DeSantis 2024?

[BugI02]

More people voted in 2020 than ever. It was a highly contested election because both sides thought a lot was at stake. The support for Trump lessened among independents by 9%. Trump's leading the pack by a lot among Republicans, but what that says is that ~half of Republicans would rather have someone else.

Die hard Trumpers are maybe 30% of the vote. I don't see from what other Demographics Trump can get votes. He did better among Blacks and Hispanics, but not enough to matter, because they still went for D's hard. Trump will probably lose even more ground to young people. The new young adult voters have been indoctrinated. They won't want to go vote, because they never do. But the fat pink haired lady will be along to convince them Trump is literally Hitler.

BTW, DeSantis has broad appeal. Just not among die hard fiercely loyal Trumpers. And that's actually the difference. DeSantis also actually has a track record of beating the "margin of cheating" in FL. He learned how to ballot harvest and did it well enough in Dade county, of all places, to make that a fair fight. But like I've said. This ain't about DeSantis. It ain't gonna happen for him this trip. So it would be nice if Trump could actually have wide appeal and get support from people who aren't fiercely loyal Trumpers. That ain't gonna happen unless he can fix that image problem.

This is a good example of what are essentially 'jamil says ...' assertions that when challenged to support with citations you never do

Here are a couple of actual citations, from RCP. These are general election polls and presumably include Dems, Reps and Independents, so 'broad appeal' should be apparent, yes?


Trump, who supposedly couldn't beat Biden has closed the gap to a virtual dead heat in the poll average

Biden 43.8 Trump 43.6 for Trump -0.2
Worst result Biden +4, best result Trump +6, with Trump moving in the right direction


DeSantis, who supposedly was the only one who could beat/was beating Biden is moving in the wrong direction, losing his perceived advantage and falling behind

Biden 43.5 DeSantis 42.0 for DeSantis -1.5
Worst result Biden +6, best result Desantis +1 with DeSantis falling away

Again, general election poll, should include full spectrum of the electorate and 'broad support' should be apparent

 

[jamil]

This is a good example of what are essentially 'jamil says ...' assertions that when challenged to support with citations you never do

Here are a couple of actual citations, from RCP. These are general election polls and presumably include Dems, Reps and Independents, so 'broad appeal' should be apparent, yes?

No. That's NOT broad appeal. Yeah yeah, I've seen the head to head polls. I think you're ignoring some important information because they aren't a good measure of wide appeal.

Head to head polls Trump v Biden, have narrowed recently, I think because the corporate press has actually reported on some of the Biden corruption. Fickle independents could hide behind
"biden laptop is Russian disinformation" because that's what corporate media mostly reported. Now they're reporting some pretty damning stuff on Biden. Polls are transitory though. Will corporate media continue reporting it? Are TPTB just trying to remind Biden who's in charge?

In terms of appeal, does Biden's weakness give Trump broader appeal? No. It's not zero sum. At best it makes Trump a lesser evil comparatively, not in the absolute. Head to head polls aren't a measure of appeal. Favorability is a better measurement. The last RCP average for Trump is -16.9. Biden is at -11.4. Trump's appeal has changed maybe 5 points or so over the last several years. He doesn't appeal significantly more now than ever. It's been consistently mid to high 30's favorable. Low to mid 50's unfavorable. And I don't think I have to post a citation for that. I'm sure you know how to find RCP.

So given Trump's disfavor with America--WHICH HE CLEARLY HAS, when you see even polling, that means a lot of people are holding their noses when they answer the pollster's questions in Trump's favor. I think when faced with the cheating Democrats are sure to do, all the ballot harvesting they're sure to do, Trump needs to cheat-proof this election by fixing that favorability deficit. That means fixing his image. I don't mean less tweeting. I mean, a good troll tweet is a good tweet. Acting like the evil people already believe is what I'm talking about.

To address your remarks specifically, I think a problem in our discussions is that you've developed contempt for me, and, deserved or not, whatever. But instead of looking to see if there's anything real in what I'm saying, in your contempt you find the most cynical interpretation. That leads you to continually say I say things I haven't said. You pick trivial points and and find technical reasons why it invalidates the whole thesis. So let me make what I'm saying unequivocal.

