling the truth), it was no where NEAR as bad as Clinton's 'deplorables' remark, which was actually a condemnation of a significant swath of the public.

As far as Russia being America's chief geopolitical foe, Obama treated that like a joke. "The 80's have called, and they want their foreign policy back." Everyone had a good yuck over that and the media spun it as a major loss of credibility for Romney, but it turns out that he was far more correct about Russia than Barack "Tell Putin I'll have more flexibility after the election" Obama.

Romney was slandered by the Democrats and the Press. He is a serious guy with a life of serious experience and accomplishment, and he didn't deserve it. But you paid the price - you got Trump. I mean hey, if Romney is going to be portrayed as evil incarnate, might as well elect someone who really is, right?
  #35  
Old 04-03-2019, 12:00 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
The dog thing was from decades earlier, and what he did was strap a dog crate to the top of the car, then put the dog in it. Depending on the crate and the weather and how fast he was driving, the dog may have been just fine, and may have enjoyed it. It's certainly better than letting dogs ride in the back of an open pickup bed, which an awful lot of people then did - and still do. We have no way of knowing if it was at all abusive to the dog. And in any event, it was a very small thing blown way out of proportion.

Agreed.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
'Binders full of women' was a complete, ridiculous smear. Romney actually said that he felt there weren't enough women in the executive leadership, and so he asked his staff to bring him a list of women who might be qualified to move up. And they brought him binders full. It's actually the exact opposite of the way it was spun by the Democrats - it was an example of Romney trying to do then what everyone is trying to do now - increase the percentage of women in leadership roles. But 'binders full of women' as a phrase was just too juicy to pass up, so the Democrats turned Romney's story on its head to smear him.

Yeah, that's pretty much true.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
The 47% thing was just a statement of fact. His point was that when you get more than 50% of the people not paying federal taxes but demanding benefits, it's not a good thing for democracy. And if it was a gaffe in the political sense (a politician accidentally caught telling the truth), it was no where NEAR as bad as Clinton's 'deplorables' remark, which was actually a condemnation of a significant swath of the public.

(record scratch)

No, now I can't go with you any more. In fact, this is exactly backward. Romney was betraying a very Ayn Randian view of the world as "makers" and "takers". It was ugly, although I'm sure his running mate loved it. And Hillary's statement is the one taken out of context and unfairly twisted. I would argue that she was actually very generous to let half of Trump voters off the hook:

Quote:
You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?
The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic — you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people — now how 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks — they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America. But the other basket — and I know this because I see friends from all over America here — I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas — as well as, you know, New York and California — but that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they’re just desperate for change. It doesn’t really even matter where it comes from. They don’t buy everything he says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won’t wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroine, feel like they’re in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
As far as Russia being America's chief geopolitical foe, Obama treated that like a joke. "The 80's have called, and they want their foreign policy back." Everyone had a good yuck over that and the media spun it as a major loss of credibility for Romney, but it turns out that he was far more correct about Russia than Barack "Tell Putin I'll have more flexibility after the election" Obama.

Yes, now you have once again made a fair point.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
Romney was slandered by the Democrats and the Press. He is a serious guy with a life of serious experience and accomplishment, and he didn't deserve it. But you paid the price - you got Trump. I mean hey, if Romney is going to be portrayed as evil incarnate, might as well elect someone who really is, right?

I do genuinely feel for you. It must be very difficult to be a "Republican classic", Main Street pro-business conservative, and watch what's happening now in the GOP. Your wing of the party got to pick the leaders for a long time, and now you have to reckon with the fact that the majority of the base of your party is, well, deplorable is a good word for it. And they don't even share your economic or foreign policy goals, nor do they really want to shrink the state--except insofar as cutting off funds that go to support cities, the arts, scientific research, or programs that tend to benefit immigrants and minorities...while not cutting them off for rural white folks.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc

Last edited by SlackerInc; 04-03-2019 at 12:04 AM.
  #36  
Old 04-03-2019, 01:13 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 6,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
The 47% thing was just a statement of fact. His point was that when you get more than 50% of the people not paying federal taxes but demanding benefits, it's not a good thing for democracy.
It was only true if you do exactly what you just did, which is isolate the federal income tax and falsely make it stand in for the entirety of "federal taxes." There are some people who get enough back in refundable credits, etc. to wipe out their entire federal tax burden, but it's not 47%. And in any case, the whole focus on "federal taxes" is in itself annoying, because total taxation is flat or regressive in many places.

