Phatbob said:

---

richardag said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

richardag said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

This is a perfect example of exactly how Trump is destroying conservatism in the Republican party.

---

Are you looking in a mirror?

---

Amazing the support "So get on board or STFU" gets. There is no room to point out he is a big government liberal when the rubber hits the road. That is Trumpism, that is the cancer in the party.

---

Apparently you have not read the responses people defending President Trump have made regarding how they disagreed with his spending during COVID.
Also many defending President Trump disagreed with his relenting on the government shut down.
Using stupid labels as "Trumpism" is childish and nonproductive. Resorting to childish labels in debate generally you have no real arguments.

---

Trumpism is a thing. It is what is becoming of the Republican party. Think of it as the opposite of TDS.

It isn't conservatism, it isn't liberalism, it is only based on 1 standard, which is to support whatever it is that Trump did or is doing currently regardless of any other standards.

The "get on board or you are supporting Biden" bit is Trumpism. The "we only have 2 options, so saying anything against him can't be allowed" is exactly that... Trumpism.

I get it, Biden is awful and he needs to be out, but that's not enough. As long as our standards are "he's not Biden" then we not just accept, but endorse and push different versions of the problem that are just as bad, just with a different label. If you can't handle any sort of push back against your guy, not your positions, but your guy, then YOU have no real arguments, and that is the point.

---

Quote:

---

The "get on board or you are supporting Biden" bit is Trumpism. The "we only have 2 options, so saying anything against him can't be allowed"

---

I don't disagree that there are Trump sycophants, but not all of us who are pushing for support, support him blindly. To your statement above, unfortunately we are at the point where we only have 2 options with a legitimate shot of being elected: Trump or Biden. If you are typically a republican voter and don't vote for Trump this next cycle, it is a net gain for Biden. You represent a republican voter sitting out this cycle.

Everybody has to make their own choices, but it is critical someone not named Biden win this next cycle....and as it is, that is Trump. I had to pull the lever for McCain....had to do the same for Romney....and then had to do the same for Trump in 2016 although there were more conservative options who didn't get the nomination.

We need to stop the Biden train. Even if it means you don't get my ideal/perfect candidate, it has to happen. Trump has his hardcore cult-like followers just as Obama did. There are also a large group of folks that don't care for the man or his behavior who can get behind a majority of the things he accomplished and call him out for the bad things. Every vote is needed.

Quote:

---

I don't disagree that there are Trump sycophants, but not all of us who are pushing for support, support him blindly.

---

And not all are demanding fealty to Trump... but a vocal and not insignificant block are... and they are the ones who are taking over the Republican party.

Quote:

---

If you are typically a republican voter and don't vote for Trump this next cycle, it is a net gain for Biden. You represent a republican voter sitting out this cycle.

---

I typically vote for Republicans, but I am not a Republican voter. I am a conservative voter. I will vote for a leader who I think will be conservative, that will push for smaller government and more freedom (not as compared to the other guy, but actually smaller government and actually more freedom). If neither of them qualify, neither of them get my vote. If the Republican party no longer represents conservatism, then it no longer represents my interests, just like the Democrat party, or the Green party, or the Socialist party, etc. Participating in a false dichotomy is legitimizing the false dichotomy.

Quote:

---

It isn't conservatism, it isn't liberalism, it is only based on 1 standard, which is to support whatever it is that Trump did or is doing currently regardless of any other standards.

---

LOL, no.

Here is what "it" is. IDGAF what anyone names it.
1. Lower Taxes
2. Energy Independence
3. Strong Foreign Policy
4. No new wars
5. Jobs here in the US
6. Strong Economy
7. Strong Border Wall / Security

Pretty much what is in the best interest of Americans.

And, while most "conservatives" (LMAO) SAY are for these principles (until it comes time to vote) "it" REQUIRES all politicians that get their vote to ACTUALLY STAND FOR THEM.

Quote:

---

Everybody has to make their own choices, but it is critical someone not named Biden win this next cycle....and as it is, that is Trump. I had to pull the lever for McCain....had to do the same for Romney....and then had to do the same for Trump in 2016 although there were more conservative options who didn't get the nomination.

---

Rove had numbers for both the 2008 and 2012 elections wherein he posited that between 3-4 millon Republicans stayed home.

Trump won in 2016 by finding and targeting those disaffected voters. This cycle they are getting them to apply for mail in ballots.

Quote:

---

n eight-figure campaign to target traditionally reluctant Republicans to vote by mail is beginning to bear "early fruits," the head of one of three conservative groups leading the key swing state effort tells The Federalist.

And the get-out-the-vote initiative is soon to expand into two other states featuring pivotal Senate races.

---

Quote:

---

Last month, the Sentinel Action Fund, the Republican State Leadership Committee PAC, and the Keystone Renewal PAC announced the "historic" investment to put Republicans in a position to win in November by doing what Democrats have historically done so well: use voting by mail to harvest victory.

"It's going very well. We are starting to see the early fruits of our labor," Jessica Anderson, president of the Sentinel Action Fund, told The Federalist in an interview.

Sentinel bills itself as "the only conservative Super PAC with a year-round ground game committed to turning out absentee, early vote, and 'day of' voters."

And the group is hitting the ground running. Anderson said the GOTV effort has sent out multiple rounds of mailers and has hit Pennsylvania's airwaves with digital ads to go after about 1.2 million low-propensity voters in the Keystone State eligible voters who infrequently participate in elections. The campaign is targeting Republicans who have only voted once or twice in the last four election cycles, Anderson said.

"Those voters are key for us [in the presidential election] and for David McCormick winning Pennsylvania," Anderson said.

---

Quote:

---

Anderson said the GOTV campaign has brought into the fold some 40,000 low-propensity Republican voters who have joined the absentee voter list, according to their internal models of proprietary elections data. She also asserted that a total of 236,000 Republican voters had requested absentee ballots for the April 23 primary, an increase of more than 36,000 requests from the 2022 state primary.

---

LINK

Quote:

---

Participating in a false dichotomy

---

For clarity, are you saying the "false dichotomy" in this conversation is someone stating a typically conservative voter not voting for Trump this cycle is helping Biden?

8. Spent more than Obama did in his 8 years but in only 4.
9. Made the printers go "Bbbbrrrrr".
10. Terrihorribad COVID response.

All of which helped lead us where the economy is now, along with Biden turning it to 11.

No thanks, I don't vote for liberals but you do you.

We fixed the keg said:

---

Quote:

---

Participating in a false dichotomy

---

For clarity, are you saying the "false dichotomy" in this conversation is someone stating a typically conservative voter not voting for Trump this cycle is helping Biden?

---

A conservative voter wouldn't vote for either Biden nor Trump. They're both liberals.

The idea that not voting or voting 3rd party helps either ****tard in the Uniparty is based faulty math/logic.

We fixed the keg said:

---

Quote:

---

Participating in a false dichotomy

---

For clarity, are you saying the "false dichotomy" in this conversation is someone stating a typically conservative voter not voting for Trump this cycle is helping Biden?

---

The false dichotomy is you can only vote "against the bad" or not, and that not voting "against the bad", is just like being "for the bad". It's a simplistic take. Voting for neither, but voting for conservatives down ballot says more than just voting for the less worst of the two.

BigRobSA said:

---

8. Spent more than Obama did in his 8 years but in only 4.
9. Made the printers go "Bbbbrrrrr".
10. Terrihorribad COVID response.

All of which helped lead us where the economy is now, along with Biden turning it to 11.

No thanks, I don't vote for liberals but you do you.

---

LOL, COVID response.
1. Wharp speed for the vax FOR THOSE THAT NEEDED IT.
2. Shut down immigration into the country.

I know the TDS like to blame shutting everything down on Trump, but those were local governors that did that.

You can screem REEEEEE about handing money to both businesses and individuals due to their livelihoods being taken away by local governors. No problem there. If that's your only beef, then you will NEVER find a conservative again.

