Why exactly? It seems pretty obvious he's not going anywhere any time soon and will be part of the GOP as long as they'll have him. He are witnessing a major example of the cult of personality.I really though we would never hear from Trump again. Biden is failing so bad only 8 months in he might springboard Trump back into the White House on his own.
He would burn the GOP to the ground so long as he could be king of the ashes. That’s why I laugh when people said Trump would play kingmaker. Malignant narcissists, which Trump clearly is, don’t play kingmaker. They play King.Why exactly? It seems pretty obvious he's not going anywhere any time soon and will be part of the GOP as long as they'll have him.
I could see Elise Stefanik but they might decide her seat in the House is more important.
She could bring her seat over to my house any day know what I'm sayin ...
Bongbong is now +130 and Manny is up to +400Went to Bovada to examine odds and there's really nothing new to report. At least with regards to the US election.....Trump the fave for GOP and Biden or Harris the fave for DEM with the DEMs holding the pole position to win in 2024.
But then something caught my eye at the bottom of the page! Odds To Win 2022 Presidential Election In The Philippines
Manny Pacquiao +110 to be the next president? Wow......
But that not why we here!
At +1200 is a candidate called BongBong Marcus and if we can't get behind BongBong what exactly are we doing here, folks?
I actually think it will be Pompeo. He brings experience and a sense of "calm" to Trumps outlandish behavior.
Eta: if Trump is the nominee, I think he hurts the Republicans chance to win back the White House.
Where do you get this stuff? Chris Wallace just identified Jen as one of the best press secretaries (he may have said best).Running the hypothetical, Trump would ask a woman to be VP. I don't see Nikki Haley running lame duck when she would be the current presumptive favorite for 2024. That leaves Kristi Noem. Who might take it if offered but it's actually a massive step down in power. The reality of the situation is that age timelines operate as critical junctures for women in the public eye. Noem is outside her practical window at this point. Candace Owens has no political experience and would not survive a true hard vetting into her life. I'll leave that there.
Kayleigh McEnany. She is already beloved by the MAGA base and would do much better to appeal to suburban women. As a bonus, lots of CNN analysts would refuse to attack her. They just wouldn't do it as she has a personal relationship with many of them. While she was embattled and attacked by the press corps almost non stop, she is still widely respected in that industry. She would destroy anyone in a debate. Reading the tealeaves, she understands she would need to go full Bulworth here. Trump already has assessed her loyalty.
The failures of Jen Psaki will only raise McEnany's profile. It's unfortunate that because she's linked to the Trump administration that many will underestimate her. Give her access to the national daily media cycle as a candidate and she'll start lining up people in body bags. She would end political careers up and down the ticket against the Democratic Party.
For her relative experience level, her sense of timing and pace is uncanny. That only happens if it's purely innate. She instinctively knows how to set up, ambush, engage spin and take the kill shot in media optics.
Noem has the better resume. McEnany will just better produce on the field of play. Heath Schuler's college pedigree versus Gus Frerotte and his Pro Bowl appearance.
Where do you get this stuff? Chris Wallace just identified Jen as one of the best press secretaries (he may have said best).
And Jeff Ireland raved about Pat White being a secret cheat code to unlock the NFL after taking him in the 2nd round in 2009.
In this scenario, Susan Rice is Jeff Ireland. Jen Psaki is Pat White. And by default, you are Tony Sparano's bizarre fist pump on the sideline.
The way to sell McEnany to the public is that she was a riser who just made the most out of the opportunity presented in front of her. You can blame her for working for a controversial POTUS, but she was just trying to carve out a career for herself and pull herself up by her bootstraps. You can sell that to suburban women. McEnany would take half the ticket from Trump because if he wins ( Considering this current Biden administration is such a failure that they've shockingly dragged Trump back into some kind of contention. How pathetic does your stay in office have to be to make lots of moderates miss Trump?) , she's now VPOTUS and if Trump loses, her profile is raised to the point where she's a contender for Governor in a transitional Red stronghold.
McEnany is still a name brand Republican and she has no previous term in office where a COVID19 narrative can be used against her. Her linkage to Trump cuts off lots of roads for her so quadrupling down with Trump isn't such a bad move for her. If Kamala Harris walks onto the debate stage with McEnany, then the savagery inflicted would put the former Press Secretary into the media spotlight as a legitimate media killshot threat. The leftist media will try to paint her as a "cult like dumb blonde" but they will ignore the fact that she's a high conflict personality type. She wants a fight. She wants people to tell her to her face what she can't do nor achieve. She wants you to doubt her. Then she wants to punch you in the mouth.
The current political environment does not reward someone like Jen Psaki. Because Psaki can only angle a lecturing/condescending tone to try to hold onto single issue voters, zealots, liberal "Karen" archtypes and a declining number of low information voters ( Big surprise. People start caring and researching about politics and their elected officials when they see their day to day lives being ruined)
Your limp wristed attempt at derailing and laying a sacrifice at the altar of political tribalism has reduced you to a Tony Sparano fist pump.
Your kick returner made a fair catch. Fist pump. You got that blocking tight end in the 7th round just like you were dreaming about. Fist pump. The new restaurant you tried out was not run by pure heathens, they had Coke and not Pepsi. Fist pump. The fifth dentist is wavering and now they all might recommend Trident. Fist pump.
Your arm tired yet?
Chris Wallace just identified Jen as one of the best press secretaries
I get it - you know better than Chris Wallace
I disliked Trump because he was a serial liar, sexist, sexual assaulter, probable rapist, conman malignant narcissist that masqueraded as a wildly successful business man. But that's just me.I think Trump was what this nation needed, an outsider with no political alignments, and I think that is a big part of why both Republicans and Democrats really disliked him.
I submit that there are better options on the horizon to run for president, Trump could run and would likely win, but I think, we have better candidates, more capable of handling the criminality of the political system.
I think Ron Desantis is a better option, by way of example.
He left a little better impression with you than he did me...I would add dangerous, irrational and unhinged.I disliked Trump because he was a serial liar, sexist, sexual assaulter, probable rapist, conman malignant narcissist that masqueraded as a wildly successful business man. But that's just me.
I disliked Trump because he was a serial liar, sexist, sexual assaulter, probable rapist, conman malignant narcissist that masqueraded as a wildly successful business man. But that's just me.
This statement may need some additional reflection and explanation. Pretty sure you don't really mean this...outcomes are the only thing that matters.
You equating Trump to Obama (especially in response to the list of traits I just listed out) could be one of the most disingenuous things you have posted here in the last few weeks. And that is really saying something.I felt the same about Clinton, Bush and Obama; each was a liar IMHO, Clinton may have been some of the other stuff, who knows about Obama....fortunately none of that mattered since outcomes are the only thing that matters.
not worth it.This statement may need some additional reflection and explanation. Pretty sure you don't really mean this...
You equating Trump to Obama (especially in response to the list of traits I just listed out) could be one of the most disingenuous things you have posted here in the last few weeks. And that is really saying something.
At this point, the better question is, who would want the job?
I too have been musing lately about the unexplored complexities of Congresswoman Greene and would appreciate hearing her thoughts on some of the critical issues of our time.
This statement may need some additional reflection and explanation. Pretty sure you don't really mean this...
"I will happily support a flawed leader who delivers positive outcomes." (Even if he and his followers possibly engaged in a coup to overturn the legitimate results of a democratic election, so he could stay in power)Sparky Big Time said:I do mean this. You see I have been around bad leadership and good leadership, all my life.
I know that all leaders are flawed, and that does not stop them from being a good leader. And it is folly to discard someone because of their flaws when their ability to deliver outcomes is tangible.
Outcomes matter. I will happily support a flawed leader who delivers positive outcomes. The nicest guy who harms us, is not what we want; in this case Biden.
I stand by this.
I think perhaps the volume and deleterious effects of the flaws should be taken into account, no? All flaws are not equal, but you are not acknowledging that.Sparky Big Time said:I do mean this. You see I have been around bad leadership and good leadership, all my life.
I know that all leaders are flawed, and that does not stop them from being a good leader. And it is folly to discard someone because of their flaws when their ability to deliver outcomes is tangible.
Outcomes matter. I will happily support a flawed leader who delivers positive outcomes. The nicest guy who harms us, is not what we want; in this case Biden.
I stand by this.
I think perhaps the volume and deleterious effects of the flaws should be taken into account, no? All flaws are not equal, but you are not acknowledging that.
"I will happily support a flawed leader who delivers positive outcomes." (Even if he and his followers possibly engaged in a coup to overturn the legitimate results of a democratic election, so he could stay in power)
I'm not talking about how we 'feel' about the 'leadership.' As @lazyike pointed out, the Jan. 6th incident was a direct, highly undesirable outcome made possible by flawed leadership. I will gladly take some policy-driven poor outcomes over that.What are the outcomes of the leadership? I do not consider time spent debating the person as contributing to outcomes.
Whether the person is "good" or "bad" will vary depending on the bias of the individual making that assessment.
It is what happens that matters, not how we feel about the person making it happen.