Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Campaign 2020 U.S. House Select Committee on the J6 Attack

You’re the guru on DeSantis, I wouldn’t forget Niki Haley. Pence isn’t getting the nomination, too many Trumpers think he got no balls, they’re not going to support Pence even if Trump ends up in jail. I don’t like to jump ahead to 2024 without knowing the midterm results. My eyes are on Pennsylvania and Fetterman. If he wins, he should, maybe a Democratic ticket of Duckworth/Fetterman could be successful. It’s time to get rid of all the ancient old foggies like Sanders, Biden, Warren etc. New young, fresh blood. For some strange reason, both Duckworth and Fetterman has struck my fancy.

I would. She won't even use her real first name because she knows her base would not like it. Same with Rafael "Fled" Cruz. That's what cowards do.

We've known the midterm results for months.

Since they don't have an incumbent president, Reeps are able to better jostle for position, so we know a handful of the players on the red team.

The blue team is hobbled with Biden, a deeply unpopular president who insists he'll run for a second term. I figger about a year after the midterms before the Democratic primary situation begins to reveal itself.

I've got Ron DeSantis in my face 24/7. For the 2024 nomination Trump is the hands-down favorite. If the Jan 6 Commission removes him from the picture, Trump's base will switch immediately to DeSantis. I don't think he's the next Mussolini but I certainly don't want him to be the next president either.

Nikki who...?

I've watched the full testimony of Rusty Bowers to the committee. Very powerful and heartfelt.

Sitting presidents who have had someone challenge them in their primaries have had a zero success rate. 1952 Estes Kefauver challenged Harry Truman, Truman withdrew, Eisenhower defeated Stevenson. 1968, McCarthy challenged LBJ, LBJ withdrew, Nixon beat Humphrey. 1976 Reagan challenged Ford, Ford survived, but lost to Jimmy Carter. 1980 Kennedy challenged Carter, Carter survived, but lost to Reagan. 1992, Buchanan challenged G.H.W. Bush, Bush survived, but lost to Bill Clinton.

What all those sitting presidents had in common, they were viewed a vulnerable and likely to lose in the general election. So, a challenger arose to challenge the sitting president in hope of the challenger having a better chance in the general, which probably weaken the sitting president even more.

Moral of the story, if Biden decides to run for a second term, it’s probably better to let him without being challenged. Some history.

Obama sat at 42% this time in his second year and would go on to lose 63 house seats in November. But he rebounded to 52% by November 2012 and won reelection. Bill Clinton was at 41% this time in his second year, he would lose 54 house seats in 1994. But Bill rebounded to 57% by November 1996 and easily won reelection. Reagan was at 43% this time in his second year, he would lose 26 house seats in November, but Reagan recovered to 62% in November 1984 and won in a 49-state landslide over Mondale. Presidents can recover, if they don’t, they lose reelection ALA Carter, G.H.W. Bush and Trump. Just because a president is unpopular today or at this time during his second year, doesn’t mean he won’t become very popular come time for reelection.

By the way things went at today's J6 hearing, TFG will be sitting in a holding cell soon.

You should be.

The right wing sites are a reflection of what the base is thinking or about to think. For Republicans it is all about the base. Their base is actually extorting the elected officials into maintaining a strict Trump party. Because of this, you should pay attention. I listen to the local Trump supporters. Their signs are still up. The polls say Trump is losing influence ... I say when it comes down to actual reality, when Trump says he will run (even if from prison ... he'll pardon himself) .... they will come back and support him. Forget Ponzi ....Trump is the greatest con man to have ever lived.

What you're attached to is some of the same voodoo mathematics that Douglas Frank uses to find fraud in election results.

You present results and suggest if the next candidates fit certain criteria you have selected then the outcome is fore ordained ... until there is a one off and then the mad scramble to explain away the aberrant result. But it is in that explanation that we find the real way to use historical records. It turns out there are many more variables which come into play, which determine an outcome, and all are dependent on their place in the historical time frame. What is a variable today was not a variable of interest 20 years ago, etc etc. And to further complicate it, people like Trump who are obviously unfit to be dogcatcher, can be elected because he has captured the minds of a base which was looking for a savior.

True. But most of us have a pretty good idea what those idiots are thinking without tuning in to or clicking on right-wing media reports.

The same more or less holds true for liberal news outlets. The primary difference is that I don't think their audience is made up entirely of idiots.

But I also don't need to go any deeper than the Times or Politico to keep up with what's happening.

The J6 proceedings are making them squirm. I like that.

But also, people like Trump get rapidly un-elected when their unfitness to govern becomes obvious to an electoral majority of Americans. And his half-baked scheme to retain power is being exposed on prime-time teevee for all to see!

My never-ending faith in the American system is playing out in real time.

And I've got dollars to doughnuts says Garland will go easy on him.