Will Trump drop Vance?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I need to bring my kids’ birth certificates to be able to vote? DNA tests? WTAF.

Where did he make these remarks? Shame them for sharing their platform with a misogynist.

https://isi.org/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Was Trump on fox this morning? I want to see that interview ... anyone have a link?

found it

https://www.foxnews.com/media/trump-slams-bidens-terrible-oval-office-address-abrupt-exit-2024-race-coup

[Anonymous]

It would be so embarrassing for Trump to drop his young, healthy VP candidate that he was previously effusive about and vetted thoroughly.

It would open Trump to criticism that he has poor judgment, flip flops and has bad decision making and possibly cognitive decline.

He can't drop Vance. He has to stick with him or risk looking less like a leader.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone bothered to merely google the town he was actually raised in? It’s hardly some dire hellscape. It’s a perfectly normal and safe middle class suburb in Ohio. His mom was a straight A student and salutatorian on the high school. She became a nurse, his step-dad was a CDL truck driver, and the grandpa who allegedly helped raise him was a pensioned retired union rep.

Nothing about his bio is that bad. He’s a pathological lying worm.

Know a guy who grew up there. He described it as life-sucking boring and conforming. Banged up from deindustrialization, but not Appalachia.

I am skeptical of Vance, but his high school was 100% low income: https://www.greatschools.org/ohio/middletown/1124-Middletown-High-School/

Not was. Is now. You linked 2024. Now do 30 years ago. Also, a 91% grad rate isn’t awful for low income. But mostly— what was in in 1994?

NP, but really? You can’t extrapolate that a high school performing this poorly likely was never awesome. You wouldn’t put your kids here, not now or 20 yrs ago

I’ll agree it was never high performing. But, I’m inFCPS and have definitely seen individual schools change a lot in 10 years. 10 years ago, there was a civil war to keep kids out of Chantilly. Now it’s a top 6 or so school and people are desperately trying to move into the boundaries. SLHS has also made a jump up. Herndon has gone down. Things change. So no, I’m not accepting that a school was the same 30 years ago— especially a school I. An area with an opioid epidemic that lost a bunch of good jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I need to bring my kids’ birth certificates to be able to vote? DNA tests? WTAF.

Where did he make these remarks? Shame them for sharing their platform with a misogynist.

I'm not defending his stance, which is wrong.

But he is saying that all children should have a vote. (Presumably unborn fetuses too I guess?)

Since kids under 18 are still minors, their parents would vote for them.

So have 6 kids, parents get 6 votes. Now, which parent? Mom or dad? I guess he'd say dad...

What about kids of illegal immigrants, but kids who were born in the US? I wonder if he has really thought this through because he'd just magnify the immigrant/minority vote, wouldn't he?

This is really about boosting the voting power of Evangelical, Catholic, and Mormon families, who are the base of the GOP. There's nothing pro-life/natal about this. It is simply a ploy to increase their power vis-a-vis their dwindling support in the population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It would be so embarrassing for Trump to drop his young, healthy VP candidate that he was previously effusive about and vetted thoroughly.

It would open Trump to criticism that he has poor judgment, flip flops and has bad decision making and possibly cognitive decline.

He can't drop Vance. He has to stick with him or risk looking less like a leader.

Of course he can drop him. No one gets much time working with trump. He discards every single one sooner or later. Vance might be sooner. He can go hang with Mike pence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It would be so embarrassing for Trump to drop his young, healthy VP candidate that he was previously effusive about and vetted thoroughly.

It would open Trump to criticism that he has poor judgment, flip flops and has bad decision making and possibly cognitive decline.

He can't drop Vance. He has to stick with him or risk looking less like a leader.

Dumping him, he could position it as being more of a leader...you haven't performed to expectations, so you are fired.

(as no one else steps in to fill the void)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be so embarrassing for Trump to drop his young, healthy VP candidate that he was previously effusive about and vetted thoroughly.

It would open Trump to criticism that he has poor judgment, flip flops and has bad decision making and possibly cognitive decline.

He can't drop Vance. He has to stick with him or risk looking less like a leader.

Of course he can drop him. No one gets much time working with trump. He discards every single one sooner or later. Vance might be sooner. He can go hang with Mike pence.

There isn't a party mechanism to change at this point. But it would be an authoritarian flex.

[Anonymous]

If you agree to serve as Trump's VP you have poor judgement by definition. That should be enough reason to get rid of him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be so embarrassing for Trump to drop his young, healthy VP candidate that he was previously effusive about and vetted thoroughly.

