Vivek Ramaswamy Presidential candidate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not a simple-minded fool, but a grifter targeting simple-minded fools. There is a big market for these dumbed-down greed, anger, and delusion narratives.

News flash...the vast majority of voters, regardless of party, are simple-minded fools that can't really be bothered with detailed Liz Warren style proposals. Targeting them is called campaigning. It isn't a dissertation defense.

He is saying stupid things. Very stupid things showing no understanding of any policy issues.

What stupid things? You know how many very stupid things were said on the campaign trail by both major-party candidates in 2020?

Not even sure what you're referring to, but he's not running to be Chief Policy Advisor of the U.S. You hire that crap out. He's running for President. All he needs right now is to set the tone, to hit on themes that resonate with people and traction to get on the debate state. He's trying to appeal to values and common sense, in a way that resonates. Leave the wonkery to DC types he can eventually hire if he gets enough traction to put a cute little "issues" page on his website and policy proposals that you can have fun eviscerating.

This dude is not a politician; not even sure he actually wants to be President. His campaign is in startup mode right now and things can look a little funky in the beginning stages of a startup, especially for an outsider without a name brand. Andrew Yang became relevant by 4 chan memes, random podcasts and some twitter exuberance. Vivek needs to find a similar path, because I don't think he's rich enough to just bankroll the whole thing like a Tom Steyer. He's already a little ahead in that regard, because Fox and others have been giving him airtime, but I don't think he has as fervent a fanbase as Yang did. Right now, he's just trying to get to the next milestone, for now more attention and visibility; eventually getting on debate stages.

Anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person. The President is head of the government. This narcissist knows nothing about government. He’s just a literate version of MTG. None of his points are even original. It’s the same stupid shit that the dumbest Republican have been saying for 40 years.

You yourself said eliminating the DOE is an old Republican talking point that has been adopted by many. Education also happens to be at the fore of people's minds, because it's becoming the battlefield for many cultural touch points which, you guessed it, generate buzz for a campaign. What else ya got?

Everyone who runs for President likely has narcissistic tendencies. What else ya got?

He is trying to harken and appeal back to what were once foundational, core American values that made the country great, so I'm not sure what originality has to do with anything. What else ya got?

I think you failed to respond to the main point from pp that “anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person.”

I tend to agree. He is just another populist feeding complete nonsense to the rubes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not a simple-minded fool, but a grifter targeting simple-minded fools. There is a big market for these dumbed-down greed, anger, and delusion narratives.

News flash...the vast majority of voters, regardless of party, are simple-minded fools that can't really be bothered with detailed Liz Warren style proposals. Targeting them is called campaigning. It isn't a dissertation defense.

He is saying stupid things. Very stupid things showing no understanding of any policy issues.

What stupid things? You know how many very stupid things were said on the campaign trail by both major-party candidates in 2020?

Not even sure what you're referring to, but he's not running to be Chief Policy Advisor of the U.S. You hire that crap out. He's running for President. All he needs right now is to set the tone, to hit on themes that resonate with people and traction to get on the debate state. He's trying to appeal to values and common sense, in a way that resonates. Leave the wonkery to DC types he can eventually hire if he gets enough traction to put a cute little "issues" page on his website and policy proposals that you can have fun eviscerating.

This dude is not a politician; not even sure he actually wants to be President. His campaign is in startup mode right now and things can look a little funky in the beginning stages of a startup, especially for an outsider without a name brand. Andrew Yang became relevant by 4 chan memes, random podcasts and some twitter exuberance. Vivek needs to find a similar path, because I don't think he's rich enough to just bankroll the whole thing like a Tom Steyer. He's already a little ahead in that regard, because Fox and others have been giving him airtime, but I don't think he has as fervent a fanbase as Yang did. Right now, he's just trying to get to the next milestone, for now more attention and visibility; eventually getting on debate stages.

Anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person. The President is head of the government. This narcissist knows nothing about government. He’s just a literate version of MTG. None of his points are even original. It’s the same stupid shit that the dumbest Republican have been saying for 40 years.

You yourself said eliminating the DOE is an old Republican talking point that has been adopted by many. Education also happens to be at the fore of people's minds, because it's becoming the battlefield for many cultural touch points which, you guessed it, generate buzz for a campaign. What else ya got?

Everyone who runs for President likely has narcissistic tendencies. What else ya got?

He is trying to harken and appeal back to what were once foundational, core American values that made the country great, so I'm not sure what originality has to do with anything. What else ya got?

I think you failed to respond to the main point from pp that “anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person.”

I tend to agree. He is just another populist feeding complete nonsense to the rubes.

The has been a longstanding Republican talking point, he's just applying it to modern-day pain points.