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 04-03-2019 at 01:18 AM.
  #37  
Old 04-03-2019, 01:28 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 6,304
And whatever point Romney might have been able to make (which I obviously don't think was especially convincing) was totally obliterated by his own situation. Recall that he (probably correctly from his POV) never released a single genuine federal tax return, because he knew it would be disastrous. (I don't count the fudged 2011 return. If he releases a current transcript of his 2011 return, I'll reconsider, but my assumption until then is that he ultimately amended it.)

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 04-03-2019 at 01:30 AM.
  #38  
Old 04-17-2019, 06:10 PM
iamthewalrus(:3= is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 11,675
I agree fully with SlackerInc's response to Sam Stone. Many good points, Sam, but you're going off the rails on the 47% comment.

Who's included in those 47% who don't pay Federal taxes?

Retirees who worked and paid taxes their whole life, but are now living on low-enough incomes that they don't pay. Young people going to college working part-time jobs. People who are disabled. Parents of young children. People working crappy low-pay jobs who qualify for the EITC. In some years, Donald Trump.

Portraying people who (usually temporarily) don't pay federal income taxes in a particular year as voting democratic no matter what, dependent on the government, believing they are victims who won't take personal responsibility for their lives is total bullshit, and it received the response it deserved.

I will also own up as someone who thought at the time that Romney's comments about Russia were foolish and dated, and who has since realized that I was very wrong about that.
  #39  
Old 04-17-2019, 06:31 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 27,878
Romney's point about the 47% was not at all a disparagement of them, but more of a structural point about democracy - when almost half the people voting for things that cost money don't pay any of the taxes needed to pay for them, you can wind up in an unbalanced situation absent the normal checks and balances of democracy - that people ultimately have to pay for the things they vote for. They can be the best, hardest-working people around, and it can still be too easy for them to vote to spend other people's money. It wasn't a judgement of the people, but a statement about the structure of Democracy.

And yes, I know those people still pay state and local taxes and payroll taxes. That's irrelevant to the issue of voting for things federally when you don't pay federal income tax.
  #40  
Old 04-17-2019, 11:58 PM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,827
“There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what…who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims. …These are people who pay no income tax. …and so my job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”

Sure sounds like he's saying that people who don't pay taxes will vote for Obama and don't take personal responsibility for their lives. If there's some deeper point in there about the structure of democracy it's real real deep.
  #41  
Old 04-18-2019, 04:30 AM
SOJA is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Sunny Southern California
Posts: 168
There were murmurs of Pence wanting to run in 2020. It'd be easy for him. Trump's supporters also include the Evangelicals. The Evangelicals may very well be a sizeable portion of Trump's current approval rate. Pence is an Evangelical. He could easily steal Trump's thunder by choosing to run. The only Trump supports that will remain then are those who liked him for him, and not because of his VP.

Paul Ryan would rather go into the private lobbying sector and make millions. Romney has baggage. McConnell is disliked. Pence has the strongest chance, followed by dumbass Weld.
  #42  
Old 04-18-2019, 10:01 AM
iamthewalrus(:3= is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 11,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
Romney's point about the 47% was not at all a disparagement of them, but more of a structural point about democracy - when almost half the people voting for things that cost money don't pay any of the taxes needed to pay for them, you can wind up in an unbalanced situation absent the normal checks and balances of democracy - that people ultimately have to pay for the things they vote for. They can be the best, hardest-working people around, and it can still be too easy for them to vote to spend other people's money. It wasn't a judgement of the people, but a statement about the structure of Democracy.
It... really wasn't. If you read the quote, he claims that people who don't pay taxes believe they are victims and won't take personal responsibility for their life. And, of course, that they all vote for Democrats.

That's clearly a disparagement.

And even as a simple statement of facts, it's totally misleading. 47% of people don't pay federal taxes in any given year, but the percentage of people who never pay federal taxes is way smaller. The largest classes of people (students, young parents, retirees) who don't pay taxes either will or have paid taxes. They're not layabout victims. They're at a stage in life where the federal tax burden currently doesn't fall on them.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:35 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017