Vivek Ramaswamy Presidential candidate

[Anonymous]

A biotech company owner is going to clash with the religious right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A biotech company owner is going to clash with the religious right.

You think that will be the issue and not the fact that he's Hindu?

[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?

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.

It’s stupid, period. There is no public support for eliminating education programs. It’s disqualifying. It shows he’s a clown who has no clue what he is talking about.

[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?

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.

It’s stupid, period. There is no public support for eliminating education programs. It’s disqualifying. It shows he’s a clown who has no clue what he is talking about.

Then it's disqualifying for every major Republican candidate since the DOE was created. Well done.

[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?

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.

It’s stupid, period. There is no public support for eliminating education programs. It’s disqualifying. It shows he’s a clown who has no clue what he is talking about.

Then it's disqualifying for every major Republican candidate since the DOE was created. Well done.

Neither Bush Administration wanted to repeal education programs. They both signed expansions and reforms of programs, including 1990 and 2004 reauthorizations of the IDEA, and W’s own No Child Left Behind Act. The whole eliminate DofEd narrative is based on nonsense. The Department of Education does boring administrative things to support local schools and students. It doesn’t control the schools or their curricula. Your hero has no factual understanding of any of this. Not a serious person.

[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?

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.

It’s stupid, period. There is no public support for eliminating education programs. It’s disqualifying. It shows he’s a clown who has no clue what he is talking about.

“Period.”

[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?

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.

It’s stupid, period. There is no public support for eliminating education programs. It’s disqualifying. It shows he’s a clown who has no clue what he is talking about.

“Period.”

Your meme is stupid too. I sincerely wish Republican talking points were not all stupid and delusional. It’s pathetic. It really is.

[Anonymous]

I tried to educate you about education policy and politics but your only response is that facts are irrelevant and insistence that your clown candidate is a genius for his 100% fact-free pandering to dopes and bigots.

[Anonymous]

I only vote D.

[Anonymous]

He sounds very elitist

[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?

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.

It’s stupid, period. There is no public support for eliminating education programs. It’s disqualifying. It shows he’s a clown who has no clue what he is talking about.

“Period.”

Your meme is stupid too. I sincerely wish Republican talking points were not all stupid and delusional. It’s pathetic. It really is.

[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?

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.

It’s stupid, period. There is no public support for eliminating education programs. It’s disqualifying. It shows he’s a clown who has no clue what he is talking about.

Then it's disqualifying for every major Republican candidate since the DOE was created. Well done.

Neither Bush Administration wanted to repeal education programs. They both signed expansions and reforms of programs, including 1990 and 2004 reauthorizations of the IDEA, and W’s own No Child Left Behind Act. The whole eliminate DofEd narrative is based on nonsense. The Department of Education does boring administrative things to support local schools and students. It doesn’t control the schools or their curricula. Your hero has no factual understanding of any of this. Not a serious person.

You are taking this far too literally lol. Again, you probably said the same about this whole "Build the Wall" narrative. Unserious! And guess what? It worked!

Ronald Reagan,Newt Gingrich, Bob Dole, Rick Perry, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Donald Trump, Marco Rubio. 40 years of Republicans. DISQUALIFIED! UNSERIOUS!

Vivek ain't my hero, but find a better stick to beat him with. There are plenty. This aint it, babe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I tried to educate you about education policy and politics but your only response is that facts are irrelevant and insistence that your clown candidate is a genius for his 100% fact-free pandering to dopes and bigots.

It's politics, not policy. Don't confuse em.

If we lived in your world, Liz Warren or Paul Ryan would have been President. They weren't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A biotech company owner is going to clash with the religious right.

You think that will be the issue and not the fact that he's Hindu?

Evangelicals have already demonstrated that they are willing to look the other way if their guy will hate the people they hate.

[Anonymous]

This idiot thinks Biden can pardon Trump for state crimes.