Remember, Reagan also spent like a drunken sailor on the military complex. He tripled the national debt during his tenure. He also allowed amnesty for illegals without fixing the border. So, if you don't like BRRRRRRR, you must hate Reagan.

Reagan also gave illegals amnesty without protecting the border. Total opposite of Trump.

IMO, those two are way worse than bailing out the country due to local govenors shutting down their states.

So, you again are proving you think Reagan was a huge lib.

TexAgs91 said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

rgag12 said:

---

Would be a bonehead move by DeSantis.

---

If DeSantis isn't VP, he's either on his way to congress or he's on his way to obscurity. He might have one more failed presidential run in him. But if he's VP, he'll have much more credibility with the rest of the country.

---

As of now there is no successor to Trump and it's a fresh game in '28. %A0If you think Trump having Vivek or Abbott as his VP clears the field I couldn't disagree more.

DeSantis has an insane record and work ethic. %A0He has a solid base of support. %A0Not saying he is the presumptive nominee but he's the likely front runner.

---

Judging by his performance during the campaign season you really think the rest of the country sees it that way?

---

K. %A0So who else is the Frontrunner for '28? %A0Haley? %A0She has zero chance as 70% of the Party hates her. %A0Vivek? %A0He may make a run and if he is VP under Trump that would certainly help him but as of now I don't see how he is a Frontrunner in any way. %A0Who else, Abbott? %A0Don Jr? %A0lol.

Trump's VP will run most likely of course but as I said the Trump magic doesn't transfer and we have seen that over and over. %A0Sure, some hardcore MAGA folks will follow whatever Trump says but that's not the main Trump support and there is a large contingent that is ready for the next chapter.

So who is the Frontrunner if it isn't DeSantis?

---

Depends on who Trump's VP is, assuming the VP does a better job than Pence.

---

So you don't have a name then and even by saying it is "VP to be names" you have to put conditions on it. %A0Like I said DeSantis is the "likely Frontrunner". %A0He was the 2nd Choice in virtually all polling. %A0He can fundraise and organize extremely well. %A0He's a top notch debater. %A0He has a list of conservative W's so long it bores people to hear them. %A0He also has very low negatives and few people, esp in the GOP, hate him. %A0He can also keep kicking ass in Florida for the next 2 years and has become adept at getting publicity. %A0If Trump loses? %A0I honestly don't know who beats him.

Doesn't mean he will be the nominee or win but I don't see anyone else out there with that much going for them. %A0I agree if Trump appoints a strong VP who does great they will certainly be a solid candidate. %A0Just have no idea who that is or if that happens. %A0Thus DeSantis is "The likely Frontrunner"

---

You'll get no argument from me that DeSantis is the better choice. We know that. What I don't get is how you could have paid attention to his campaign and still say it's a given that he will be the front runner.

And yes, of course after I said that being VP would bolster DeSantis's, I'm putting conditions on who the VP is.

---

Ok, so who is the frontrunner in '28 not named DeSantis then? %A0"Trump's VP" is not a real answer. %A0Give me a name.

---

So you're saying that who the GOP nominee is in 2028 depends solely on what has happened up to this point and that the VP has no bearing on that?

That's your fantasy, not mine. I already gave you my answer.

---

So your argument is that Trump's VP, no matter who it is, will be the Frontrunner then? %A0Oh, and I am the one who is fantasizing.

---

I'm arguing Trump's VP would definitely have an advantage. And yes. You are living in fantasy world if refuse to factor that in.

---

I said DeSantis is the likely Front Runner. %A0You still haven't named anyone else but you have said that thinking DeSantis is the Front Runner is "fantasyland".

---

Stop telling me what you think I said and just quote where I said that.

I'm not jumping though any of your other hoops until you can at least be honest about what is being said.

---

I acknowledge that whomever is the VP for Trump will benefit from that. I also don't think that simply being Trump's VP makes you the frontrunner. Trump is anything but conventional and his popularity doesn't transfer well.