So just say you don't think Republicans are serious. We already knew you thought that though

He's not trying to appeal to DCUM.

https://www.cato.org/commentary/elimination-lost-what-happened-abolishing-department-education

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/romney-yes-ill-eliminate-whole-departments-but-i-wont-tell-you-which-ones/2012/03/26/gIQAAbIdcS_blog.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not a simple-minded fool, but a grifter targeting simple-minded fools. There is a big market for these dumbed-down greed, anger, and delusion narratives.

News flash...the vast majority of voters, regardless of party, are simple-minded fools that can't really be bothered with detailed Liz Warren style proposals. Targeting them is called campaigning. It isn't a dissertation defense.

He is saying stupid things. Very stupid things showing no understanding of any policy issues.

What stupid things? You know how many very stupid things were said on the campaign trail by both major-party candidates in 2020?

Not even sure what you're referring to, but he's not running to be Chief Policy Advisor of the U.S. You hire that crap out. He's running for President. All he needs right now is to set the tone, to hit on themes that resonate with people and traction to get on the debate state. He's trying to appeal to values and common sense, in a way that resonates. Leave the wonkery to DC types he can eventually hire if he gets enough traction to put a cute little "issues" page on his website and policy proposals that you can have fun eviscerating.

This dude is not a politician; not even sure he actually wants to be President. His campaign is in startup mode right now and things can look a little funky in the beginning stages of a startup, especially for an outsider without a name brand. Andrew Yang became relevant by 4 chan memes, random podcasts and some twitter exuberance. Vivek needs to find a similar path, because I don't think he's rich enough to just bankroll the whole thing like a Tom Steyer. He's already a little ahead in that regard, because Fox and others have been giving him airtime, but I don't think he has as fervent a fanbase as Yang did. Right now, he's just trying to get to the next milestone, for now more attention and visibility; eventually getting on debate stages.

Anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person. The President is head of the government. This narcissist knows nothing about government. He’s just a literate version of MTG. None of his points are even original. It’s the same stupid shit that the dumbest Republican have been saying for 40 years.

You yourself said eliminating the DOE is an old Republican talking point that has been adopted by many. Education also happens to be at the fore of people's minds, because it's becoming the battlefield for many cultural touch points which, you guessed it, generate buzz for a campaign. What else ya got?

Everyone who runs for President likely has narcissistic tendencies. What else ya got?

He is trying to harken and appeal back to what were once foundational, core American values that made the country great, so I'm not sure what originality has to do with anything. What else ya got?

I think you failed to respond to the main point from pp that “anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person.”

I tend to agree. He is just another populist feeding complete nonsense to the rubes.

The has been a longstanding Republican talking point, he's just applying it to modern-day pain points.

So just say you don't think Republicans are serious. We already knew you thought that though

He's not trying to appeal to DCUM.

https://www.cato.org/commentary/elimination-lost-what-happened-abolishing-department-education

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/romney-yes-ill-eliminate-whole-departments-but-i-wont-tell-you-which-ones/2012/03/26/gIQAAbIdcS_blog.html

It’s not even a debate that the vast majority of modern republicans are not serious people who make good faith arguments. You guys have expelled them all from your party! And now you want to whine about nobody taking you seriously?

Why would you spend so much time on DCUM if it is not your crowd?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not a simple-minded fool, but a grifter targeting simple-minded fools. There is a big market for these dumbed-down greed, anger, and delusion narratives.

News flash...the vast majority of voters, regardless of party, are simple-minded fools that can't really be bothered with detailed Liz Warren style proposals. Targeting them is called campaigning. It isn't a dissertation defense.

He is saying stupid things. Very stupid things showing no understanding of any policy issues.

What stupid things? You know how many very stupid things were said on the campaign trail by both major-party candidates in 2020?

Not even sure what you're referring to, but he's not running to be Chief Policy Advisor of the U.S. You hire that crap out. He's running for President. All he needs right now is to set the tone, to hit on themes that resonate with people and traction to get on the debate state. He's trying to appeal to values and common sense, in a way that resonates. Leave the wonkery to DC types he can eventually hire if he gets enough traction to put a cute little "issues" page on his website and policy proposals that you can have fun eviscerating.

This dude is not a politician; not even sure he actually wants to be President. His campaign is in startup mode right now and things can look a little funky in the beginning stages of a startup, especially for an outsider without a name brand. Andrew Yang became relevant by 4 chan memes, random podcasts and some twitter exuberance. Vivek needs to find a similar path, because I don't think he's rich enough to just bankroll the whole thing like a Tom Steyer. He's already a little ahead in that regard, because Fox and others have been giving him airtime, but I don't think he has as fervent a fanbase as Yang did. Right now, he's just trying to get to the next milestone, for now more attention and visibility; eventually getting on debate stages.

Anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person. The President is head of the government. This narcissist knows nothing about government. He’s just a literate version of MTG. None of his points are even original. It’s the same stupid shit that the dumbest Republican have been saying for 40 years.

You yourself said eliminating the DOE is an old Republican talking point that has been adopted by many. Education also happens to be at the fore of people's minds, because it's becoming the battlefield for many cultural touch points which, you guessed it, generate buzz for a campaign. What else ya got?

Everyone who runs for President likely has narcissistic tendencies. What else ya got?

He is trying to harken and appeal back to what were once foundational, core American values that made the country great, so I'm not sure what originality has to do with anything. What else ya got?

I think you failed to respond to the main point from pp that “anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person.”

I tend to agree. He is just another populist feeding complete nonsense to the rubes.

The has been a longstanding Republican talking point, he's just applying it to modern-day pain points.

So just say you don't think Republicans are serious. We already knew you thought that though

He's not trying to appeal to DCUM.

https://www.cato.org/commentary/elimination-lost-what-happened-abolishing-department-education

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/romney-yes-ill-eliminate-whole-departments-but-i-wont-tell-you-which-ones/2012/03/26/gIQAAbIdcS_blog.html

It’s not even a debate that the vast majority of modern republicans are not serious people who make good faith arguments. You guys have expelled them all from your party! And now you want to whine about nobody taking you seriously?

Why would you spend so much time on DCUM if it is not your crowd?

Do Reagan, Bush and Romney qualify as modern Republicans? Do we need to go back to the Civil War?

It's not the crowd Vivek is trying to appeal to. DCUM tends to center itself, which is a horrible proxy for the general populace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not a simple-minded fool, but a grifter targeting simple-minded fools. There is a big market for these dumbed-down greed, anger, and delusion narratives.

News flash...the vast majority of voters, regardless of party, are simple-minded fools that can't really be bothered with detailed Liz Warren style proposals. Targeting them is called campaigning. It isn't a dissertation defense.

He is saying stupid things. Very stupid things showing no understanding of any policy issues.

What stupid things? You know how many very stupid things were said on the campaign trail by both major-party candidates in 2020?

Not even sure what you're referring to, but he's not running to be Chief Policy Advisor of the U.S. You hire that crap out. He's running for President. All he needs right now is to set the tone, to hit on themes that resonate with people and traction to get on the debate state. He's trying to appeal to values and common sense, in a way that resonates. Leave the wonkery to DC types he can eventually hire if he gets enough traction to put a cute little "issues" page on his website and policy proposals that you can have fun eviscerating.

This dude is not a politician; not even sure he actually wants to be President. His campaign is in startup mode right now and things can look a little funky in the beginning stages of a startup, especially for an outsider without a name brand. Andrew Yang became relevant by 4 chan memes, random podcasts and some twitter exuberance. Vivek needs to find a similar path, because I don't think he's rich enough to just bankroll the whole thing like a Tom Steyer. He's already a little ahead in that regard, because Fox and others have been giving him airtime, but I don't think he has as fervent a fanbase as Yang did. Right now, he's just trying to get to the next milestone, for now more attention and visibility; eventually getting on debate stages.

Anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person. The President is head of the government. This narcissist knows nothing about government. He’s just a literate version of MTG. None of his points are even original. It’s the same stupid shit that the dumbest Republican have been saying for 40 years.

PP here and THANK YOU. 100% spot on. I am not impressed by Harvard or Yale anymore. Nor am I impressed that someone made a lot of money in startups or tech. I am interested in someone that wants to get things done for the US and the American people in a reality-based manner. And that's not what Ramaswamy is interested in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not a simple-minded fool, but a grifter targeting simple-minded fools. There is a big market for these dumbed-down greed, anger, and delusion narratives.

News flash...the vast majority of voters, regardless of party, are simple-minded fools that can't really be bothered with detailed Liz Warren style proposals. Targeting them is called campaigning. It isn't a dissertation defense.

He is saying stupid things. Very stupid things showing no understanding of any policy issues.

What stupid things? You know how many very stupid things were said on the campaign trail by both major-party candidates in 2020?

Not even sure what you're referring to, but he's not running to be Chief Policy Advisor of the U.S. You hire that crap out. He's running for President. All he needs right now is to set the tone, to hit on themes that resonate with people and traction to get on the debate state. He's trying to appeal to values and common sense, in a way that resonates. Leave the wonkery to DC types he can eventually hire if he gets enough traction to put a cute little "issues" page on his website and policy proposals that you can have fun eviscerating.

This dude is not a politician; not even sure he actually wants to be President. His campaign is in startup mode right now and things can look a little funky in the beginning stages of a startup, especially for an outsider without a name brand. Andrew Yang became relevant by 4 chan memes, random podcasts and some twitter exuberance. Vivek needs to find a similar path, because I don't think he's rich enough to just bankroll the whole thing like a Tom Steyer. He's already a little ahead in that regard, because Fox and others have been giving him airtime, but I don't think he has as fervent a fanbase as Yang did. Right now, he's just trying to get to the next milestone, for now more attention and visibility; eventually getting on debate stages.

Anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person. The President is head of the government. This narcissist knows nothing about government. He’s just a literate version of MTG. None of his points are even original. It’s the same stupid shit that the dumbest Republican have been saying for 40 years.

