The DeSantis gambit

[Donal]

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

Elon says the launch went exactly as expected. It was a trial and he didn't expect it to get DeSantis nominated for this election. They did get a lot of useful data for this failure and Musk will have the required number of servers and staff available for the next launch. Everything will be in place for the 2028 election. When he lands men on Mars.

Sure, King Kong broke his chains, destroyed the theater, rampaged through Midtown, killed hundreds, and died when he fell off the Empire State Building, but that was just a test run. And I got lots of attention for it.

[JoeMorgue]

As the oft repeated joke goes.

Musk: *Slams his dick in a sliding glass door*
Musk: "I totally meant to do that."
Musk Simps: "Good job Sir! Wow you're playing 5d Chess 20 steps ahead! Bravo! Bravo!"

[I Am The Scum]

Originally Posted by Donal

gonna ride a bunch of AngelFire sites into office.

His campaign office could definitely use some animated construction sign GIFs right now.

[Shalamar]

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

More coverage from ABC News Australia.

Live: Ron DeSantis's presidential bid announcement hit with tech glitches as #DeSaster trends on Twitter

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-...aign/102384864

Ahem.

"Look How PopUlAr The DeSantis Was! It crashed the TweeTer! Success!"

Is how it will likely be spun.

[eerok]

Originally Posted by W.D.Clinger

He's not huge. Reportedly 5 feet 9 inches and 154 pounds, he wears high-heeled cowboy boots to make himself look taller.

154 pounds? Trump is easily twice as bigly.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by W.D.Clinger

He's not huge. Reportedly 5 feet 9 inches and 154 pounds, he wears high-heeled cowboy boots to make himself look taller.

Halfway to being accused of being a closet drag queen.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Shalamar

Ahem.

"Look How PopUlAr The DeSantis Was! It crashed the TweeTer! Success!"

Is how it will likely be spun.

It already has been by Sacks, Musk, and DeSantis.

[Gulliver Foyle]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

154 pounds, sure

What I was about to say, no way is a lad that chunky only eleven stone at five foot nine.

[Stacyhs]

Compare Trump's POTUS announcement of coming down the escalator at his hotel compared to DeSantis' screwed up audio announcement on Twitter. As far as showmanship, it's Oreo vs Hydrox.

[bruto]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Halfway to being accused of being a closet drag queen.

Oh no, they're made of rattlesnake hide (come on, take a little walk with me now, tell me who do you love!...)

[bruto]

Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle

What I was about to say, no way is a lad that chunky only eleven stone at five foot nine.

Hot air has negative weight.

[dudalb]

What makes this glorious is it's a two for the price on one deal: Two Right Wing kooks make idiots of themselves.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by W.D.Clinger

He's not huge. Reportedly 5 feet 9 inches and 154 pounds, he wears high-heeled cowboy boots to make himself look taller.

He must have the same doctor as Trump: Ronny Jackson.

[Orphia Nay]

Edit. Wrong thread

[shemp]

[shemp]

Cokehead Junior can't read the script right, has a Freudian slip:

https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/s...83521546481666

Quote:

Junior goes on a rant that is supposed to be about Desantis, but he misreads his script:

“Trump has the personality of a mortician, and the energy that makes Jeb Bush look an Olympian.”

[JoeMorgue]

DeSantis has all be promised to pardon Trump and any Jan 6 participant.

[Foster Zygote]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

He must have the same doctor as Trump: Ronny Jackson.

I can't find it right now, but a while back I saw a photo of DeSantis that looked a awful lot like he was wearing some sort of girdle. His torso was decidedly cylindrical, with slight circumferential bulges at top and bottom.

Not that I care about his weight, or that of any other politician. But, like Trump, the vanity he shows seems to be a warning sign.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

DeSantis has all be promised to pardon Trump and any Jan 6 participant.

That's a terrifying prospect.

No matter how heinous the offence, or what threat they represent to the security of the US, DeSantis will clear their name and release them onto the street.

If there was any doubt that Jan 6 is now official GOP policy, here is proof.

[Trebuchet]

In the extremely unlikely event that Mike Pence gets nominated and elected, even he will pardon Trump and the J6ers. I'll be surprised if the candidates don't all take a pledge to do so in the first debate.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Trebuchet

In the extremely unlikely event that Mike Pence gets nominated and elected, even he will pardon Trump and the J6ers. I'll be surprised if the candidates don't all take a pledge to do so in the first debate.

I disagree. Most GOPers will try to ignore the issue.

[Orphia Nay]

DeSantis will kick off his campaigning on Tuesday in Iowa, starting at a Des Moines megachurch.

Trump will be in Iowa on Thursday.

https://apnews.com/article/7be1c1d07...ee6571891a50ac

Quote:

Two weeks ago, Trump scheduled a rally in Des Moines to take place the same day DeSantis was headlining Iowa Republican events in western and eastern Iowa as the guest of Rep. Randy Feenstra and the state GOP. However, Trump scrubbed the outdoor event the day he was to arrive due to threats of severe weather.

Turning the tables on Trump, DeSantis swooped into Des Moines that evening for an impromptu appearance that helped his campaign create the desired impression of him dancing in the ring with the heavyweight.

Trump is scheduled to return to Iowa on Thursday, the day after DeSantis’ tour, and is expected to hold events in the Des Moines area, meet influential conservatives and sit for an interview that evening with Fox News Channel host Sean Hannity.

Why are they both starting with Iowa?

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

DeSantis will kick off his campaigning on Tuesday in Iowa, starting at a Des Moines megachurch.

Trump will be in Iowa on Thursday.

https://apnews.com/article/7be1c1d07...ee6571891a50ac



Why are they both starting with Iowa?

I think it's one of the early states to hold a Republican Party primary election.

You cannot win the nomination this early in the race, but you can lose it.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

DeSantis will kick off his campaigning on Tuesday in Iowa, starting at a Des Moines megachurch.

Trump will be in Iowa on Thursday.

https://apnews.com/article/7be1c1d07...ee6571891a50ac



Why are they both starting with Iowa?

That's where the first primary (actually caucus in the case of Iowa) takes place.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Orphia Nay

Why are they both starting with Iowa?

I don't know how much sense this is going to make to people outside the United Bald Eagles of Assault Rifle Land but political primaries here in the states have this weird fight about "first" to the point that several states have it in their Constitutions that they will be the first primary and no don't ask me to explain how that works when multiple states all make the same rule but long story short Iowa has long been seen as the place where political campaigns for President "officially" start.

[W.D.Clinger]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

I don't know how much sense this is going to make to people outside the United Bald Eagles of Assault Rifle Land but political primaries here in the states have this weird fight about "first" to the point that several states have it in their Constitutions that they will be the first primary and no don't ask me to explain how that works when multiple states all make the same rule but long story short Iowa has long been seen as the place where political campaigns for President "officially" start.

Early primary states have disproportionate influence on the nomination process, because they set the early narrative concerning which candidates are doing well or poorly.

For some time now, the earliest primary states (Iowa and New Hampshire) have been unusually rural and conservative, which gives an advantage to conservative candidates.

In an attempt to reduce that advantage, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) has approved a plan that would make South Carolina the first state to hold a Democratic primary in 2024, with New Hampshire and Nevada following three days later.

State and party officials in Iowa and New Hampshire have objected to this plan, and are fairly likely to proceed with dates that violate the DNC plan. The DNC can penalize states that ignore the DNC plan by reducing the number of delegates those states can send to the Democratic Party's nominating convention. That enforcement mechanism has no direct effect on the Republican Party's process.

To conform to the DNC plan, a few states may end up holding their Democratic and Republican primaries on separate days, but the number of states that can do that is limited by state laws (which vary from state to state) and political considerations within state legislatures and each state's party apparatus.

[JoeMorgue]

Real talk. If I ran a major political party I would make it a rule that our first primary would always be held in the state that we won/lost by the narrowest margin in the last election, and go up from there.

So hypothetically this years Democratic Primaries would be in order; Georgia, Arizona, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and so forth.

[shemp]

Originally Posted by W.D.Clinger

Early primary states have disproportionate influence on the nomination process, because they set the early narrative concerning which candidates are doing well or poorly.

For some time now, the earliest primary states (Iowa and New Hampshire) have been unusually rural and conservative, which gives an advantage to conservative candidates.

In an attempt to reduce that advantage, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) has approved a plan that would make South Carolina the first state to hold a Democratic primary in 2024, with New Hampshire and Nevada following three days later.

State and party officials in Iowa and New Hampshire have objected to this plan, and are fairly likely to proceed with dates that violate the DNC plan. The DNC can penalize states that ignore the DNC plan by reducing the number of delegates those states can send to the Democratic Party's nominating convention. That enforcement mechanism has no direct effect on the Republican Party's process.

To conform to the DNC plan, a few states may end up holding their Democratic and Republican primaries on separate days, but the number of states that can do that is limited by state laws (which vary from state to state) and political considerations within state legislatures and each state's party apparatus.

I guess you haven't been here lately.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Real talk. If I ran a major political party I would make it a rule that our first primary would always be held in the state that we won/lost by the narrowest margin in the last election, and go up from there.

So hypothetically this years Democratic Primaries would be in order; Georgia, Arizona, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and so forth.

I don't know how much power the order of voting has, but if superdelegates are going to be used to tilt the scales of a primary, they probably ought to be assigned according to what you describe. Give a bit of bias towards candidates who perform well in swing states.

It's certainly weird that the Democrats give S. Carolina so much attention in the primary. Biden certainly seems to credit his win there as putting him on the victory path. Really odd for a state that is not even close to going D in the general. If you're going to worry about a candidate's viability in the South, you'd be better off focusing on Georgia, not a state you won't win with any candidate.

[The Great Zaganza]

Is Rhonda Santis the only female Republican running for the White House this time ?

[W.D.Clinger]

Originally Posted by shemp

I guess you haven't been here lately.

New Hampshire is becoming less conservative, but still ranks 9th on the list of least urbanized states. New Hampshire is less urban than Iowa (13th).

[Darat]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Real talk. If I ran a major political party I would make it a rule that our first primary would always be held in the state that we won/lost by the narrowest margin in the last election, and go up from there.

So hypothetically this years Democratic Primaries would be in order; Georgia, Arizona, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and so forth.

You need to do away with your primeries and so on. It's one of things that cement people and positions in place.

Political parties should be run by their members, and that doesn't mean you "register" as a republican/democrat it means you pay your subs and get a vote on who you want as your leader. The party then has an actual leader and then they can promote the party's manifesto and stand for president.

[Trebuchet]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

Is Rhonda Santis the only female Republican running for the White House this time ?

Until Lady Graham throws her hat in the ring, I guess so.

[shemp]

Originally Posted by W.D.Clinger

New Hampshire is becoming less conservative, but still ranks 9th on the list of least urbanized states. New Hampshire is less urban than Iowa (13th).

What, do you think there's nothing between urban and rural? Perhaps you've never heard of suburbs? The two southern and southeastern counties in NH, Hillsborough and Rockingham, which have over half of the state's population, are full of suburbs, many of which are bedroom communities for Massachusetts. My town, which I shall not name to avoid doxing, has over 8,000 people; it is in no way urban, and neither is it rural. For instance, there isn't a single working farm in this town anymore, the last one closed and sold the land for development several years ago. New Hampshire is loaded with towns that are neither urban nor rural. To use the data you cited to make an argument that New Hampshire is rural is utterly ridiculous!

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by shemp

What, do you think there's nothing between urban and rural? Perhaps you've never heard of suburbs?

Politically? *Makes the sorta gesture*

I mean sure nothing is THAT simple in politics, but the urban/rural divide does seem to be a consistent thing in politics.

[shemp]

You're entitled to your opinion. My opinion: New Hampshire is not a rural state, and to claim it is oversimplifies the politics.

[JoeMorgue]

Politics IS oversimplifying things. Politicians have to think of us in the context of big demographics they can court votes from.

Retirees aren't a single block in any social sense of the term but they absolutely are politically. Same thing with farmers, parents, teachers. None of these things mean to a politician what they mean to you or me.

[W.D.Clinger]

All serious content of this communication has been confined to the following spoiler.

Originally Posted by shemp

What, do you think there's nothing between urban and rural? Perhaps you've never heard of suburbs?

The Census Bureau has continued to define "rural" as all territory, persons, and housing units not defined as urban.

Originally Posted by United States Census Bureau

In 1960, the Census Bureau also adopted a population density threshold of at least 1,000 people per square mile for urbanized areas.

For Census 2000, the Census Bureau adopted the urban cluster concept, for the first time defining relatively small, densely settled clusters of population using the same approach as was used to define larger urbanized areas of 50,000 or more population, and no longer identified urban places located outside urbanized areas. In addition, all urbanized areas and urban clusters were delineated solely on population density, without reference to place boundaries...

Originally Posted by shemp

My town, which I shall not name to avoid doxing, has over 8,000 people; it is in no way urban, and neither is it rural.

My town's bigger than your town.

Originally Posted by shemp

New Hampshire is loaded

Yeah right, blame it on the state liquor stores.

Originally Posted by shemp

To use the data you cited to make an argument that New Hampshire is rural is utterly ridiculous!

Why, thank you!

[shemp]

Fine, whatever. I disagree with the Census Bureau definition. When it comes to "urban" and "rural", as Justice Potter Stewart said, "I know it when I see it."

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by shemp

Fine, whatever. I disagree with the Census Bureau definition. When it comes to "urban" and "rural", as Justice Potter Stewart said, "I know it when I see it."

I don't think we're disagree all that much.

I'm not saying "suburban" doesn't exist, I mean obviously I live in a subdivision.

I'm saying that suburban doesn't have the same easily "vote courtable" hot button topics that make the urban and rural.

There's also far less of any real narrative with suburbia then there is with with rural and urban voters.

It's like independent voters. They are more of then they are Democrats and Republicans but there's no single thing they agree on so there are no use politiclally to reach out to for votes.