You are doing some pretty good pretzel twisting to avoid giving a name though. I simply don't see anyone who has a stronger case than DeSantis to be the Frontrunner at this point in '28 but if you have another name that's worth discussing.%A0 If you think it will simply be whomever is Trump's VP that is also worth discussing.%A0 It seems you don't want to do either of those things though and are trying to find some way to say I am misstating what you said. Ok. So who is the Frontrunner or why is it not DeSantis? You either have a name or it is simply "Whomever is Trump's VP". Which is it?

You convinced me, I won't vote for Reagan, either.

BigRobSA said:

---

You convinced me, I won't vote for Reagan, either.

---

Here is another hint. You won't ever vote for what is your definition of "conservative".

Science Denier said:

---

BigRobSA said:

---

You convinced me, I won't vote for Reagan, either.

---

Here is another hint. You won't ever vote for what is your definition of "conservative".

---

BS, I have in the past and will write in Desantis this time.

The peanuts in his crap have more conservative bona fides than all of Ozempic Don's liberal body.

BigRobSA said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

BigRobSA said:

---

You convinced me, I won't vote for Reagan, either.

---

Here is another hint. You won't ever vote for what is your definition of "conservative".

---

BS, I have in the past and will write in Desantis this time.

The peanuts in his crap have more conservative bona fides than all of Ozempic Don's liberal body.

---

Needs another star.

As it currently stands, either Biden or Trump will be president next year.

With Biden I get nothing I want for myself and my family.

With Trump I get a lot of things I want for myself and my family.

Maybe I am just a simpleton. But it's like dinner choices when you're hungry.

Option 1: Salad (but I hate salad)
Option 2: Cheeseburger (burgers are ok but I really wanted a ribeye)

Wife: I'm making myself a salad and burgers for the kids, ribeye is not on the menu

Me: Then I just won't eat! (again it's simplistic but I really believe it's the mistake a lot of conservatives will make, again). I don't like it either but I'm hungry and will eat the burger and hope I can get the ribeye on the menu next time.

Reagan also raised taxes when original growth projections missed

BigRobSA said:

---

richardag said:

---

Resorting to childish labels in debate generally you have no real arguments.

---

You take this attack on Trump back, Mister Falcon!!

---

Well said.
I like most people who defend President Trump regarding spurious attacks, admit whole heartedly that President Trump uses ridiculous attacks on social media and political rallies.
President Trump's personality will not allow him to restrain himself.

Quote:

---

The false dichotomy is you can only vote "against the bad" or not, and that not voting "against the bad", is just like being "for the bad". It's a simplistic take. Voting for neither, but voting for conservatives down ballot says more than just voting for the less worst of the two.

---

Then this is where we disagree. What you call a "false dichotomy" I call current reality. Now, if you truly believe Trump and his policies are just as bad as Biden's, then you are correct. What tips the scales is; however, quite a few of Trump's policies were FAR better than anything Biden has done, and it isn't close enough to say they are equally bad.

Furthermore, since the last election was very close in key swing states and I expect the same to be the case this cycle as well. Conservatives choosing to vote 3rd party, or to "sit this one out", can absolutely tilt the election to Biden because we know Liberals are going to vote for Biden regardless of the current economy or his mental state.

I don't expect to convince you otherwise, and likewise, you won't convince me to not vote for Trump because he is not the embodiment of conservatism. I am fine with being ridiculed as a Trumper and assume you will be fine with the same as a never-trumper.

It's more like someone is offering you a choice between rat poison and antifreeze and deciding you're going to choose willingly to drink the antifreeze, cause it at least is sweeter.

Sorry, they're going to have to force feed me and maybe next time they'll wonder why I didn't choose one of them.

BigRobSA said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

BigRobSA said:

---

You convinced me, I won't vote for Reagan, either.

---

Here is another hint. You won't ever vote for what is your definition of "conservative".

---

BS, I have in the past and will write in Desantis this time.

The peanuts in his crap have more conservative bona fides than all of Ozempic Don's liberal body.

---

1. Ron said he'd support a 15 week ban on abortion. It's a state issue and should be a state issue. Very liberal of him.

2. Spending like a drunken sailor
Passed a record budget for Florida. $115 Billion.
Here is another one DeSantis announces in Jupiter a record $2.2 billion toward people with disabilities.