It would open Trump to criticism that he has poor judgment, flip flops and has bad decision making and possibly cognitive decline.

He can't drop Vance. He has to stick with him or risk looking less like a leader.

Of course he can drop him. No one gets much time working with trump. He discards every single one sooner or later. Vance might be sooner. He can go hang with Mike pence.

There isn't a party mechanism to change at this point. But it would be an authoritarian flex.

How soon will ballots be printed? When does it have to be locked in to appear on state ballots? I imagine the decision needs to be made really soon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Had coffee with my grandparents this morning. They randomly said Vance was a mistake as VP. They wondered why Trump picked a wormy guy who spoke so viciously negative about him. When I asked my Vietnam war veteran grandfather what "public affairs" meant as far as Vance's military service, he rolled his eyes. My grandfather saw a lot of friends die in Vietnam, he doesn't have any respect for a nancy boy neocon like Vance itching to start wars with Iran and Russia.

I'm no fan of Vance or Trump, but isn't Vance's position that we should abandon Ukraine and just let Russia have it? I thought he was an isolationist who will just rollover for Putin and any other "strongman" dictator.

Putin won’t stop with Ukraine and will attack our NATO allies which starts a war with Russia.

+1. I mean— Poland, Finland, the Baltic states. Learn something from our mistakes in WW2. For several years Putin was “just the Crimea,” until he wasn’t. He absolutely will keep going after the Ukraine. Might as well stop him sooner rather than later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I need to bring my kids’ birth certificates to be able to vote? DNA tests? WTAF.

Where did he make these remarks? Shame them for sharing their platform with a misogynist.

I'm not defending his stance, which is wrong.

But he is saying that all children should have a vote. (Presumably unborn fetuses too I guess?)

Since kids under 18 are still minors, their parents would vote for them.

So have 6 kids, parents get 6 votes. Now, which parent? Mom or dad? I guess he'd say dad...

What about kids of illegal immigrants, but kids who were born in the US? I wonder if he has really thought this through because he'd just magnify the immigrant/minority vote, wouldn't he?

This is really about boosting the voting power of Evangelical, Catholic, and Mormon families, who are the base of the GOP. There's nothing pro-life/natal about this. It is simply a ploy to increase their power vis-a-vis their dwindling support in the population.

Catholics lean Democrat (44% v. 37% GOP).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be so embarrassing for Trump to drop his young, healthy VP candidate that he was previously effusive about and vetted thoroughly.

It would open Trump to criticism that he has poor judgment, flip flops and has bad decision making and possibly cognitive decline.

He can't drop Vance. He has to stick with him or risk looking less like a leader.

Of course he can drop him. No one gets much time working with trump. He discards every single one sooner or later. Vance might be sooner. He can go hang with Mike pence.

There isn't a party mechanism to change at this point. But it would be an authoritarian flex.

How soon will ballots be printed? When does it have to be locked in to appear on state ballots? I imagine the decision needs to be made really soon.

Probably not before the Democratic convention?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Non-parents can't vote? what kind of crap is that? And step parents don't count as parents?

The former wife of Kamala’s husband, Kerstin Emhoff, disagrees that step parents don’t count as parents.

Doug Emhoff's Ex-Wife Shreds GOP For Attacks on Kamala For Not Having Children
Kerstin Emhoff called Harris a "loving, nurturing, fiercely protective" stepmother

https://meidasnews.com/news/doug-emhoffs-ex-wife-shreds-gop-for-attacks-on-kamala-for-not-having-children

Kiersten Emerhoff is a class act.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I need to bring my kids’ birth certificates to be able to vote? DNA tests? WTAF.

Where did he make these remarks? Shame them for sharing their platform with a misogynist.

I'm not defending his stance, which is wrong.

But he is saying that all children should have a vote. (Presumably unborn fetuses too I guess?)

Since kids under 18 are still minors, their parents would vote for them.

So have 6 kids, parents get 6 votes. Now, which parent? Mom or dad? I guess he'd say dad...

What about kids of illegal immigrants, but kids who were born in the US? I wonder if he has really thought this through because he'd just magnify the immigrant/minority vote, wouldn't he?

This is really about boosting the voting power of Evangelical, Catholic, and Mormon families, who are the base of the GOP. There's nothing pro-life/natal about this. It is simply a ploy to increase their power vis-a-vis their dwindling support in the population.

Catholics lean Democrat (44% v. 37% GOP).

I'm referring to Opus Dei and similarly aligned Catholics.