I don’t even get the @DavidAFrench NRO/DCX crowd that keeps on pointing out that Trump lost: They kept hammering Trump and essentially called for his loss. He lost by 42K spread in 3 states. They caused it and now they behave as if it prove how weak Trump was. cc @LarryHogan
Non-Trumpers due to MSM had enough of an impact to cause Trump to lose by 42K votes. A former GOP POTUS admitted not voting for his party’s choice! There were indeed thousands more of those. Their choice. But they keep yelling that Trump lost as if it proves anything about him.
If Non/Never-Trumpers want to say “we caused Trump’s loss and we are happy about it because Biden in his worst day is better than Trump in his best,” I can respect that. It’s flawed but that’s where someone stands behind their actions. However, these Non-Nevers keep “proving”
that Trump was a net loss for the GOP by showing that the GOP lost it all with him but they ignore their role in it! Their role of sniping away at Trump from the alleged right for years which left an impact against the GOP, so what is the surprise that he lost? cc @RichLowry
BTW, the claim that the “GOP lost the WH, House, Senate with Trump” skips over the little fact that the GOP had the WH/Senate for 4 years with Trump and the House for 2 years, while the GOP never had the WH with McCain/Romney and the GOP lost it all with Bush! cc @brithume
W. Bush in 2008 and McCain atop the ticket left the GOP depleted from the WH, House and Senate despite no organized Never McCain movement; nor was there a Never Romney machine when the GOP with @MittRomney on the ticket lost 8 House seats; 2 Senate seats and the WH in 2012!
Bush, McCain and Romney (BMR) left the GOP worse or as bad as Trump did, and the Non-Never Trump wing likely caused the losses by snipping at Trump/GOP. Yet they act as if Trump’s outcome (caused by them yet still better than BMR) proves that Trump was a net loss for the GOP.
The whole claim by the Non-Never Trump wing of the GOP about Trump-induced losses is off when you consider that they think it’s a virtue to lose in name of Country Over Party. Great. So why are they complaining when they got what they championed? cc @EWErickson@EsotericCD
Sum:
1) Trump’s GOP won better than the McCain/Romney GOP (Bush left the GOP with nothing).
2) Non-Never Trumper kept undercutting the GOP; likely causing losses.
3) Nevers claim it’s cool to lose in name of Country.
So what’s their point that the GOP lost it all with Trump?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
@AnnCoulter@michaeljknowles The fault line in the GOP is not Cons vs moderates on policy. Every political party moves on policy over time.
The fault line is process, the politics part of politics.
So... is @EliseStefanik willing to hit back regarding elections, candidates, fake scandals and smears?
@AnnCoulter@michaeljknowles@EliseStefanik I didn’t study how @EliseStefanik is on the politics of politics (which matters more than policy because if you sabotage on process as Liz did, you lose elections and don׳t have the power to even argue on policy). Here are some quick search results on her politics of politics:
People are reporting about Facebook’s “oversight board” as if it’s the Office of Legal Counsel at the DOJ which it turns out is as driven by bias emotions/agendas as anything else in life. None of these things are run by righteousness or integrity.
Why does FB even act that they have a system of rules? They do what they wish just because they could.
Did anyone think that FB as a company will now open itself to more slamming from Lefties? (Lefties who violate the same supposed rules that causes non-Libs to be banned.)
There is no legit “FB Oversight Board.” FB as a company has an executive team and a board who call the shots and won׳t give up the direction of its company to a truly independent committee. Besides, oversight members are hacks who know what to do. You think they have Trump Fans?
Tony Podesta is @johnpodesta’s brother. He was a big-shot lobbyist who closed his firm when Manafort was clipped by Mueller.
Why?
They both worked together on Ukraine items; Tony was a vehicle for Manafort. He could have been charged. He wasn’t. He instead closed shop.
John was one of ten board members at Joule. 3 members were Russians who served there as result of the Putin-funded Rusnano having investing in the firm; which collapsed when Hillary’s campaign ended in 2016.
My point?
Tony and John could have possibly been charged with FARA.
The Foreign Agent Registrarion Act requires operatives to register when they get paid to lobby foreign government interests. People rarely get charged with this and many people rushed to register after Manafort’s case.
This is the given investigation against @RudyGiuliani. FARA.
Principled Conservatives like to slam “their own side” due to principles.
But if they are driven by principle, how do they have a political side?
If and since they don’t have a side due to principles, why do they attack the side closer aligned with their policy principles?
Principled Cons reserve their harshest criticism for politicians who take the most media heat which is mostly against Republicans.
Odd because those Cons like to whine about media power yet they follow along. They claim to be driven by principle yet they get influenced by media.
Principled Cons (PCs) claim to be conservatice on policy and therefore aligned with the GOP which is more right-leaning than Democrats. Yet, these PCs enable Democrats to drive Republicans from office and to implement anti-conservative policy. What is principle in this?
The grand juries and raids against people on the Trump side (over issues that are usually not prosecuted and/or done without raids), show you that the email and IRS abuse investigations were jokes. Mueller (FBI head until late 2013) and Comey held the line for the Obama Admin.
Mueller figured out how to charge Trump’s Manafort’s Rick Gates’ Van Der Zwan for lying about a legal meeting unrelated to collusion. That’s a prosecution six degrees of separation from Trump Colluding.
Michel Cohen’s father-in-law faced charges so Cohen pled guilty.
Many who opine about vaccines are clueless, so their default responses is to yell “anti-vaxx” as @HaMeturgeman noted. But if you are informed pls address: Fauci suggested that Covid vaccines for kids R to protect them (he didn’t say herd). Considering the data, why is it needed?
This is Fauci’s latest words on Coronavirus vaccines for kids of all ages and the reason why they need it. When you listen to it, please note the data above and please try to address it like an informed adult; not a mindless zombie repeating buzzwords. Go: