Just like that Brit twit–LMFAO!
I was among the first in this thread to call this choice a disaster. Some people were fighting me on it at first. I don’t see anyone doing that now!
You know you’re done in American fascist circles when Russian state TV makes fun of you:
Have you seen the clips of Vance? (I was unable to stomach watching his whole acceptance speech.) “Not ready for prime time” doesn’t even begin to cover it!
Vance is 39 but looks 29 with the beard, 23 without it. But, to be fair, that’s just a matter of appearance (though I don’t think it helps him). The trouble is that he has all the gravitas and charm of a cheeky teenager. He just doesn’t seem… like a real candidate, you know?
And it’s also clear that Trump is starting to hate this dickhead. Did you see their appearance together with Jesse “Fox’s New Fave Fascist” Watters? Cringe-O-Licious! Just so, so bad. Despite being fellow nazis, it’s clear that Trump and Vance are like oil and water. The miscibility just ain’t happening.
I would not be surprised if Trump does take the L on this one and boots Vance from the ticket. It’s a win for us either way though: Keep him, and he does immeasurable damage to the ticket. Boot him, and that L is gonna sting–hard.
Also:
Whut whoa!
“Lowest of any running mate since 1990”… Who was the unpopular running mate in 1990?
On a more local note, all this sunshine on him means a better chance of unseating him in his next Senate race (which, unfortunately, isn’t until 2028).
Yeah, I thought that too, but they meant to write “1980” (only the headlines is wrong; it’s correct in the article).
Yes. Very few deserve it less than he.
… because I’m bored on this 11 hour flight …
Can’t you see me sitting here
I got Wayfair on the computer machine?
Love every sofa I see…
Can’t keep my davenport cleee-ean!
I might as well hump
Hump!
So they were referring to Bush? Not very comforting considering what happened next.
And why didn’t they use his name? Yeesh.
I think they meant Mondale.
So unpopular he got the Democratic nomination 4 years later? They meant Bush, and it just speaks to how relatively unimportant a VP pick really is.
I don’t know, there’s a lot to unpack there.
Maybe Bush (if that is whom they meant) was unpopular in that moment because Reagan was so popular and Bush had opposed him, or because people were hoping for someone else. More data required; probably too late to analyze it with any certainty.
(I was just 9 at the time of the 1980 election, but our household was Republican, and I remember liking Bush in the primaries. I don’t recall him ever seeming particularly unpopular, and he went on to be president himself…)
Reagan ran against Washington politics, and Bush personified them. The CIA was also very unpopular and not trusted at the time.
Well this is some lunatic nonsense:
Vance: “Let’s give votes to all children in this country, but let’s give control over those votes to the parents of those children.”
Well the EC already weights people’s votes differently depending on where they are in the country. This seems like a natural outgrowth of that.
Serious question… What is Vance’s obsession with people with children? Between this and the “crazy cat lady” thing this seems like a weird thing to be pushing as some sort of campaign message? I know it’s pointless to try to read logic into MAGA thinking, but even for them this seems like an odd angle of attack.
He’s read The Handmaid’s Tale as a how-to.
I might suspect trying to drive appeal among conservative Christians who have big families, as well as contrasting against “liberal elites” who don’t have kids as a bogeyman.
Do Christians have big families? I think Catholics do, but I’m not sure Catholics count to Christians.
I think they want white people to have more babies.
What about children of immigrants who (the children) are American citizens? Do their non-American parents get to vote for them?
They will get 3/5 of a vote.
Actually, it sounds to me like he has read too much late-stage Heinlein.
It was also proposed in the New York Times a few years ago by conservative scholar Lyman Stone:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/01/opinion/politics/kids-right-to-vote.html