You yourself said eliminating the DOE is an old Republican talking point that has been adopted by many. Education also happens to be at the fore of people's minds, because it's becoming the battlefield for many cultural touch points which, you guessed it, generate buzz for a campaign. What else ya got?

Everyone who runs for President likely has narcissistic tendencies. What else ya got?

He is trying to harken and appeal back to what were once foundational, core American values that made the country great, so I'm not sure what originality has to do with anything. What else ya got?

I think you failed to respond to the main point from pp that “anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person.”

I tend to agree. He is just another populist feeding complete nonsense to the rubes.

The has been a longstanding Republican talking point, he's just applying it to modern-day pain points.

So just say you don't think Republicans are serious. We already knew you thought that though

He's not trying to appeal to DCUM.

https://www.cato.org/commentary/elimination-lost-what-happened-abolishing-department-education

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/romney-yes-ill-eliminate-whole-departments-but-i-wont-tell-you-which-ones/2012/03/26/gIQAAbIdcS_blog.html

It’s not even a debate that the vast majority of modern republicans are not serious people who make good faith arguments. You guys have expelled them all from your party! And now you want to whine about nobody taking you seriously?

Why would you spend so much time on DCUM if it is not your crowd?

Do Reagan, Bush and Romney qualify as modern Republicans? Do we need to go back to the Civil War?

It's not the crowd Vivek is trying to appeal to. DCUM tends to center itself, which is a horrible proxy for the general populace.

I don't know. It seemed to work all right in 2020 and 2022.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not a simple-minded fool, but a grifter targeting simple-minded fools. There is a big market for these dumbed-down greed, anger, and delusion narratives.

News flash...the vast majority of voters, regardless of party, are simple-minded fools that can't really be bothered with detailed Liz Warren style proposals. Targeting them is called campaigning. It isn't a dissertation defense.

He is saying stupid things. Very stupid things showing no understanding of any policy issues.

What stupid things? You know how many very stupid things were said on the campaign trail by both major-party candidates in 2020?

Not even sure what you're referring to, but he's not running to be Chief Policy Advisor of the U.S. You hire that crap out. He's running for President. All he needs right now is to set the tone, to hit on themes that resonate with people and traction to get on the debate state. He's trying to appeal to values and common sense, in a way that resonates. Leave the wonkery to DC types he can eventually hire if he gets enough traction to put a cute little "issues" page on his website and policy proposals that you can have fun eviscerating.

This dude is not a politician; not even sure he actually wants to be President. His campaign is in startup mode right now and things can look a little funky in the beginning stages of a startup, especially for an outsider without a name brand. Andrew Yang became relevant by 4 chan memes, random podcasts and some twitter exuberance. Vivek needs to find a similar path, because I don't think he's rich enough to just bankroll the whole thing like a Tom Steyer. He's already a little ahead in that regard, because Fox and others have been giving him airtime, but I don't think he has as fervent a fanbase as Yang did. Right now, he's just trying to get to the next milestone, for now more attention and visibility; eventually getting on debate stages.

Anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person. The President is head of the government. This narcissist knows nothing about government. He’s just a literate version of MTG. None of his points are even original. It’s the same stupid shit that the dumbest Republican have been saying for 40 years.

PP here and THANK YOU. 100% spot on. I am not impressed by Harvard or Yale anymore. Nor am I impressed that someone made a lot of money in startups or tech. I am interested in someone that wants to get things done for the US and the American people in a reality-based manner. And that's not what Ramaswamy is interested in.

Campaign. Say it with me one more time: campaign. Go talk to some hill staffer if you're interested in the feasibility of policy proposals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not a simple-minded fool, but a grifter targeting simple-minded fools. There is a big market for these dumbed-down greed, anger, and delusion narratives.

News flash...the vast majority of voters, regardless of party, are simple-minded fools that can't really be bothered with detailed Liz Warren style proposals. Targeting them is called campaigning. It isn't a dissertation defense.

He is saying stupid things. Very stupid things showing no understanding of any policy issues.

What stupid things? You know how many very stupid things were said on the campaign trail by both major-party candidates in 2020?

Not even sure what you're referring to, but he's not running to be Chief Policy Advisor of the U.S. You hire that crap out. He's running for President. All he needs right now is to set the tone, to hit on themes that resonate with people and traction to get on the debate state. He's trying to appeal to values and common sense, in a way that resonates. Leave the wonkery to DC types he can eventually hire if he gets enough traction to put a cute little "issues" page on his website and policy proposals that you can have fun eviscerating.

This dude is not a politician; not even sure he actually wants to be President. His campaign is in startup mode right now and things can look a little funky in the beginning stages of a startup, especially for an outsider without a name brand. Andrew Yang became relevant by 4 chan memes, random podcasts and some twitter exuberance. Vivek needs to find a similar path, because I don't think he's rich enough to just bankroll the whole thing like a Tom Steyer. He's already a little ahead in that regard, because Fox and others have been giving him airtime, but I don't think he has as fervent a fanbase as Yang did. Right now, he's just trying to get to the next milestone, for now more attention and visibility; eventually getting on debate stages.

Anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person. The President is head of the government. This narcissist knows nothing about government. He’s just a literate version of MTG. None of his points are even original. It’s the same stupid shit that the dumbest Republican have been saying for 40 years.

You yourself said eliminating the DOE is an old Republican talking point that has been adopted by many. Education also happens to be at the fore of people's minds, because it's becoming the battlefield for many cultural touch points which, you guessed it, generate buzz for a campaign. What else ya got?

Everyone who runs for President likely has narcissistic tendencies. What else ya got?

He is trying to harken and appeal back to what were once foundational, core American values that made the country great, so I'm not sure what originality has to do with anything. What else ya got?

I think you failed to respond to the main point from pp that “anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person.”

I tend to agree. He is just another populist feeding complete nonsense to the rubes.

The has been a longstanding Republican talking point, he's just applying it to modern-day pain points.

So just say you don't think Republicans are serious. We already knew you thought that though

He's not trying to appeal to DCUM.

https://www.cato.org/commentary/elimination-lost-what-happened-abolishing-department-education

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/romney-yes-ill-eliminate-whole-departments-but-i-wont-tell-you-which-ones/2012/03/26/gIQAAbIdcS_blog.html

It’s not even a debate that the vast majority of modern republicans are not serious people who make good faith arguments. You guys have expelled them all from your party! And now you want to whine about nobody taking you seriously?

Why would you spend so much time on DCUM if it is not your crowd?

Do Reagan, Bush and Romney qualify as modern Republicans? Do we need to go back to the Civil War?

It's not the crowd Vivek is trying to appeal to. DCUM tends to center itself, which is a horrible proxy for the general populace.

I don't know. It seemed to work all right in 2020 and 2022.

No don't kid yourself, DCUM is laughably out of touch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Whip smart guy.

Don’t think he’s ready for the big seat but I am thrilled he’s in the race, and I am donating, because I think he’ll elevate the discourse.

Signed - white conservative guy, and believe it or not most of us care about ideas a helluva lot more than color.

Elevate the discourse?! He’s parroting what’s already out there. 😂

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not a simple-minded fool, but a grifter targeting simple-minded fools. There is a big market for these dumbed-down greed, anger, and delusion narratives.

News flash...the vast majority of voters, regardless of party, are simple-minded fools that can't really be bothered with detailed Liz Warren style proposals. Targeting them is called campaigning. It isn't a dissertation defense.

He is saying stupid things. Very stupid things showing no understanding of any policy issues.

What stupid things? You know how many very stupid things were said on the campaign trail by both major-party candidates in 2020?

Not even sure what you're referring to, but he's not running to be Chief Policy Advisor of the U.S. You hire that crap out. He's running for President. All he needs right now is to set the tone, to hit on themes that resonate with people and traction to get on the debate state. He's trying to appeal to values and common sense, in a way that resonates. Leave the wonkery to DC types he can eventually hire if he gets enough traction to put a cute little "issues" page on his website and policy proposals that you can have fun eviscerating.

This dude is not a politician; not even sure he actually wants to be President. His campaign is in startup mode right now and things can look a little funky in the beginning stages of a startup, especially for an outsider without a name brand. Andrew Yang became relevant by 4 chan memes, random podcasts and some twitter exuberance. Vivek needs to find a similar path, because I don't think he's rich enough to just bankroll the whole thing like a Tom Steyer. He's already a little ahead in that regard, because Fox and others have been giving him airtime, but I don't think he has as fervent a fanbase as Yang did. Right now, he's just trying to get to the next milestone, for now more attention and visibility; eventually getting on debate stages.

Anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person. The President is head of the government. This narcissist knows nothing about government. He’s just a literate version of MTG. None of his points are even original. It’s the same stupid shit that the dumbest Republican have been saying for 40 years.

You yourself said eliminating the DOE is an old Republican talking point that has been adopted by many. Education also happens to be at the fore of people's minds, because it's becoming the battlefield for many cultural touch points which, you guessed it, generate buzz for a campaign. What else ya got?

Everyone who runs for President likely has narcissistic tendencies. What else ya got?

He is trying to harken and appeal back to what were once foundational, core American values that made the country great, so I'm not sure what originality has to do with anything. What else ya got?

I think you failed to respond to the main point from pp that “anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person.”

I tend to agree. He is just another populist feeding complete nonsense to the rubes.

The has been a longstanding Republican talking point, he's just applying it to modern-day pain points.