Quote:

---

"That is the highest amount ever appropriated in the history of Florida by a country mile,"

---

Oops. Huge lib, right?

"faulty math"

Dems won the popular vote by 2.1% in 2016 and lost then won by 4.5% of the popular vote in 2020 and won. So a 2.4% swing in the popular vote was all it took to change the outcome. It isn't going to take that many conservative voters sitting this one out, or voting 3rd party to ensure another 4 years of Biden. My only hope is that enough independents are sick of the last 3 years to cover that gap an additional 3% in November.

Phatbob said:

---

richardag said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

richardag said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

This is a perfect example of exactly how Trump is destroying conservatism in the Republican party.

---

Are you looking in a mirror?

---

Amazing the support "So get on board or STFU" gets. There is no room to point out he is a big government liberal when the rubber hits the road. That is Trumpism, that is the cancer in the party.

---

Apparently you have not read the responses people defending President Trump have made regarding how they disagreed with his spending during COVID.
Also many defending President Trump disagreed with his relenting on the government shut down.
Using stupid labels as "Trumpism" is childish and nonproductive. Resorting to childish labels in debate generally you have no real arguments.

---

Trumpism is a thing. It is what is becoming of the Republican party. Think of it as the opposite of TDS.

It isn't conservatism, it isn't liberalism, it is only based on 1 standard, which is to support whatever it is that Trump did or is doing currently regardless of any other standards.

The "get on board or you are supporting Biden" bit is Trumpism. The "we only have 2 options, so saying anything against him can't be allowed" is exactly that... Trumpism.

I get it, Biden is awful and he needs to be out, but that's not enough. As long as our standards are "he's not Biden" then we not just accept, but endorse and push different versions of the problem that are just as bad, just with a different label. If you can't handle any sort of push back against your guy, not your positions, but your guy, then YOU have no real arguments, and that is the point.

---

Me? I and others have complained concerning many aspects of President Trump's policies, mostly regarding his spendthrift attitude and his failure to rid the government of the services of Fauci & Birx.

The "get on board or you support President Biden" comment is misinterpreted by you, the intent of that comment is to point out the constant *****ing about those President Trump policies you disagree with or his acerbic behavior only helps others justify wasting their votes on third party candidates with no shot at winning or not voting.

The end result could be the re-election of possibly the worst President in the history of our country.

We fixed the keg said:

---

Quote:

---

The false dichotomy is you can only vote "against the bad" or not, and that not voting "against the bad", is just like being "for the bad". It's a simplistic take. Voting for neither, but voting for conservatives down ballot says more than just voting for the less worst of the two.

---

Then this is where we disagree. What you call a "false dichotomy" I call current reality. Now, if you truly believe Trump and his policies are just as bad as Biden's, then you are correct. What tips the scales is; however, quite a few of Trump's policies were FAR better than anything Biden has done, and it isn't close enough to say they are equally bad.

Furthermore, since the last election was very close in key swing states and I expect the same to be the case this cycle as well. Conservatives choosing to vote 3rd party, or to "sit this one out", can absolutely tilt the election to Biden because we know Liberals are going to vote for Biden regardless of the current economy or his mental state.

I don't expect to convince you otherwise, and likewise, you won't convince me to not vote for Trump because he is not the embodiment of conservatism. I am fine with being ridiculed as a Trumper and assume you will be fine with the same as a never-trumper.

---

I do understand your position, and I respect that. I have voted for plenty of politicians that weren't all that conservative with the understanding that it was better than the alternative. This time, there is a difference. Trump is not just "not conservative", but he is rooting out and actively replacing conservatism in the only place where it used to live. That, to me, is at least as bad long term for the country as a second Biden administration.

But reasonable people can still come to different conclusions. But again, that is not really allowed as part of Trumpism.

Quote:

---

This time, there is a difference. Trump is not just "not conservative", but he is rooting out and actively replacing conservatism in the only place where it used to live.