It's pretty clear to me that Trump will be the nominee. I want him to defeat the uniparty establishment (Democrats and chamber-o-commerce/neocon Republicans). That doesn't mean I'm a Trumper. I'm not a any 'er. I distrust all politicians. It means he's gonna be the only option in the general election. So I'd like him to act like he's more electable. If that makes him less electable to you, which I doubt, then that's your problem.

He doesn't need to campaign at all to the Trumpers. He just likes to. He's already got your vote though. He needs a good portion of the independent vote, and he's not going to get it if he doesn't improve his favorability. That's just how it works. If his favorability sucks then it's only a race for who sucks less. If people think the corrupt pedo influence pedler sucks less than the corrupt document stealing porn star ****ing bully does, then I don't think Trump comes out on top of that race. Especially after the mercenary army of pink haired "canvassing" ho's offer all the zoomer betas a handy for their vote.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I'm gonna have to set aside some time for that and the Ramaswamy interview. Haven't had much time for that or INGO lately. Looks like rain today though.

I think The Blaze posted all of them…if you’re bored enough.

 

[buckwacker]

Well, my thesis is that rather than making this election about retribution for 2020, that's not going to help independents get on board with another Trump presidency.


Whether Trump has lost more independents because of 1/6 or not doesn't matter to the thesis I'm actually putting forth. It matters that he lost them. And he's not going to win without getting enough of them back. Especially with an influx of indoctrinated beta-zoomers into the voting pool, and enabled by pink-haired ho's willing to give handies in exchange for ballots.

He's probably not gonna get a large chunk of the zoomer vote. But there are a lot of independents, including anti-establishment zoomers, who don't like the woke ****. They also don't like Trump because of his image. The point is, if he spends his campaigning efforts making this about retribution for 2020, instead of making it about saving the country from the excesses of the left, he will lose.

He needs to convince those people he's the least evil. That's two fronts. 1) helping more people see him as not literally Hitler. 2) Helping more people see what the consequences will be if Democrats win. He's already got the Trumpers. They're the only ones who give a flying **** about getting revenge for 2020. Why campaign only to your fans? I guess if you like having adoring fans cheer for you, that's how you campaign. If you want to win elections, no.

I thinks there's a problem with your thesis, in regard to how the left and right conduct political "warfare".

The right basically have political ADD. They can't focus on any line of reasoning\persuasion for any length of time because it might adversely affect the chances of winning the next election if it's not immediately impactful or resonnating with swing\independent voters.

The left is nothing like this they are laser focused on persuading persuadable voters, often with unrealistic promises often based solely on lies and half truths. But they are relentless. They've adopted Goebbels tactic and use it effectively.

The right should learn from the left's example, because they more often have the benefit of having ideas and policy grounded in reality, rather than pie in the sky ideas that appeal to people's selfish desires but have little to no chance of achieving the promised result. Stick with your ideas.

I think the election shenanigans falls neatly here. We all know what went on, and we should keep hammering on it if we want elections cleaned up. I think even you would have to admit that Trump's message and those of his supporters have been very effective in this regard. The number of people who believe there were election shenanigans has risen in polling data precisely because there are those who refuse to let the message die because the left has convinced many it's a losing proposition. I mean even CNN has admitted to the trend.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/21/politics/cnn-poll-elections/index.html

 

[KLB]

I thinks there's a problem with your thesis, in regard to how the left and right conduct political "warfare".

The right basically have political ADD. They can't focus on any line of reasoning\persuasion for any length of time because it might adversely affect the chances of winning the next election if it's not immediately impactful or resonnating with swing\independent voters.

How does abortion fit your thesis?

 

[buckwacker]

How does abortion fit your thesis?

I'd say it's an exception. Conservatives do have their sacred cows, and I don't mean this mockingly or dismissively. There are political planks that are essential to maintaining the base.

 

[jamil]

I thinks there's a problem with your thesis, in regard to how the left and right conduct political "warfare".

The right basically have political ADD. They can't focus on any line of reasoning\persuasion for any length of time because it might adversely affect the chances of winning the next election if it's not immediately impactful or resonnating with swing\independent voters.

The left is nothing like this they are laser focused on persuading persuadable voters, often with unrealistic promises often based solely on lies and half truths. But they are relentless. They've adopted Goebbels tactic and use it effectively.

The right should learn from the left's example, because they more often have the benefit of having ideas and policy grounded in reality, rather than pie in the sky ideas that appeal to people's selfish desires but have little to no chance of achieving the promised result. Stick with your ideas.

Why should independents find the platform you propose more important to them than their other concerns? So your contention is that Trump can be more appealing to independents if he continues to complain about 2020? I don't think the right has ADD. Neither does the left, as you say. Independents do. Hell. They follow which way the wind blows.

I suppose if you get them to think that election reform is the most important thing to them, maybe what you say is true. I don't think that's top on their list, or at least far enough up on enough independents' list to make Trump more appealing than the Democrat. I'm not even saying Biden at this point, because I don't think it's certain that he's gonna be the nominee.

Trump can't talk about election reform without making it about him. And Democrats have been successful in making elections a referendum on Trump. As has been pointed out many times in these election threads, Trump's 2022 candidates didn't fair well because Democrats were able to use that to stir up votes against.

I think the election shenanigans falls neatly here. We all know what went on, and we should keep hammering on it if we want elections cleaned up. I think even you would have to admit that Trump's message and those of his supporters have been very effective in this regard. The number of people who believe there were election shenanigans has risen in polling data precisely because there are those who refuse to let the message die because the left has convinced many it's a losing proposition. I mean even CNN has admitted to the trend.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/21/politics/cnn-poll-elections/index.html

What they believe about "shenanigans" matters to that point though. The left leaner's contribution to those polling numbers aren't favorable to Trump.

---

Follow-up interviews with people who participated in the poll suggest that the driving factors behind Republicans’ and Democrats’ views on elections are near-opposite. But there is a common thread: Concern.

---

On the right, we believe the "shenanigans" are election interference at the polls. Changing election rules to favor democrats. The counting. The ballot harvesting. Election season. And even the "Kraken" if you will (actually altering electronic vote tallies after the fact). And so forth. On the other side, the average joe believe the "shenanigans" is what Trump did. It was 1/6. Trump's attempts to steal the election from Biden with the electors nonsense.

So I think a lot of independents aren't as friendly to Trump constantly looking back in retributive rhetoric about 2020. To me the obviously lowest hanging fruit to get those ADD riddled independents consuming, is the left's obsession with normalizing pedophilia, and all the other excesses of the left we've mentioned. Democrats are incredibly vulnerable on that. I think Trump needs to STFU about 2020, mostly. And focus on the consequences of how the ClownWorld™ that the left is building will affect them and their children.

It's fine to talk about ways that the voting system as it is can help miscreants cheat in the future, and what we need to do to make elections fair. That's looking towards the future. That's puting the focus on voters' concerns rather than putting the focus on Trump. Trump should not make this about him. If he makes it all about voters and their concerns, and ending ClownWorld™, I don't think a Democrat can beat him. Any Democrat.

But I also don't think Trump can make anything not about him. It's not in his personality. Trump only appeal to Trumpers, because they like the way he is. Most people don't like him. The image problem Trump has is that he personifies something similar enough to the straw monster the left makes of him, that it's easy for people to believe lies about him if they aren't more skeptical of NPR. So make it harder for it to stick.

 

[jamil]

How does abortion fit your thesis?

That's a problem that costs votes. I know people who aren't on board with all the wokeness, and grooming crap, but Trump's stance on abortion is a deal breaker for them. I mean that takes away votes. On the other hand, I think Trump is in a unique position here, because his ardent supporters woudn't stop supporting him if he were to soften his stance on abortion.

DeSantis can't soften his position. He has fickle enough support as it is. If he softened his stance people would drop him like a used rubber. But I don't think it would hurt Trump. I think Trumpers would overlook it like they do Trump refusing to admit lockdowns and vaccines were a bad idea.

