So? IMO what many political nerds don't always fully comprehend is that to the masses political messaging is more about feelings than policy/rationality. Trump's 2016 campaign is similar to Obama's 2008 campaign in how each of their campaigns represented for millions the hopeful idea for actual change. Plenty of ex-Obama/Bernie voters crossing over to Trump in 2016 makes sense when you realize how hated the DC class is to average Americans.
2016 was one thing. But he didn’t actually follow through on the message and largely did the opposite. The idiots still screaming for him would be much happier with DeSantis if the weren’t idiots they’d be able to see that.
Quick anecdote. This weekend I was at a gathering with several gay friends. The topic of 2024 came up and the question of who would you choose between Trump or DeSantis. Everyone said Trump as the feeling is DeSantis is much more dangerous. Of course these are all folks who live in Florida and are very familiar with DeSantis.
Interesting anecdotal information. I guess if you truly loathe both, at least you know Trump can only be in office for 4 years and then he’s forever done being an active and serving political figure. I still think DeSantis represents the best chance for the GOP in a general. Many remember his leadership during an actual crisis being on the center stage nationally. Lots of folks saw through the ridiculous MSM/Bureaucratic class lionizing of the Cuomo/Newsome’s of the world while simultaneously portraying DeSantis as someone who was recklessly killing grandma because he wasn’t toeing the line like some thought he should. It’s likely he would rhetorically [itch bay] slap this geriatric version of Biden in a one-on-one debate setting. Plus without Trump to vote against, I have my questions as to whether a ticket as uninspiring as Biden/Harris 4 years later could marshall their same 2020 voting coalition. Not to mention Biden will actually have to get out and campaign this time like Presidential candidates traditionally must do. He can’t just sit back in his basement this cycle. Ron needs to start broadening and diversifying his overall message and sell a story about America’s greatness and hope for the future. His overall marketing so far doesn’t seem like it is going to work within the context of winning the GOP nomination. We can talk theoretically about a general election all we want, however obviously Ron must navigate and win a Primary against the sitting figure head of his own political party first. He can’t out flank Trump on the “anti-woke” messaging with GOP primary voters assuming that remains his primary messaging.
While DeSantis has gotten a lot of bills passed, there's several of them in the courts and probably a few more on their way, so curious to see what holds up and what doesn't. He wont' have a yes man majority legislature if he were to win the Presidency. We've also seen the courts curtail a lot of executive order attempts in the last decade. Would be curious to see how effective he could be as a president with a split congress or a razor's majority. I think he'd be a lot like Trump in that he'd talk a lot of shit do one or two things and otherwise not be very effective. He doesn't seem to put much stock on working with people not already in his pocket so that kinda limits you as a president.
In typical fashion of misrepresentation, this one is rather chalk full of it. The terms "pedophilia" and "MAP" are driven to differentiate between someone with the attraction, MAP, and someone who's engaged in sexual abuse as there's clearly a difference. It's not very fringe and is the same rationale why you can sit down and watch documentaries on serial killers, then listen to the rationale from professionals on why they created their fields and how their objectives are to understand these people so as to prevent innocents from being murdered.
It's always amazing to me that you "america's thu best!111!" types can't handle legitimate criticisms. I don't get the fragility. Is this where I say: "If you can't handle your country being criticized, go live in one that's less in the spotlight?"
That's just not true. https://helpusdefend.com/?page_id=3012 The source of child abuse is obviously adult individuals with awful attractions, but I think you're aware that sheer shaming of individuals that haven't committed any acts isn't the most effective way at disincentivizing and preventing abuse. And further, neither does adopting more precise verbiage tantamount to absolving any committed abuse.
Moving to Raleigh soon. You? Aren't you one of those who also doesn't like immigrants because they "don't fight to make their country better" or am I mixing up your various inconsistencies?
Absolutely mixing me up. I have welcomed immigration and have said we need to find a better way to get people in our country.
I've seen too many people who self-identify as a MAP and use it to justify normalizing their inclinations in the form of 30+ year olds dating 15 and 16 year olds.
This sounds like the same rationale used against BLM stating it's being used to justify normalizing their inclinations in the form of "looting stores and causing riots".
If a research group uses the term, I don't bat an eye. If an individual uses it as an identity which should be given protected status, [uck fay] that. Example. Should sociopaths be studied? Yes. Should they be given protected status as a minority identity? No. Does that mean I think being diagnosed as such means they are automatically criminals? Nope. Same with "MAPs." That is not an orientation. It is a disorder because there is an obligatory nonconsenting participant if action is taken.