So just say you don't think Republicans are serious. We already knew you thought that though

He's not trying to appeal to DCUM.

https://www.cato.org/commentary/elimination-lost-what-happened-abolishing-department-education

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/romney-yes-ill-eliminate-whole-departments-but-i-wont-tell-you-which-ones/2012/03/26/gIQAAbIdcS_blog.html

It’s not even a debate that the vast majority of modern republicans are not serious people who make good faith arguments. You guys have expelled them all from your party! And now you want to whine about nobody taking you seriously?

Why would you spend so much time on DCUM if it is not your crowd?

Do Reagan, Bush and Romney qualify as modern Republicans? Do we need to go back to the Civil War?

It's not the crowd Vivek is trying to appeal to. DCUM tends to center itself, which is a horrible proxy for the general populace.

Is anyone gonna define when the era of "modern" Republicans appealing to the rubes by proposing the elimination of departments begins? I think I found another one!

That populist grifter, Bob Dole

https://www.deseret.com/1995/3/11/19163699/dole-calls-for-abolishing-4-agencies-education-energy-commerce-hud

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not a simple-minded fool, but a grifter targeting simple-minded fools. There is a big market for these dumbed-down greed, anger, and delusion narratives.

News flash...the vast majority of voters, regardless of party, are simple-minded fools that can't really be bothered with detailed Liz Warren style proposals. Targeting them is called campaigning. It isn't a dissertation defense.

He is saying stupid things. Very stupid things showing no understanding of any policy issues.

What stupid things? You know how many very stupid things were said on the campaign trail by both major-party candidates in 2020?

Not even sure what you're referring to, but he's not running to be Chief Policy Advisor of the U.S. You hire that crap out. He's running for President. All he needs right now is to set the tone, to hit on themes that resonate with people and traction to get on the debate state. He's trying to appeal to values and common sense, in a way that resonates. Leave the wonkery to DC types he can eventually hire if he gets enough traction to put a cute little "issues" page on his website and policy proposals that you can have fun eviscerating.

This dude is not a politician; not even sure he actually wants to be President. His campaign is in startup mode right now and things can look a little funky in the beginning stages of a startup, especially for an outsider without a name brand. Andrew Yang became relevant by 4 chan memes, random podcasts and some twitter exuberance. Vivek needs to find a similar path, because I don't think he's rich enough to just bankroll the whole thing like a Tom Steyer. He's already a little ahead in that regard, because Fox and others have been giving him airtime, but I don't think he has as fervent a fanbase as Yang did. Right now, he's just trying to get to the next milestone, for now more attention and visibility; eventually getting on debate stages.

Anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person. The President is head of the government. This narcissist knows nothing about government. He’s just a literate version of MTG. None of his points are even original. It’s the same stupid shit that the dumbest Republican have been saying for 40 years.

You yourself said eliminating the DOE is an old Republican talking point that has been adopted by many. Education also happens to be at the fore of people's minds, because it's becoming the battlefield for many cultural touch points which, you guessed it, generate buzz for a campaign. What else ya got?

Everyone who runs for President likely has narcissistic tendencies. What else ya got?

He is trying to harken and appeal back to what were once foundational, core American values that made the country great, so I'm not sure what originality has to do with anything. What else ya got?

I think you failed to respond to the main point from pp that “anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person.”

I tend to agree. He is just another populist feeding complete nonsense to the rubes.

The has been a longstanding Republican talking point, he's just applying it to modern-day pain points.

So just say you don't think Republicans are serious. We already knew you thought that though

He's not trying to appeal to DCUM.

https://www.cato.org/commentary/elimination-lost-what-happened-abolishing-department-education

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/romney-yes-ill-eliminate-whole-departments-but-i-wont-tell-you-which-ones/2012/03/26/gIQAAbIdcS_blog.html

It’s not even a debate that the vast majority of modern republicans are not serious people who make good faith arguments. You guys have expelled them all from your party! And now you want to whine about nobody taking you seriously?

Why would you spend so much time on DCUM if it is not your crowd?

Do Reagan, Bush and Romney qualify as modern Republicans? Do we need to go back to the Civil War?

It's not the crowd Vivek is trying to appeal to. DCUM tends to center itself, which is a horrible proxy for the general populace.

No Reagan, Bush and Romney are not aligned with modern republicans. That’s the point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not a simple-minded fool, but a grifter targeting simple-minded fools. There is a big market for these dumbed-down greed, anger, and delusion narratives.

News flash...the vast majority of voters, regardless of party, are simple-minded fools that can't really be bothered with detailed Liz Warren style proposals. Targeting them is called campaigning. It isn't a dissertation defense.

He is saying stupid things. Very stupid things showing no understanding of any policy issues.

What stupid things? You know how many very stupid things were said on the campaign trail by both major-party candidates in 2020?

Not even sure what you're referring to, but he's not running to be Chief Policy Advisor of the U.S. You hire that crap out. He's running for President. All he needs right now is to set the tone, to hit on themes that resonate with people and traction to get on the debate state. He's trying to appeal to values and common sense, in a way that resonates. Leave the wonkery to DC types he can eventually hire if he gets enough traction to put a cute little "issues" page on his website and policy proposals that you can have fun eviscerating.

