Reply to Vivek Ramaswamy Presidential candidate

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Vivek Ramaswamy Presidential candidate "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Maybe not a simple-minded fool, but a grifter [b]targeting simple-minded fools[/b]. There is a big market for these dumbed-down greed, anger, and delusion narratives. [/quote]

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.[/quote]

He is saying stupid things. Very stupid things showing no understanding of any policy issues. [/quote]

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. [/quote]

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. [/quote]

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?[/quote]

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.
[/quote]

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  :roll:

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[/quote]

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?[/quote]

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 [i]horrible[/i] proxy for the general populace. [/quote]

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

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics