July 20, 2023
Trump and the Vaunted Independents
Timothy Birdnow
On Facebook Sherrie Mathieson (who thinks Trump has no chance of winning) says she thinks Tim Scott may be Trump's running mate.
I reply:
Scott seems to me to have the inside track. He's affable, he's polite, and he's black. I wish Trump would choose a more combative veep, if for no other reason than to protect his soon-to-be precarious health, but he won't; he doesn't like to be upstaged. (I still don't have a whole lot of use for Scott after some of the things he has said, including tacit support for the removal of the Confederate flag, a caving to political correctness and the BLM mob, and for his refusal to condemn the legal assaults on Mr. Trump, something that suggests he'll betray Trump in the future.)
Bear in mind Mr. Scott might well be acceptable to the Left, who would find it convenient to, uh, remove Donald Trump from the equation. Trump's veep pick needs to be someone who they fear putting in charge even more than Trump.
Also, I'm not sure how many voters Scott will bring to the dance. A big part of the veep selection is to balance the ticket and bring in people from swing states or places that the candidate needs shoring up. Do we really need to shore up South Carolina? I'd rather get someone from, say, Wisconsin.
If nothing else Scott will probably be more about Tim Scott than a loyal booster of the Trump Administration it seems to me. He'd be a good pick for a cabinet post but I think he would be of little help and possibly a major detriment to a Trump campaign and Presidency.
If nothing else the man has absolutely no understanding of the current political climate. He still thinks this is a gentleman's disagreement with well-meaning people and not the war that the Left has imposed on us. He's the kind of knock-kneed weakling the GOP is forever putting forward. And such cost us dearly and have cost us over many long years.
This doesn't sit well with Sherry. She says:
I understand your perceptions. And it may well be that Trump may pick someone outside of these challengers (as Pense was).
I personally fear Scott hasn't enough international experience (but there I like Haley who no "Trumper" likes). And I agree--to some extent it is about a "visual" but I wouldn't necessarily it capitulates to BLM (who consider him a White Nationalist anyway with an "R" next to his name). But it DOES show that the R Party is diverse and getting more so.
You don't have to worry about his being "knock-kneed" because Trump is perceived as a bulldozer (though you'd say that about Pense who served Trump VERY well till Jan 6th).
When I think of possibilities--
You tend to operate on "Look how we've been deceived and hurt before! I want what I want and that's it!"
But I have ONE objective--to WIN. We must think of WHO can win the General. Or at least as having the best chance.
Trump is the guy you may want most--but he is the most maligned by now--and sadly--most hated. As unreasonable as it is.
Whoever he picks has to balance that impulse to avoid the guy who heads the ticket. I'm not sure even Scott can do it because the 97% Dem media will just call him a sellout and only there for the "visual" perception.
The question for me is ALWAYS: How will INDEPENDENTS view this? (they are also victims of the media--just less so than the Dems).
I retort:
Sherrie, Sherrie, Sherrie...what value is winning at the ballot box if the person you put in power does nothing to advance our cause, or worse yet does little or nothing to protect what we have as of yet failed to hand over to them?
You are all about winning elections, even if it means not actually accomplishing anything.
You accuse me of "I want what I want and that's it!" but what is the purpose of electing people to represent us in the first place? It is so they serve us and work our will. Politics is about that very thing. In times past we were willing to compromise and take half a loaf, but look where that has taken us; we are now at a point where we've compromised everything away. You want to hand over the thin single slice of bread left from the loaf we started with in the interest of "winning". I want someone who will not only make sure we keep the slice but start taking back the other slices stolen from us.
Yes, there are times to make compromises and tactical retreats but this is not one of them. Now we need to go on the offensive. Sadly Sherrie you seem to want to keep trying to avoid upsetting the little snowflakes because you think they are the core of America. They aren't. We've heard that deception from the media and from the Republican consulting class for decades and these same people told us Ronald Reagan had no chance of winning and for the exact same reasons you cite here Sherrie. They were wrong then and you are wrong now.
(Bear in mind I didn't go back to this fight here - you did. I was merely commenting on Tim Scott.)
By all means lets WIN! Maybe we can run another Bush? Yeah; that'll solve EVERYTHING!
Sherrie, you just don't seem to have any sense of urgency or understand how close to destruction this country is at the moment. What do you think will be accomplished by putting someonne you and the GOP consulting class deem electable?
Why do you think the GOP establishment so hated Trump in the first place? Because he was doing what needed to be done and what they have labored to prevent for many years. They are happy with the status quo, with this endless slide into socialism and the rising bolshevik nature of the Democrats. All they want is their cut.
ANYBODY who is going to be of any value to Middle America is going to not be acceptable to your precious moderates. These are dimwits who listen to the media. Anyone who listens to the media will believe any Republican is evil.
Sherrie, do you think ANY Trump Veep pick will satisfy these moderates? Of course it won't. IF Trump is as hated as you believe (something the media keeps saying as a self-fulfilling
So tell me Sherrie, if not Trump then who? Who is this savior who will ride in on a white horse and save us all? I know you like DeSantis, and I am o.k. with him if I am a bit untrusting of him. Bu who else? Nikki Haley?
Did it ever occur to you that the very people who have been screwing up the country want us to make this very move you propose and choose an "electable" candidate, one of which they approve?
I've seen them do that repeatedly over the years and we fall for it every time, like Charlie Brown chasing the football and having Lucy pull it out from under his foot.
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. We didn't do it with Reagan and he saved America for a couple of decades. We didn't do it with Trump and things went extremely well under him despite the all-out war against him.
But you now want to go back to the tried and true, like a dog returning to it's vomit. I do not understand that. We've been creamed by "electability" and chasing the vaunted moderate vote.
I am unwilling to go quietly into that good night. Chasing the independents is the surest way to wind up there. Independents are no such thing; they are rather people who are too wishy-washy or too ignorant to bother learning what is happening. And guess what Sherrie? They will go with the flow, meaning they will support those candidates acceptable to the media.
That is, unless we actually have something to offer, some cause to be part of, some bandwagon upon which to jump. The "electable" candidates are all career politicians who are clearly there for their own benefit and these independents see that. Trump MAY be hated by them, but he at least offers excitement and a cause. What does Nikki Haley offer but a tired and feckless GOP insider? NOBODY wants to vote for such.
Also, I don't know why you think the independents have so much power. Who are the "independents"?
The fact is those middle of the road types certainly didn't play any part in the American Revolution; Patriots represented at most 45% of the populace. But they dragged the rest along with them. Courage and leadership makes up for numbers in many instances.
Do you believe the Democrats can or are going to do any better with these independents? If that were the case the Democrats would not be trying to kick Trump off state ballots as we speak. They wouldn't be launching these endless prosecutions.
By the way I am an independent voter; I'm not registered with any party affiliation.
I would also ask, if Trump fares so poorly with independents how did he win 74 million votes in 2020? That was after four years of endless assault by the media and one (at that time) impeachment. Even when adjusted for population growth that was a bigger margin than Ronald Reagan's landslide 1980 victory over Jimmy Carter. (Reagan won 43,903,230 popular votes.)
So, was Trump's 74 million votes all registered Republicans?
Just 29% of registered voters identified as Republicans in that election. So how did Trump win so many votes when there were just 38.8 million REGISTERED Republicans? (NOT likely voters, overall registered.) It means Trump won 36 some odd MILLION independent votes.
Not bad for a guy who can't win independents.
And don't forget that Trump either won the popular vote or just barely lost it nationwide if we subtract California. California was not and is not Trump country, or country for any Republican.
Sherrie, the only thing you can say is that the indpenendents may have soured on Trump AFTER the election, but who is telling us this? Polls that are clearly trying to manipulate public opinion (especially Republicans such as yourself) and the meda.
And if that is so, how much does the souring on Joe Biden enter into this?
Remember the Wilder Effect; how many of these independents are telling pollsters what they think they want to hear?
In the final analysis you want to moisten your finger and put it in the air - air that is quite breezy from the media blowing their hot air in our direction. Leadership leads the public. What may appear a loser can be a winner if we take a stand. Saul Alinsky said "if you push a negative long and hard enough it can break through and become a postiive". You don't want to push hard. You seem to want to surrender to the media here and find someone who will do a whole lot of nothing because he won't offend anyone. That way lies ultimate disaster. Right now we absolutely MUST have someone who will fight for America. We cannot afford four or eight years of someone who will surrender us piece by piece (like George W. Bush.) We are dying the death of a thousand papercuts under most Republican leadership. America does not have time for that any longer. We are on the precipice.
The independents will view it the way they are told to view it. If we are fearful and tentative they will view it through the prism of the media. By nominating a milksop we only confirm to the independents that we are ashamed of our own party and are merely out for a quick buck or to try to grab what we can. That is the message of a political animal like Scott or Haley. Trump may come across as a real SOB but he comes across as having the courage of his convictions and standing for something. And given the abuse he's taken and the money he's lost he will appear ever more principled to a good many of these independents.
On Facebook Sherrie Mathieson (who thinks Trump has no chance of winning) says she thinks Tim Scott may be Trump's running mate.
I reply:
Scott seems to me to have the inside track. He's affable, he's polite, and he's black. I wish Trump would choose a more combative veep, if for no other reason than to protect his soon-to-be precarious health, but he won't; he doesn't like to be upstaged. (I still don't have a whole lot of use for Scott after some of the things he has said, including tacit support for the removal of the Confederate flag, a caving to political correctness and the BLM mob, and for his refusal to condemn the legal assaults on Mr. Trump, something that suggests he'll betray Trump in the future.)
Bear in mind Mr. Scott might well be acceptable to the Left, who would find it convenient to, uh, remove Donald Trump from the equation. Trump's veep pick needs to be someone who they fear putting in charge even more than Trump.
Also, I'm not sure how many voters Scott will bring to the dance. A big part of the veep selection is to balance the ticket and bring in people from swing states or places that the candidate needs shoring up. Do we really need to shore up South Carolina? I'd rather get someone from, say, Wisconsin.
If nothing else Scott will probably be more about Tim Scott than a loyal booster of the Trump Administration it seems to me. He'd be a good pick for a cabinet post but I think he would be of little help and possibly a major detriment to a Trump campaign and Presidency.
If nothing else the man has absolutely no understanding of the current political climate. He still thinks this is a gentleman's disagreement with well-meaning people and not the war that the Left has imposed on us. He's the kind of knock-kneed weakling the GOP is forever putting forward. And such cost us dearly and have cost us over many long years.
This doesn't sit well with Sherry. She says:
I understand your perceptions. And it may well be that Trump may pick someone outside of these challengers (as Pense was).
I personally fear Scott hasn't enough international experience (but there I like Haley who no "Trumper" likes). And I agree--to some extent it is about a "visual" but I wouldn't necessarily it capitulates to BLM (who consider him a White Nationalist anyway with an "R" next to his name). But it DOES show that the R Party is diverse and getting more so.
You don't have to worry about his being "knock-kneed" because Trump is perceived as a bulldozer (though you'd say that about Pense who served Trump VERY well till Jan 6th).
When I think of possibilities--
You tend to operate on "Look how we've been deceived and hurt before! I want what I want and that's it!"
But I have ONE objective--to WIN. We must think of WHO can win the General. Or at least as having the best chance.
Trump is the guy you may want most--but he is the most maligned by now--and sadly--most hated. As unreasonable as it is.
Whoever he picks has to balance that impulse to avoid the guy who heads the ticket. I'm not sure even Scott can do it because the 97% Dem media will just call him a sellout and only there for the "visual" perception.
The question for me is ALWAYS: How will INDEPENDENTS view this? (they are also victims of the media--just less so than the Dems).
I retort:
Sherrie, Sherrie, Sherrie...what value is winning at the ballot box if the person you put in power does nothing to advance our cause, or worse yet does little or nothing to protect what we have as of yet failed to hand over to them?
You are all about winning elections, even if it means not actually accomplishing anything.
You accuse me of "I want what I want and that's it!" but what is the purpose of electing people to represent us in the first place? It is so they serve us and work our will. Politics is about that very thing. In times past we were willing to compromise and take half a loaf, but look where that has taken us; we are now at a point where we've compromised everything away. You want to hand over the thin single slice of bread left from the loaf we started with in the interest of "winning". I want someone who will not only make sure we keep the slice but start taking back the other slices stolen from us.
Yes, there are times to make compromises and tactical retreats but this is not one of them. Now we need to go on the offensive. Sadly Sherrie you seem to want to keep trying to avoid upsetting the little snowflakes because you think they are the core of America. They aren't. We've heard that deception from the media and from the Republican consulting class for decades and these same people told us Ronald Reagan had no chance of winning and for the exact same reasons you cite here Sherrie. They were wrong then and you are wrong now.
(Bear in mind I didn't go back to this fight here - you did. I was merely commenting on Tim Scott.)
By all means lets WIN! Maybe we can run another Bush? Yeah; that'll solve EVERYTHING!
Sherrie, you just don't seem to have any sense of urgency or understand how close to destruction this country is at the moment. What do you think will be accomplished by putting someonne you and the GOP consulting class deem electable?
Why do you think the GOP establishment so hated Trump in the first place? Because he was doing what needed to be done and what they have labored to prevent for many years. They are happy with the status quo, with this endless slide into socialism and the rising bolshevik nature of the Democrats. All they want is their cut.
ANYBODY who is going to be of any value to Middle America is going to not be acceptable to your precious moderates. These are dimwits who listen to the media. Anyone who listens to the media will believe any Republican is evil.