This dude is not a politician; not even sure he actually wants to be President. His campaign is in startup mode right now and things can look a little funky in the beginning stages of a startup, especially for an outsider without a name brand. Andrew Yang became relevant by 4 chan memes, random podcasts and some twitter exuberance. Vivek needs to find a similar path, because I don't think he's rich enough to just bankroll the whole thing like a Tom Steyer. He's already a little ahead in that regard, because Fox and others have been giving him airtime, but I don't think he has as fervent a fanbase as Yang did. Right now, he's just trying to get to the next milestone, for now more attention and visibility; eventually getting on debate stages.

Anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person. The President is head of the government. This narcissist knows nothing about government. He’s just a literate version of MTG. None of his points are even original. It’s the same stupid shit that the dumbest Republican have been saying for 40 years.

You yourself said eliminating the DOE is an old Republican talking point that has been adopted by many. Education also happens to be at the fore of people's minds, because it's becoming the battlefield for many cultural touch points which, you guessed it, generate buzz for a campaign. What else ya got?

Everyone who runs for President likely has narcissistic tendencies. What else ya got?

He is trying to harken and appeal back to what were once foundational, core American values that made the country great, so I'm not sure what originality has to do with anything. What else ya got?

I think you failed to respond to the main point from pp that “anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person.”

I tend to agree. He is just another populist feeding complete nonsense to the rubes.

The has been a longstanding Republican talking point, he's just applying it to modern-day pain points.

So just say you don't think Republicans are serious. We already knew you thought that though

He's not trying to appeal to DCUM.

https://www.cato.org/commentary/elimination-lost-what-happened-abolishing-department-education

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/romney-yes-ill-eliminate-whole-departments-but-i-wont-tell-you-which-ones/2012/03/26/gIQAAbIdcS_blog.html

It’s not even a debate that the vast majority of modern republicans are not serious people who make good faith arguments. You guys have expelled them all from your party! And now you want to whine about nobody taking you seriously?

Why would you spend so much time on DCUM if it is not your crowd?

Do Reagan, Bush and Romney qualify as modern Republicans? Do we need to go back to the Civil War?

It's not the crowd Vivek is trying to appeal to. DCUM tends to center itself, which is a horrible proxy for the general populace.

No Reagan, Bush and Romney are not aligned with modern republicans. That’s the point.

But they also proposed eliminating the DOE, which PP was using as an example of Vivek being "unserious". If this is what we are working with, then no Republican has been serious for a long time, not just "modern" Republicans. Just say what you mean.

[Anonymous]

I donated. Anyone who wants to undo AA by EO has my vote. Did you know CA banned race based AA in 1996? California. We need to get away from this at the federal level. It was Johnson who implemented it by EO in 1965. It is his intention to undo it by EO on day 1.

The ignorance that flows through here is appalling. Some people called him an immigrant based solely on his name.

He definitely wants the best for America. Think of all of those ESGs now operating in China who are subject to such nonsense here. Companies are scoring their wokeness as nothing more than a virtue signal which has about the same effect as posting thoughts and prayers on FB.

He may never be president but I love the conversation!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not a simple-minded fool, but a grifter targeting simple-minded fools. There is a big market for these dumbed-down greed, anger, and delusion narratives.

News flash...the vast majority of voters, regardless of party, are simple-minded fools that can't really be bothered with detailed Liz Warren style proposals. Targeting them is called campaigning. It isn't a dissertation defense.

He is saying stupid things. Very stupid things showing no understanding of any policy issues.

What stupid things? You know how many very stupid things were said on the campaign trail by both major-party candidates in 2020?

Not even sure what you're referring to, but he's not running to be Chief Policy Advisor of the U.S. You hire that crap out. He's running for President. All he needs right now is to set the tone, to hit on themes that resonate with people and traction to get on the debate state. He's trying to appeal to values and common sense, in a way that resonates. Leave the wonkery to DC types he can eventually hire if he gets enough traction to put a cute little "issues" page on his website and policy proposals that you can have fun eviscerating.

This dude is not a politician; not even sure he actually wants to be President. His campaign is in startup mode right now and things can look a little funky in the beginning stages of a startup, especially for an outsider without a name brand. Andrew Yang became relevant by 4 chan memes, random podcasts and some twitter exuberance. Vivek needs to find a similar path, because I don't think he's rich enough to just bankroll the whole thing like a Tom Steyer. He's already a little ahead in that regard, because Fox and others have been giving him airtime, but I don't think he has as fervent a fanbase as Yang did. Right now, he's just trying to get to the next milestone, for now more attention and visibility; eventually getting on debate stages.

Anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person. The President is head of the government. This narcissist knows nothing about government. He’s just a literate version of MTG. None of his points are even original. It’s the same stupid shit that the dumbest Republican have been saying for 40 years.

You yourself said eliminating the DOE is an old Republican talking point that has been adopted by many. Education also happens to be at the fore of people's minds, because it's becoming the battlefield for many cultural touch points which, you guessed it, generate buzz for a campaign. What else ya got?

Everyone who runs for President likely has narcissistic tendencies. What else ya got?

He is trying to harken and appeal back to what were once foundational, core American values that made the country great, so I'm not sure what originality has to do with anything. What else ya got?

Eliminating the Department of Education is a supremely stupid Republican talking point. It is idiotic. All Carter did in 1979 was move the Office of Education from the Dept of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW), making it a relatively minor department separate from HHS. He didn’t create new programs. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the Education of the Handicapped Act now the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and the Higher Education Act already existed in HEW and their programs have been very successful despite the intentional obstruction of some states. The Republican talking point against the Dept. of Education during the Reagan years was targeted to racists who had created segregated private schools and did not want to support public schools. The modern dumbass Republicans keep using the same talking point even though it makes no sense. Anyone leading with this as his big issue is a moron about government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe not a simple-minded fool, but a grifter targeting simple-minded fools. There is a big market for these dumbed-down greed, anger, and delusion narratives.

News flash...the vast majority of voters, regardless of party, are simple-minded fools that can't really be bothered with detailed Liz Warren style proposals. Targeting them is called campaigning. It isn't a dissertation defense.

He is saying stupid things. Very stupid things showing no understanding of any policy issues.

What stupid things? You know how many very stupid things were said on the campaign trail by both major-party candidates in 2020?

Not even sure what you're referring to, but he's not running to be Chief Policy Advisor of the U.S. You hire that crap out. He's running for President. All he needs right now is to set the tone, to hit on themes that resonate with people and traction to get on the debate state. He's trying to appeal to values and common sense, in a way that resonates. Leave the wonkery to DC types he can eventually hire if he gets enough traction to put a cute little "issues" page on his website and policy proposals that you can have fun eviscerating.

This dude is not a politician; not even sure he actually wants to be President. His campaign is in startup mode right now and things can look a little funky in the beginning stages of a startup, especially for an outsider without a name brand. Andrew Yang became relevant by 4 chan memes, random podcasts and some twitter exuberance. Vivek needs to find a similar path, because I don't think he's rich enough to just bankroll the whole thing like a Tom Steyer. He's already a little ahead in that regard, because Fox and others have been giving him airtime, but I don't think he has as fervent a fanbase as Yang did. Right now, he's just trying to get to the next milestone, for now more attention and visibility; eventually getting on debate stages.

Anyone claiming that eliminating the Department of Education is a solution for anything is not a serious person. The President is head of the government. This narcissist knows nothing about government. He’s just a literate version of MTG. None of his points are even original. It’s the same stupid shit that the dumbest Republican have been saying for 40 years.

You yourself said eliminating the DOE is an old Republican talking point that has been adopted by many. Education also happens to be at the fore of people's minds, because it's becoming the battlefield for many cultural touch points which, you guessed it, generate buzz for a campaign. What else ya got?

Everyone who runs for President likely has narcissistic tendencies. What else ya got?

He is trying to harken and appeal back to what were once foundational, core American values that made the country great, so I'm not sure what originality has to do with anything. What else ya got?

Eliminating the Department of Education is a supremely stupid Republican talking point. It is idiotic. All Carter did in 1979 was move the Office of Education from the Dept of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW), making it a relatively minor department separate from HHS. He didn’t create new programs. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the Education of the Handicapped Act now the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and the Higher Education Act already existed in HEW and their programs have been very successful despite the intentional obstruction of some states. The Republican talking point against the Dept. of Education during the Reagan years was targeted to racists who had created segregated private schools and did not want to support public schools. The modern dumbass Republicans keep using the same talking point even though it makes no sense. Anyone leading with this as his big issue is a moron about government.

You are missing the point and caught up in some silly weeds, but at least you're admitting that it's been around for a while and that if you accept that TP as a proxy for "unseriousness", then just do away with all Republican candidates since the DOE was created. All of the geniuses told us that "Build the Wall" was unserious too, but it worked wonders as a campaign issue.

Vivek's "Eliminate DOE" is a proxy for 1.) tackle the exorbitant cost of higher education and stifling student debt, 2.) get rid one overpaid administrative bloat in universities and diversity indoctrination (even some liberals are getting sick of aggressive DEI pushes) and 3.) stop these national bureaucrats from poisoning the minds of your children by trying to control education at all levels.

You think this dude doesn't know that addressing all of these issues, would actually be way more complicated than somehow just abolishing the DOE? You really think that?

He is framing himself at the outset as a "culture" candidate, with culture being at the root of much of the modern malaise seen today. Education and approaches to pedagogy are central to cultural norms and are vectors through which his campaign can speak to those issues.

"Eliminate DOE" is not really that sexy or catchy to me, but dude is campaigning. It's not that deep.