---

Can you expand on this part? Genuinely curious.

From the perspective of the economy, energy (green-initiatives), judicial appointments, foreign policy, immigration, and CRT/DEI, I don't see a world where another 4 years of Biden doesn't push us off an abyss leading to decades of austerity. With Trump, I see each of the above either turning around (energy/economy), or at least, greatly slowed down (immigration/CRT/DEI).

The biggest concern I have is that Biden can put us in a position where even a conservative candidate, say Desantis, is going to be a one-and-done president because the pain we will all feel doing what has to be done immediately. (at this point, that may be a reality anyway). I believe a president elected in 2028 with one or more of the list above turned around will have an easier path to fixing more of the problems.

Science Denier said:

---

Quote:

---

It isn't conservatism, it isn't liberalism, it is only based on 1 standard, which is to support whatever it is that Trump did or is doing currently regardless of any other standards.

---

LOL, no.

Here is what "it" is. IDGAF what anyone names it.
1. Lower Taxes
2. Energy Independence
3. Strong Foreign Policy
4. No new wars
5. Jobs here in the US
6. Strong Economy
7. Strong Border Wall / Security

Pretty much what is in the best interest of Americans.

And, while most "conservatives" (LMAO) SAY are for these principles (until it comes time to vote) "it" REQUIRES all politicians that get their vote to ACTUALLY STAND FOR THEM.

---

1. Lower Taxes
2. Energy Independence
3. Strong Foreign Policy
4. No new wars
5. Jobs here in the US
6. Strong Economy
7. Strong Border Wall / Security

Agreed. This are all conservative policies including;
8. Reduction in regulations eliminated 8 old regulations for every 1 new regulation adopted.

ETA:
9. Deferred to states authority during the BLM riots.
10. Deferred to the states authority regarding COVID restrictions.

Science Denier said:

---

BigRobSA said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

BigRobSA said:

---

You convinced me, I won't vote for Reagan, either.

---

Here is another hint. You won't ever vote for what is your definition of "conservative".

---

BS, I have in the past and will write in Desantis this time.

The peanuts in his crap have more conservative bona fides than all of Ozempic Don's liberal body.

---

1. Ron said he'd support a 15 week ban on abortion. It's a state issue and should be a state issue. Very liberal of him.

2. Spending like a drunken sailor
Passed a record budget for Florida. $115 Billion.
Here is another one DeSantis announces in Jupiter a record $2.2 billion toward people with disabilities.

Quote:

---

"That is the highest amount ever appropriated in the history of Florida by a country mile,"

---

Oops. Huge lib, right?

---

Actually Ron never said he wanted abortion as a national issue. The closest he came to that was saying he wouldn't veto laws limiting abortion but of course they won't pass without his strong support (and even then likely wouldn't).

Florida runs massive surpluses and has been paying down their debt, it is almost gone completely and they have a monster rainy day fund. When you have more people move to a state though you spend more money because you have more services to provide and have more tax revenue. DeSantis has instituted massive tax cut after massive tax cut though.

Spending on services like those for the disabled is a state issue. Not sure why you think that's an own. He spends money on things people want but he runs surpluses and has low taxes. That's conservatism.

That is a very salient point to make about Trumpism is doing to conservatism. I agree that long term it's problematic.

But I am damn near a single issue voter at this point as it pertains to the border and immigration and what this country will be in 20 years when my sons are in their 30's. Real conservative values and policies probably won't mean much when we're Brazil 2.0.

Quote:

---

Spending on services like those for the disabled is a state issue. Not sure why you think that's an own. He spends money on things people want but he runs surpluses and has low taxes. That's conservatism.

---

Not an own, or a gotcha. According to the OP, spending is spending and it's a huge lib thing. Doesn't matter if its on disabled or those throw out of work or businesses forced to close do to local governors. Spending is spending and that's only done by huge libs like Trump and Reagan. According to him.

Science Denier said:

---

BigRobSA said:

---

8. Spent more than Obama did in his 8 years but in only 4.
9. Made the printers go "Bbbbrrrrr".
10. Terrihorribad COVID response.

All of which helped lead us where the economy is now, along with Biden turning it to 11.

No thanks, I don't vote for liberals but you do you.

---

LOL, COVID response.
1. Wharp speed for the vax FOR THOSE THAT NEEDED IT.
2. Shut down immigration into the country.

I know the TDS like to blame shutting everything down on Trump, but those were local governors that did that.

You can screem REEEEEE about handing money to both businesses and individuals due to their livelihoods being taken away by local governors. No problem there. If that's your only beef, then you will NEVER find a conservative again.

Remember, Reagan also spent like a drunken sailor on the military complex. He tripled the national debt during his tenure. He also allowed amnesty for illegals without fixing the border. So, if you don't like BRRRRRRR, you must hate Reagan.

Reagan also gave illegals amnesty without protecting the border. Total opposite of Trump.

IMO, those two are way worse than bailing out the country due to local govenors shutting down their states.

So, you again are proving you think Reagan was a huge lib.

---

The more you post. The worse you make Trump and his supporters look. You are literally frothing rabid foam all over this thread.

If you would stick to making points about Trump's successes and stop babbling about all that other over the top cornball stuff you might make a difference.

ttu_85 said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

BigRobSA said:

---

8. Spent more than Obama did in his 8 years but in only 4.
9. Made the printers go "Bbbbrrrrr".
10. Terrihorribad COVID response.

All of which helped lead us where the economy is now, along with Biden turning it to 11.

No thanks, I don't vote for liberals but you do you.

---

LOL, COVID response.
1. Wharp speed for the vax FOR THOSE THAT NEEDED IT.
2. Shut down immigration into the country.

I know the TDS like to blame shutting everything down on Trump, but those were local governors that did that.

You can screem REEEEEE about handing money to both businesses and individuals due to their livelihoods being taken away by local governors. No problem there. If that's your only beef, then you will NEVER find a conservative again.

Remember, Reagan also spent like a drunken sailor on the military complex. He tripled the national debt during his tenure. He also allowed amnesty for illegals without fixing the border. So, if you don't like BRRRRRRR, you must hate Reagan.

Reagan also gave illegals amnesty without protecting the border. Total opposite of Trump.

IMO, those two are way worse than bailing out the country due to local govenors shutting down their states.

So, you again are proving you think Reagan was a huge lib.

---

The more you post. The worse you make Trump and his supporters look. You are literally frothing rabid foam all over this thread.

If you would stick to making points about Trump's successes and stop babbling about all that other over the top cornball stuff you might make a difference.

---

LOL, frothing mad? No, my point is that some have such a strange grip on what is a conservative, they will never see it. Not one candidate will be perfect, even DeSantis.

I am a Vivek Ramaswamy supporter, but at this point, I just want Trump/whoever to win. DeSantis? Fine. I got nothing against him.

Let's kick out Biden.

Science Denier said:

---

Quote:

---

Spending on services like those for the disabled is a state issue. Not sure why you think that's an own. He spends money on things people want but he runs surpluses and has low taxes. That's conservatism.

---

Not an own, or a gotcha. According to the OP, spending is spending and it's a huge lib thing. Doesn't matter if its on disabled or those throw out of work or businesses forced to close do to local governors. Spending is spending and that's only done by huge libs like Trump and Reagan. According to him.

---

I didn't see him mention State vs Federal, that sounds like your assumption. The definition of conservatism is low taxes and budget surpluses. Keep reaching though. DeSantis also spends a ton of money on the Everglades and other issues in Florida that benefit the public, he just does it very efficiently and within budget.

aggie93 said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

aggie93 said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

rgag12 said:

---

Would be a bonehead move by DeSantis.

---

If DeSantis isn't VP, he's either on his way to congress or he's on his way to obscurity. He might have one more failed presidential run in him. But if he's VP, he'll have much more credibility with the rest of the country.

---

As of now there is no successor to Trump and it's a fresh game in '28. %A0If you think Trump having Vivek or Abbott as his VP clears the field I couldn't disagree more.

DeSantis has an insane record and work ethic. %A0He has a solid base of support. %A0Not saying he is the presumptive nominee but he's the likely front runner.

---

Judging by his performance during the campaign season you really think the rest of the country sees it that way?

---

K. %A0So who else is the Frontrunner for '28? %A0Haley? %A0She has zero chance as 70% of the Party hates her. %A0Vivek? %A0He may make a run and if he is VP under Trump that would certainly help him but as of now I don't see how he is a Frontrunner in any way. %A0Who else, Abbott? %A0Don Jr? %A0lol.

Trump's VP will run most likely of course but as I said the Trump magic doesn't transfer and we have seen that over and over. %A0Sure, some hardcore MAGA folks will follow whatever Trump says but that's not the main Trump support and there is a large contingent that is ready for the next chapter.

So who is the Frontrunner if it isn't DeSantis?

---

Depends on who Trump's VP is, assuming the VP does a better job than Pence.

---

So you don't have a name then and even by saying it is "VP to be names" you have to put conditions on it. %A0Like I said DeSantis is the "likely Frontrunner". %A0He was the 2nd Choice in virtually all polling. %A0He can fundraise and organize extremely well. %A0He's a top notch debater. %A0He has a list of conservative W's so long it bores people to hear them. %A0He also has very low negatives and few people, esp in the GOP, hate him. %A0He can also keep kicking ass in Florida for the next 2 years and has become adept at getting publicity. %A0If Trump loses? %A0I honestly don't know who beats him.

Doesn't mean he will be the nominee or win but I don't see anyone else out there with that much going for them. %A0I agree if Trump appoints a strong VP who does great they will certainly be a solid candidate. %A0Just have no idea who that is or if that happens. %A0Thus DeSantis is "The likely Frontrunner"

---

You'll get no argument from me that DeSantis is the better choice. We know that. What I don't get is how you could have paid attention to his campaign and still say it's a given that he will be the front runner.

And yes, of course after I said that being VP would bolster DeSantis's, I'm putting conditions on who the VP is.

---

Ok, so who is the frontrunner in '28 not named DeSantis then? %A0"Trump's VP" is not a real answer. %A0Give me a name.

---

So you're saying that who the GOP nominee is in 2028 depends solely on what has happened up to this point and that the VP has no bearing on that?

That's your fantasy, not mine. I already gave you my answer.

---

So your argument is that Trump's VP, no matter who it is, will be the Frontrunner then? %A0Oh, and I am the one who is fantasizing.

---

I'm arguing Trump's VP would definitely have an advantage. And yes. You are living in fantasy world if refuse to factor that in.

---

I said DeSantis is the likely Front Runner. %A0You still haven't named anyone else but you have said that thinking DeSantis is the Front Runner is "fantasyland".

---

Stop telling me what you think I said and just quote where I said that.

I'm not jumping though any of your other hoops until you can at least be honest about what is being said.

---

I acknowledge that whomever is the VP for Trump will benefit from that. I also don't think that simply being Trump's VP makes you the frontrunner. Trump is anything but conventional and his popularity doesn't transfer well.

You are doing some pretty good pretzel twisting to avoid giving a name though. I simply don't see anyone who has a stronger case than DeSantis to be the Frontrunner at this point in '28 but if you have another name that's worth discussing.%A0 If you think it will simply be whomever is Trump's VP that is also worth discussing.%A0 It seems you don't want to do either of those things though and are trying to find some way to say I am misstating what you said. Ok. So who is the Frontrunner or why is it not DeSantis? You either have a name or it is simply "Whomever is Trump's VP". Which is it?

---

link

Quote:

---

You'll get no argument from me that DeSantis is the better choice. We know that. What I don't get is how you could have paid attention to his campaign and still say it's a given that he will be the front runner.

And yes, of course after I said that being VP would bolster DeSantis's, I'm putting conditions on who the VP is.

---

And if I have wrongly accused you of misstating what I said, show the quote where I said "thinking DeSantis is the Front Runner is "fantasyland"".

I'll wait