 

[jamil]

I'd say it's an exception. Conservatives do have their sacred cows, and I don't mean this mockingly or dismissively. There are political planks that are essential to maintaining the base.

Like I said, I think Trump could get away with it. His devout supporters wouldn't like it. But they'd still vote for him. I mean. I don't see Bug dropping Trump for anything and picking up DeSantis as his guy. But then maybe I've mistook Bug as the average Trumper.

It looks to me from polling that most middle-right independents are here:

Support bans only ban after 1st trimester, except when the mother's life is in danger, or rape.

Do not support bans at the federal level.

So you tell me. If Trump adopted that stance on abortion would you drop him as your #1 pick? If so, who would take over as your top pick?

 

[nonobaddog]

As DeSantis rightly points out, abortion is more of a state issue. Certainly has a federal following but I don't think it should be a federal football.

 

[buckwacker]

Why should independents find the platform you propose more important to them than their other concerns? So your contention is that Trump can be more appealing to independents if he continues to complain about 2020? I don't think the right has ADD. Neither does the left, as you say. Independents do. Hell. They follow which way the wind blows.

I suppose if you get them to think that election reform is the most important thing to them, maybe what you say is true. I don't think that's top on their list, or at least far enough up on enough independents' list to make Trump more appealing than the Democrat. I'm not even saying Biden at this point, because I don't think it's certain that he's gonna be the nominee.

Trump can't talk about election reform without making it about him. And Democrats have been successful in making elections a referendum on Trump. As has been pointed out many times in these election threads, Trump's 2022 candidates didn't fair well because Democrats were able to use that to stir up votes against.

What they believe about "shenanigans" matters to that point though. The left leaner's contribution to those polling numbers aren't favorable to Trump.

---

Follow-up interviews with people who participated in the poll suggest that the driving factors behind Republicans’ and Democrats’ views on elections are near-opposite. But there is a common thread: Concern.

---

On the right, we believe the "shenanigans" are election interference at the polls. Changing election rules to favor democrats. The counting. The ballot harvesting. Election season. And even the "Kraken" if you will (actually altering electronic vote tallies after the fact). And so forth. On the other side, the average joe believe the "shenanigans" is what Trump did. It was 1/6. Trump's attempts to steal the election from Biden with the electors nonsense.

So I think a lot of independents aren't as friendly to Trump constantly looking back in retributive rhetoric about 2020. To me the obviously lowest hanging fruit to get those ADD riddled independents consuming, is the left's obsession with normalizing pedophilia, and all the other excesses of the left we've mentioned. Democrats are incredibly vulnerable on that. I think Trump needs to STFU about 2020, mostly. And focus on the consequences of how the ClownWorld™ that the left is building will affect them and their children.

It's fine to talk about ways that the voting system as it is can help miscreants cheat in the future, and what we need to do to make elections fair. That's looking towards the future. That's puting the focus on voters' concerns rather than putting the focus on Trump. Trump should not make this about him. If he makes it all about voters and their concerns, and ending ClownWorld™, I don't think a Democrat can beat him. Any Democrat.

But I also don't think Trump can make anything not about him. It's not in his personality. Trump only appeal to Trumpers, because they like the way he is. Most people don't like him. The image problem Trump has is that he personifies something similar enough to the straw monster the left makes of him, that it's easy for people to believe lies about him if they aren't more skeptical of NPR. So make it harder for it to stick.

I think you're completely missing my point. The difference between the right and left are their abilities of persuasion. If you think cleaning up elections is of extreme importance, then you need to convince your base (check, mostly) and swing voters (working on it) that 1. there is a problem, 2. that's the problem is big enough to warrant addressing, and 3. that your candidate will be the most effective at addressing the problem.

It seems you think Trump should drop the election cleanup thing because it turns people off. I posted a CNN article, of all outlets, that describes how effective the persuasion of Trump and his supporters have been in this regard. Now they didn't credit him, but he is largely responsible for the shift in views around election security.

With this evidence in hand, why in the world would you advocate dropping this issue in a campaign, if you think it needs fixing?

 

[KG1]

I think election integrity is a valid issue. Most all of the candidates were asked to address the issue by Tucker Carlson. Trump should not be the exception. It should be done in a tactful generically focused way of what needs to be addressed to try not to bring to attention the nastiness of what happened on J6. I believe J6 is a turnoff for many potential voters.

 

[jamil]

I think you're completely missing my point. The difference between the right and left are their abilities of persuasion. If you think cleaning up elections is of extreme importance, then you need to convince your base (check, mostly) and swing voters (working on it) that 1. there is a problem, 2. that's the problem is big enough to warrant addressing, and 3. that your candidate will be the most effective at addressing the problem.

No. I didn't miss the point. I disagreed with it. I think it's unnecessary to convince Trump's base. They already believe it. The chamber-o-commerce/Neocon/evangelical Republican (basically Pence kind of voters) aren't convinced. Perhaps they're reachable. Maybe your strategy can work with them. But how has it worked with that kind of voter on INGO?

But in terms of independents, I think making election reform the primary issue is a losing strategy.

It seems you think Trump should drop the election cleanup thing because it turns people off. I posted a CNN article, of all outlets, that describes how effective the persuasion of Trump and his supporters have been in this regard. Now they didn't credit him, but he is largely responsible for the shift in views around election security.

Well, you say "election cleanup". That's not what Trump is doing. He's still talking about sour grapes from 2020. I think he got robbed, sans "Kraken". But it's going to push independents away.

I think it's fine to have realistic election reform on the platform, and build a rationale for why it's needed. Is Trump the guy who can articulate that without it turning into a rant on 2020?

And again, yes, he's responsible for the shift in views around the trust issue with elections. It's like half the people think the problem with elections is that Democrats cheated. The other half think Trump tried to cheat when he pulled that **** with the delegates.

Look at the difference between what reforms people want. We want those loopholes that Democrats exploited to be closed. They want to change the laws to make what Trump tried to do with switching the slates of delegates less possible. Do you see the problem with your thesis?

With this evidence in hand, why in the world would you advocate dropping this issue in a campaign, if you think it needs fixing?

I didn't say drop it altogether. I said the election can't be another referendum on Trump because he will lose that. If he talks about election reform he has to present it apart from the election being stolen from him. People who would not vote for Trump today, just cross their eyes and stop listening as soon as you say "2020 election" and "stolen" in the same sentence.

Just make specific reforms part of the platform and not the primary part. And a well articulated policy around that which is actually convincing needs to be created. Make the case that it is reasonable. Can Trump do that?

 

[jamil]

I think election integrity is a valid issue. Most all of the candidates were asked to address the issue by Tucker Carlson. Trump should not be the exception. It should be done in a tactful generically focused way of what needs to be addressed to try not to bring to attention the nastiness of what happened on J6. I believe J6 is a turnoff for many potential voters.

I completely agree. Can Trump do this? If not, he should have a surrogate do it for him. I think that could work. But, it's not the top on the list of platform positions. It's near the top in terms of importance, because if we don't have fair elections, we can't have a functioning democratically determined republic.

 

[KG1]

I completely agree. Can Trump do this? If not, he should have a surrogate do it for him. I think that could work. But, it's not the top on the list of platform positions. It's near the top in terms of importance, because if we don't have fair elections, we can't have a functioning democratically determined republic.

it's an important issue but not an issue for Trump to air his personal grievances over. Stick with the issues that highlight his successes and contrast them against ClownWorld.

 

[jamil]

I would agree that it's an important issue but not top issue for Trump to air his personal grievances over. Stick with the issues that highlight his successes and contrast them against ClownWorld.

Like I've been saying. ClownWorld™ is probably the biggest vulnerability for Democrats. Whoever the nominee is should be hammering them with their approval of pedophilia, mutilating children, nutty promotion of trans people over every other person in society. And so on. Not just the gender stuff. The absurdity of reparations, the excesses of the climate agenda, and so on.

And on the latter. Republicans need to hit Democrats hard for proposing that the climate situation justifies harming the poor.

 

[buckwacker]

Like I said, I think Trump could get away with it. His devout supporters wouldn't like it. But they'd still vote for him. I mean. I don't see Bug dropping Trump for anything and picking up DeSantis as his guy. But then maybe I've mistook Bug as the average Trumper.

It looks to me from polling that most middle-right independents are here:

Support bans only ban after 1st trimester, except when the mother's life is in danger, or rape.

Do not support bans at the federal level.

So you tell me. If Trump adopted that stance on abortion would you drop him as your #1 pick? If so, who would take over as your top pick?

Voting is a cost benefit analysis, is it not?

I don't know where you got that Trump was my number one pick. I don't particularly like him as a person, I never have, going back 20-30 years even. But he does have certain qualities I see as important that no other candidate has. One of those is tenacity, he is a pit bull, and once he latches onto something, he isn't letting go. Now with Trump that's a double edged sword for me because I don't agree with him on everything. The vaccine thing is a big problem for me. But with the election issue, absolutely. Now could he more deftly communicate the issue? Absolutely.

With regard to abortion, he's largley responsible for overturning of Roe v Wade. How does that make him squishy in his abortion stance again? Why are we talking about hypotheticals? I'd rather base decisions on history than what ifs.

At the end of the day, not sure who I'd vote for in the primary. Maybe hop over and vote RFK in the dem primary.

 

[buckwacker]

Like I've been saying. ClownWorld™ is probably the biggest vulnerability for Democrats. Whoever the nominee is should be hammering them with their approval of pedophilia, mutilating children, nutty promotion of trans people over every other person in society. And so on. Not just the gender stuff. The absurdity of reparations, the excesses of the climate agenda, and so on.

And on the latter. Republicans need to hit Democrats hard for proposing that the climate situation justifies harming the poor.

Well, no candidate has to campaign on one issue. Trump talks about a lot of stuff at rallies. I think the national propaganda machine wants everyone to think that all he talks about is 2020. Some on this side seem to be buying it.

 

[buckwacker]

No. I didn't miss the point. I disagreed with it. I think it's unnecessary to convince Trump's base. They already believe it. The chamber-o-commerce/Neocon/evangelical Republican (basically Pence kind of voters) aren't convinced. Perhaps they're reachable. Maybe your strategy can work with them. But how has it worked with that kind of voter on INGO?

But in terms of independents, I think making election reform the primary issue is a losing strategy.


Well, you say "election cleanup". That's not what Trump is doing. He's still talking about sour grapes from 2020. I think he got robbed, sans "Kraken". But it's going to push independents away.

I think it's fine to have realistic election reform on the platform, and build a rationale for why it's needed. Is Trump the guy who can articulate that without it turning into a rant on 2020?

And again, yes, he's responsible for the shift in views around the trust issue with elections. It's like half the people think the problem with elections is that Democrats cheated. The other half think Trump tried to cheat when he pulled that **** with the delegates.

Look at the difference between what reforms people want. We want those loopholes that Democrats exploited to be closed. They want to change the laws to make what Trump tried to do with switching the slates of delegates less possible. Do you see the problem with your thesis?


I didn't say drop it altogether. I said the election can't be another referendum on Trump because he will lose that. If he talks about election reform he has to present it apart from the election being stolen from him. People who would not vote for Trump today, just cross their eyes and stop listening as soon as you say "2020 election" and "stolen" in the same sentence.

Just make specific reforms part of the platform and not the primary part. And a well articulated policy around that which is actually convincing needs to be created. Make the case that it is reasonable. Can Trump do that?

Where did I say make it the primary issue?

I don't think independents are as unpersuadable on this as you think they are. The evidence is there, we don't even have to lie about it. We cant let the other side frame the issue and debate, and many have allowed them to do it. It doesn't help that Trump is such a megalomanic, as that feeds the perception that the issue is about him. But if Goebbles and the left could do it with lies, wouldn't it be easier to do it with reality, as long as the right is tenacious enough.

 

[Floivanus]

As DeSantis rightly points out, abortion is more of a state issue. Certainly has a federal following but I don't think it should be a federal football.

Nothing not expressly outlined in the constitution IS or SHOULD EVER be a federal issue.

Period, full stop; the ONLY person responsible for kicking that ball back to the States is 45 and his 3 SCOTUS appointments