Sherrie, do you think ANY Trump Veep pick will satisfy these moderates? Of course it won't. IF Trump is as hated as you believe (something the media keeps saying as a self-fulfilling
So tell me Sherrie, if not Trump then who? Who is this savior who will ride in on a white horse and save us all? I know you like DeSantis, and I am o.k. with him if I am a bit untrusting of him. Bu who else? Nikki Haley?
Did it ever occur to you that the very people who have been screwing up the country want us to make this very move you propose and choose an "electable" candidate, one of which they approve?
I've seen them do that repeatedly over the years and we fall for it every time, like Charlie Brown chasing the football and having Lucy pull it out from under his foot.
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. We didn't do it with Reagan and he saved America for a couple of decades. We didn't do it with Trump and things went extremely well under him despite the all-out war against him.
But you now want to go back to the tried and true, like a dog returning to it's vomit. I do not understand that. We've been creamed by "electability" and chasing the vaunted moderate vote.
I am unwilling to go quietly into that good night. Chasing the independents is the surest way to wind up there. Independents are no such thing; they are rather people who are too wishy-washy or too ignorant to bother learning what is happening. And guess what Sherrie? They will go with the flow, meaning they will support those candidates acceptable to the media.
That is, unless we actually have something to offer, some cause to be part of, some bandwagon upon which to jump. The "electable" candidates are all career politicians who are clearly there for their own benefit and these independents see that. Trump MAY be hated by them, but he at least offers excitement and a cause. What does Nikki Haley offer but a tired and feckless GOP insider? NOBODY wants to vote for such.
Also, I don't know why you think the independents have so much power. Who are the "independents"?
The fact is those middle of the road types certainly didn't play any part in the American Revolution; Patriots represented at most 45% of the populace. But they dragged the rest along with them. Courage and leadership makes up for numbers in many instances.
Do you believe the Democrats can or are going to do any better with these independents? If that were the case the Democrats would not be trying to kick Trump off state ballots as we speak. They wouldn't be launching these endless prosecutions.
By the way I am an independent voter; I'm not registered with any party affiliation.
I would also ask, if Trump fares so poorly with independents how did he win 74 million votes in 2020? That was after four years of endless assault by the media and one (at that time) impeachment. Even when adjusted for population growth that was a bigger margin than Ronald Reagan's landslide 1980 victory over Jimmy Carter. (Reagan won 43,903,230 popular votes.)
So, was Trump's 74 million votes all registered Republicans?
Just 29% of registered voters identified as Republicans in that election. So how did Trump win so many votes when there were just 38.8 million REGISTERED Republicans? (NOT likely voters, overall registered.) It means Trump won 36 some odd MILLION independent votes.
Not bad for a guy who can't win independents.
And don't forget that Trump either won the popular vote or just barely lost it nationwide if we subtract California. California was not and is not Trump country, or country for any Republican.
Sherrie, the only thing you can say is that the indpenendents may have soured on Trump AFTER the election, but who is telling us this? Polls that are clearly trying to manipulate public opinion (especially Republicans such as yourself) and the meda.
And if that is so, how much does the souring on Joe Biden enter into this?
Remember the Wilder Effect; how many of these independents are telling pollsters what they think they want to hear?
In the final analysis you want to moisten your finger and put it in the air - air that is quite breezy from the media blowing their hot air in our direction. Leadership leads the public. What may appear a loser can be a winner if we take a stand. Saul Alinsky said "if you push a negative long and hard enough it can break through and become a postiive". You don't want to push hard. You seem to want to surrender to the media here and find someone who will do a whole lot of nothing because he won't offend anyone. That way lies ultimate disaster. Right now we absolutely MUST have someone who will fight for America. We cannot afford four or eight years of someone who will surrender us piece by piece (like George W. Bush.) We are dying the death of a thousand papercuts under most Republican leadership. America does not have time for that any longer. We are on the precipice.
The independents will view it the way they are told to view it. If we are fearful and tentative they will view it through the prism of the media. By nominating a milksop we only confirm to the independents that we are ashamed of our own party and are merely out for a quick buck or to try to grab what we can. That is the message of a political animal like Scott or Haley. Trump may come across as a real SOB but he comes across as having the courage of his convictions and standing for something. And given the abuse he's taken and the money he's lost he will appear ever more principled to a good many of these independents.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
12:28 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 2212 words, total size 13 kb.
33kb generated in CPU 0.109, elapsed 0.8528 seconds.
35 queries taking 0.8468 seconds, 172 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
35 queries taking 0.8468 seconds, 172 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
