Vivek Ramaswamy Presidential candidate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This guy is mowing down every interviewer he takes on. Laura Coates did a decent job, but even she could not withstand his force of intellect.

Lol. Talking quickly is not the same thing as “force of intellect”. If you disagree, please cite or link to a few comments or papers from Ramaswamy that you think clearly highlight his “force of intellect” — so the ready of us can be appropriately dazzled.

[Anonymous]

Love this guy. I think he may have a career at some point if he survives the inevitable vetting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This guy is mowing down every interviewer he takes on. Laura Coates did a decent job, but even she could not withstand his force of intellect.

Lol. Talking quickly is not the same thing as “force of intellect”. If you disagree, please cite or link to a few comments or papers from Ramaswamy that you think clearly highlight his “force of intellect” — so the ready of us can be appropriately dazzled.

Show me an interview where he in intellectually outmatched. Shouldn't be too hard if he is such a dummy, as people claim here.

Smh at you thinking "papers" are what demonstrate intellect. You might be the problem.

Some of his ideas are still wrong, but these interviewers are gonna have to work for their gotcha moments!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This guy is mowing down every interviewer he takes on. Laura Coates did a decent job, but even she could not withstand his force of intellect.

Lol. Talking quickly is not the same thing as “force of intellect”. If you disagree, please cite or link to a few comments or papers from Ramaswamy that you think clearly highlight his “force of intellect” — so the ready of us can be appropriately dazzled.

Show me an interview where he in intellectually outmatched. Shouldn't be too hard if he is such a dummy, as people claim here.

Smh at you thinking "papers" are what demonstrate intellect. You might be the problem.

Some of his ideas are still wrong, but these interviewers are gonna have to work for their gotcha moments!

Lol shake your head as much as you like. “Papers” can — like any form of communication— demonstrate intellect. So can speech. I — generously — gave you multiple options to use prove your completely unsupported point. Shifting the onus onto me to show you an interview doesn’t prove your point either. You seem to think that Ramaswamy exhibits some sort of “force of intellect” — yet you seem completely unable to support your point.

If this is your best — it’s sadly wanting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This guy is mowing down every interviewer he takes on. Laura Coates did a decent job, but even she could not withstand his force of intellect.

Lol. Talking quickly is not the same thing as “force of intellect”. If you disagree, please cite or link to a few comments or papers from Ramaswamy that you think clearly highlight his “force of intellect” — so the ready of us can be appropriately dazzled.

Show me an interview where he in intellectually outmatched. Shouldn't be too hard if he is such a dummy, as people claim here.

Smh at you thinking "papers" are what demonstrate intellect. You might be the problem.

Some of his ideas are still wrong, but these interviewers are gonna have to work for their gotcha moments!

Lol shake your head as much as you like. “Papers” can — like any form of communication— demonstrate intellect. So can speech. I — generously — gave you multiple options to use prove your completely unsupported point. Shifting the onus onto me to show you an interview doesn’t prove your point either. You seem to think that Ramaswamy exhibits some sort of “force of intellect” — yet you seem completely unable to support your point.

If this is your best — it’s sadly wanting.

You can — generously — watch any of his interviews and see that he is levels above his interlocutors. It's not that hard. Don't be lazy.

Just say you couldn't find an interview where he was intellectually outmatched and keep it moving. I can find several where this happens to Obama and you all act like he's a genius around here.

[Anonymous]

I wonder if any of the people singing his praises are the same ones who thought that Obama was too inexperienced to be president.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if any of the people singing his praises are the same ones who thought that Obama was too inexperienced to be president.

I think Vivek is also too inexperienced to be President, but he's smarter than Obama.

[Anonymous]

Great, another Republican businessman with no experience in government - didn't we learn from our last mistake?

And for those who think this makes him somehow better than an experienced politician, it doesn't. The functions of government and the politics behind it require an experienced hand to navigate; government doesn't operate like a corporation, nor should it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This guy is mowing down every interviewer he takes on. Laura Coates did a decent job, but even she could not withstand his force of intellect.

Lol. Talking quickly is not the same thing as “force of intellect”. If you disagree, please cite or link to a few comments or papers from Ramaswamy that you think clearly highlight his “force of intellect” — so the ready of us can be appropriately dazzled.

Show me an interview where he in intellectually outmatched. Shouldn't be too hard if he is such a dummy, as people claim here.

Smh at you thinking "papers" are what demonstrate intellect. You might be the problem.

Some of his ideas are still wrong, but these interviewers are gonna have to work for their gotcha moments!

Lol shake your head as much as you like. “Papers” can — like any form of communication— demonstrate intellect. So can speech. I — generously — gave you multiple options to use prove your completely unsupported point. Shifting the onus onto me to show you an interview doesn’t prove your point either. You seem to think that Ramaswamy exhibits some sort of “force of intellect” — yet you seem completely unable to support your point.

If this is your best — it’s sadly wanting.

You can — generously — watch any of his interviews and see that he is levels above his interlocutors. It's not that hard. Don't be lazy.

Just say you couldn't find an interview where he was intellectually outmatched and keep it moving. I can find several where this happens to Obama and you all act like he's a genius around here.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Great, another Republican businessman with no experience in government - didn't we learn from our last mistake?

And for those who think this makes him somehow better than an experienced politician, it doesn't. The functions of government and the politics behind it require an experienced hand to navigate; government doesn't operate like a corporation, nor should it.

While this is all true, it starts to fall on deaf ears when you get "experienced" duds like Biden in. The reason a Reality TV star like Trump and a longtime DC outsider, non-entity like Sanders surged in 2016 is because people got fed up with what "experience" was serving up for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Great, another Republican businessman with no experience in government - didn't we learn from our last mistake?

And for those who think this makes him somehow better than an experienced politician, it doesn't. The functions of government and the politics behind it require an experienced hand to navigate; government doesn't operate like a corporation, nor should it.

While this is all true, it starts to fall on deaf ears when you get "experienced" duds like Biden in. The reason a Reality TV star like Trump and a longtime DC outsider, non-entity like Sanders surged in 2016 is because people got fed up with what "experience" was serving up for them.

I don't see how anyone could objectively look at what Biden has accomplished - with an overtly hostile Congress, no less - and say he's been a "dud". Could he have done more? Maybe, and there are certainly some things I wish he had pursued more vigorously, but politics is the art of the possible, and with this Congress that's an impossibly narrow window.

Now consider how someone with *zero* experience would have absolutely floundered in such a toxic environment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Great, another Republican businessman with no experience in government - didn't we learn from our last mistake?

And for those who think this makes him somehow better than an experienced politician, it doesn't. The functions of government and the politics behind it require an experienced hand to navigate; government doesn't operate like a corporation, nor should it.

While this is all true, it starts to fall on deaf ears when you get "experienced" duds like Biden in. The reason a Reality TV star like Trump and a longtime DC outsider, non-entity like Sanders surged in 2016 is because people got fed up with what "experience" was serving up for them.

And then people saw what happens when you elect a dingbat with no experience and changed course

I've always said that Trump's election wasn't because people were angry or frustrated - it was because they were complacent and arrogant. They thought things were SO good that they could afford to risk it all - nothing would ever turn for the worse. Well, that's not how it went.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Great, another Republican businessman with no experience in government - didn't we learn from our last mistake?

And for those who think this makes him somehow better than an experienced politician, it doesn't. The functions of government and the politics behind it require an experienced hand to navigate; government doesn't operate like a corporation, nor should it.

While this is all true, it starts to fall on deaf ears when you get "experienced" duds like Biden in. The reason a Reality TV star like Trump and a longtime DC outsider, non-entity like Sanders surged in 2016 is because people got fed up with what "experience" was serving up for them.

I don't see how anyone could objectively look at what Biden has accomplished - with an overtly hostile Congress, no less - and say he's been a "dud". Could he have done more? Maybe, and there are certainly some things I wish he had pursued more vigorously, but politics is the art of the possible, and with this Congress that's an impossibly narrow window.

Now consider how someone with *zero* experience would have absolutely floundered in such a toxic environment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Great, another Republican businessman with no experience in government - didn't we learn from our last mistake?

And for those who think this makes him somehow better than an experienced politician, it doesn't. The functions of government and the politics behind it require an experienced hand to navigate; government doesn't operate like a corporation, nor should it.

While this is all true, it starts to fall on deaf ears when you get "experienced" duds like Biden in. The reason a Reality TV star like Trump and a longtime DC outsider, non-entity like Sanders surged in 2016 is because people got fed up with what "experience" was serving up for them.

I don't see how anyone could objectively look at what Biden has accomplished - with an overtly hostile Congress, no less - and say he's been a "dud". Could he have done more? Maybe, and there are certainly some things I wish he had pursued more vigorously, but politics is the art of the possible, and with this Congress that's an impossibly narrow window.

Now consider how someone with *zero* experience would have absolutely floundered in such a toxic environment.

Biden is a dud and will not be remembered at all. It's giving Gerald Ford. His physical presence and comportment are national embarrassments.

Can you imagine him marshaling the bully pulpit, one of the greatest tool's at a President's disposal, to set a national vision/tone and....you know, lead? No chance in heaven. He's a straight up dud.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Great, another Republican businessman with no experience in government - didn't we learn from our last mistake?

And for those who think this makes him somehow better than an experienced politician, it doesn't. The functions of government and the politics behind it require an experienced hand to navigate; government doesn't operate like a corporation, nor should it.

While this is all true, it starts to fall on deaf ears when you get "experienced" duds like Biden in. The reason a Reality TV star like Trump and a longtime DC outsider, non-entity like Sanders surged in 2016 is because people got fed up with what "experience" was serving up for them.

And then people saw what happens when you elect a dingbat with no experience and changed course

I've always said that Trump's election wasn't because people were angry or frustrated - it was because they were complacent and arrogant. They thought things were SO good that they could afford to risk it all - nothing would ever turn for the worse. Well, that's not how it went.

Can someone say out of touch? Project much?