Whither the GOP post Trump 2020 election loss
-
In a new letter, shared exclusively with POLITICO, the former Trump administration officials — some of the officials have been outspoken Trump critics for years — stated, “this is who Donald Trump is.”
“The revelations General Kelly brought forward are disturbing and shocking. But because we know Trump and have worked for and alongside him, we were sadly not surprised by what General Kelly had to say,” the letter states.
“We applaud General Kelly for highlighting in stark details the danger of a second Trump term. Like General Kelly, we did not take the decision to come forward lightly. We are all lifelong Republicans who served our country. However, there are moments in history where it becomes necessary to put country over party. This is one of those moments” the letter states. “Everyone should heed General Kelly’s warning.”
The letter was signed by Trump administration officials, including Kevin Carroll, former senior counselor to Kelly; former deputy press secretary Sarah Matthews; former assistant secretary of homeland security Elizabeth Neumann; former White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci; former chief of staff at the Dept. of Homeland Security Miles Taylor; former White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham; former press secretary to the vice president Alyssa Farah Griffin; and former national security adviser to vice president Pence, Olivia Troye.
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/25/never-trump-former-officials-back-kelly-warning-00185435
-
Yep, just before the election. It's part of the campaign that includes the silly Atlantic story.
I like Ben Shapiro's take...Trump is a mud monster. The more mud you throw at him, the bigger he gets.
This stuff is not going to affect his vote.
-
Rhetorically, these are mere endorsements for Kamala. It so happens that our rhetorical language in Harris endorsements in this election, is based in the existential threat of Trump. It is taken seriously only by those who've already swallowed the existential threat narrative. And I don't really know how many of us have. Lots of progressive white women and the men who follow them, that is for sure. But I also think, more people say they believe in that narrative, than actually believe in that narrative. Note that Kamala isn't pounding the existential threat drum in her campaign. Obviously, her handlers consider the narrative to be of dubious quality, even as Ax and TG consider the endorsements to be slam dunks.
Education is extremely important.
-
@Horace said in Whither the GOP post Trump 2020 election loss:
TG consider the endorsements to be slam dunks.
I dont think that endorsements do much (if anything).
I am just surprised that the comments and insights of people who worked more closer to President Trump than pretty much anyone else are discounted. As I have said before, I dont necessary agree or disagree with their politics, but their insights carry some weight.
If you are looking to eat at a restaurant, what would you trust more; the review of the brother of the owner, or the review of the people who worked there?
-
There are hopelessly complicated status reasons for propagating an existential threat narrative, and good reason not to take them seriously. And then, even if one does take them seriously, inevitably left uninvestigated is the process by which a POTUS becomes Hitler within our system of checks and balances, and within our entirely polarized society, where half the population and most of people at the institutional levers, do not like him, and are completely unafraid to say that and act on it.
Education is extremely important.
-
@Horace said in Whither the GOP post Trump 2020 election loss:
There are hopelessly complicated status reasons for propagating an existential threat narrative, and good reason not to take them seriously. And then, even if one does take them seriously, inevitably left uninvestigated is the process by which a POTUS becomes Hitler within our system of checks and balances, and within our entirely polarized society, where half the population and most of people at the institutional levers, do not like him, and are completely unafraid to say that and act on it.
Can you rewrite in simple English? LOL
(Just tease you (but only a little bit). LOL. Your writing is very good, but it takes me at least 2 or more re-reads to try and understand! ).
-
@taiwan_girl said in Whither the GOP post Trump 2020 election loss:
@Horace said in Whither the GOP post Trump 2020 election loss:
There are hopelessly complicated status reasons for propagating an existential threat narrative, and good reason not to take them seriously. And then, even if one does take them seriously, inevitably left uninvestigated is the process by which a POTUS becomes Hitler within our system of checks and balances, and within our entirely polarized society, where half the population and most of people at the institutional levers, do not like him, and are completely unafraid to say that and act on it.
Can you rewrite in simple English? LOL
(Just tease you (but only a little bit). LOL. Your writing is very good, but it takes me at least 2 or more re-reads to try and understand! ).
For instance one of the signatories Scarramucci has a side gig of going on CNN etc to propagate TDS narratives. There are plenty of social and economic incentives to use one's status as a first-hand Trump expert, to say the right things that media companies are willing to pay for.
-
This sort of "borrowed credibility" is a common tactic when propagating desired narratives. For instance, white progressives will lean into the idea that they are only backing up the opinions of minorities, and they will inevitably find some minorities who happen to agree with whatever the white progressives would like to be true. You have to be careful, when assessing narratives, that your natural inclination to trust those with first-hand experience, might be used against you.
-
@taiwan_girl said in Whither the GOP post Trump 2020 election loss:
@Horace said in Whither the GOP post Trump 2020 election loss:
TG consider the endorsements to be slam dunks.
I dont think that endorsements do much (if anything).
I am just surprised that the comments and insights of people who worked more closer to President Trump than pretty much anyone else are discounted. As I have said before, I dont necessary agree or disagree with their politics, but their insights carry some weight.
If you are looking to eat at a restaurant, what would you trust more; the review of the brother of the owner, or the review of the people who worked there?
Depends, were those people fired?
-
Two failed politicians.
Trump - Hitler could've done some shit in 2016, and he didn't.
Harris - could have fixed everything in the last 3 years, and she didn't.
Also remember who owns the Atlantic. Lauren Powell Jobs, Steve's widow. She is well known to be close friends with...
Oh, wait...wrong friend.
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Whither the GOP post Trump 2020 election loss:
Depends, were those people fired?
If one person makes a bad comment about closely working with President Trump, yeah, he could be a sour grape. Five people who worked closely with him, hmmm maybe still a sour grape. When you get to 10 or more, I have to think that there is something to it. And again, most of these people are not a junior analyst who only sees President Trump on TV. These are people who probably spent more time on a daily basis with President Trump than his wife.
