2024 GOP Presidential Race (formerly Can DeSantis overcome Trump?)

Thread Attachment browser
SteveSBrickNJ

SteveSBrickNJ

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2022
Messages
899
Reaction score
493
Age
61
Location
New Jersey
Offline
Many of Trump's endorsed candidates did not do well on Nov. 8th.
*
Gov. Ron DeSantis DID do well.
He won convincingly.
Yet in this OP's opinion, Donald Trump is an egomaniac who is seemingly incapable of putting "Party over Self"
Trump has ZERO chance of being elected our next president.
In my opinion, if Trump would just shut up and go away (fat chance of that)...but "if" Trump did that, Gov. Ron DeSantis would have a CHANCE to be a formidable candidate for President in 2024.
Here is an interesting article on this topic...
www.scotsman.com

Donald Trump warns Ron DeSantis against 2024 presidential bid as Republican rising star wins big

Donald Trump has warned Florida's Governor Ron DeSantis against running for president in 2024, saying doing so would harm the Republican Party.
www.scotsman.com www.scotsman.com
*
*
What do any of you think re. Trump vs DeSantis?
 
For what it’s worth

I didn’t know he wasn’t married

And don’t think it matters if he isn’t
==============
In June, as Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) began to get a little momentum in the presidential primary, a person working on behalf of one of Scott’s Republican opponents messaged me, asking to chat.

“Have you seen the video,” he asked over the phone, conspiratorially, “where he says he has a girlfriend?”

The video in question was from a May event organized by the news website Axios, where the interviewer asked the South Carolina senator about the possibility of becoming the first bachelor president since the 19th century.

“I probably have more time, more energy and more latitude to do the job,” he replies. And then the senator adds — quickly, as an aside: “My girlfriend wants to see me when I come home.”

The Republican operative who called me wasn’t sure said girlfriend existed. He suggested I look into it. He followed up on our conversation with an email that included a dossier of Scott’s known personal relationships. “No fingerprints,” he said.

Scott’s romantic endeavors aren’t a scandal so much as they are a mystery. At 57, he’s never been married and rarely talks about girlfriends past or present.

Late last year, as Scott was ramping up his run for president, I asked Jennifer DeCasper, his close friend and campaign manager, about the status of his dating life. “It’s nonexistent,” she said.

Now, Scott was suggesting otherwise. And the timing of that revelation seemed a bit convenient.
“He has staked so much on his personal story, character and faith,” said the operative, who spoke to me on the condition of anonymity because, well, that’s how people kick dirt around in this business.

“He’s running as America’s pastor, so to speak, as he courts evangelicals in Iowa, and I think a lot of folks may wonder about his lack of a family.”…….

……And although there have been unmarried candidates for president over the years — including the other Republican senator from South Carolina, Lindsey O. Graham, in 2015 — you would have to go all the way back to Grover Cleveland, in 1884, to find a bachelor who won. (Cleveland married two years later.) Before that, there was James Buchanan, who stayed single after winning in 1856. And yeah, it was a thing.

“An Old Bachelor is at most but a half man,” wrote the New York Evening Post in an editorial about Buchanan. “How can such a person make more than a half-President?”

Fast-forward to two-thousand-whatever. Despite an evolving understanding of gender — or, more likely, because of it — Republicans have made defining “masculinity” a part of their political playbook. This includes promoting some pretty old-school ideas about marriage.

“Men are meant to be husbands, to form the virtues of a husband in their souls,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) wrote in his book “Manhood.”

Before Trump, when Tim Miller was working in opposition research on the Republican side, finding a sex scandal used to be an effective way to topple an opponent. It may say something about our current political moment that Scott’s opponents might see an opportunity to damage him with a sexless scandal.

“What might be salient with Republican voters is not that he isn’t a perfect family man,” Miller told me, “but that he might not have the macho womanizing strength of the MAGA god-king.”

Scott’s current mission is to impress a particular subset of Republicans: the ones who will be participating in the Iowa caucuses early next year.

What do they think of the idea of an unmarried, childless commander in chief?

“I think 10 or 20 years ago, people had a kind of romance with the first family,” said Bob Vander Plaats, the head of the Family Leader, a social conservative organization in Iowa. “But I think our country is at the point where being married isn’t the top qualifier. It probably doesn’t make the Top 50.”……….

 
Optimus Prime said:
For what it’s worth

I didn’t know he wasn’t married

And don’t think it matters if he isn’t
==============
In June, as Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) began to get a little momentum in the presidential primary, a person working on behalf of one of Scott’s Republican opponents messaged me, asking to chat.

“Have you seen the video,” he asked over the phone, conspiratorially, “where he says he has a girlfriend?”

The video in question was from a May event organized by the news website Axios, where the interviewer asked the South Carolina senator about the possibility of becoming the first bachelor president since the 19th century.

“I probably have more time, more energy and more latitude to do the job,” he replies. And then the senator adds — quickly, as an aside: “My girlfriend wants to see me when I come home.”

The Republican operative who called me wasn’t sure said girlfriend existed. He suggested I look into it. He followed up on our conversation with an email that included a dossier of Scott’s known personal relationships. “No fingerprints,” he said.

Scott’s romantic endeavors aren’t a scandal so much as they are a mystery. At 57, he’s never been married and rarely talks about girlfriends past or present.

Late last year, as Scott was ramping up his run for president, I asked Jennifer DeCasper, his close friend and campaign manager, about the status of his dating life. “It’s nonexistent,” she said.

Now, Scott was suggesting otherwise. And the timing of that revelation seemed a bit convenient.
“He has staked so much on his personal story, character and faith,” said the operative, who spoke to me on the condition of anonymity because, well, that’s how people kick dirt around in this business.

“He’s running as America’s pastor, so to speak, as he courts evangelicals in Iowa, and I think a lot of folks may wonder about his lack of a family.”…….

……And although there have been unmarried candidates for president over the years — including the other Republican senator from South Carolina, Lindsey O. Graham, in 2015 — you would have to go all the way back to Grover Cleveland, in 1884, to find a bachelor who won. (Cleveland married two years later.) Before that, there was James Buchanan, who stayed single after winning in 1856. And yeah, it was a thing.

“An Old Bachelor is at most but a half man,” wrote the New York Evening Post in an editorial about Buchanan. “How can such a person make more than a half-President?”

Fast-forward to two-thousand-whatever. Despite an evolving understanding of gender — or, more likely, because of it — Republicans have made defining “masculinity” a part of their political playbook. This includes promoting some pretty old-school ideas about marriage.

“Men are meant to be husbands, to form the virtues of a husband in their souls,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) wrote in his book “Manhood.”

Before Trump, when Tim Miller was working in opposition research on the Republican side, finding a sex scandal used to be an effective way to topple an opponent. It may say something about our current political moment that Scott’s opponents might see an opportunity to damage him with a sexless scandal.

“What might be salient with Republican voters is not that he isn’t a perfect family man,” Miller told me, “but that he might not have the macho womanizing strength of the MAGA god-king.”

Scott’s current mission is to impress a particular subset of Republicans: the ones who will be participating in the Iowa caucuses early next year.

What do they think of the idea of an unmarried, childless commander in chief?

“I think 10 or 20 years ago, people had a kind of romance with the first family,” said Bob Vander Plaats, the head of the Family Leader, a social conservative organization in Iowa. “But I think our country is at the point where being married isn’t the top qualifier. It probably doesn’t make the Top 50.”……….

Click to expand...
I have a theory, but I ain't saying out loud on here. I'd rather let him say it, but I'd be surprised if he ever does.
 
Former President Donald Trump continues to lead a crowded 2024 GOP presidential field as he prepares to bring his campaign back to South Carolina on Sept. 25 in Summerville.

A new Monmouth University-Washington Post poll released Thursday bolstered his lead in the Palmetto State, with 46% of potential GOP primary voters hedging their bets on the indictment-laden candidate.

Trump's lead was equivalent to the support held by the rest of the field. The two homegrown candidates, former S.C. Gov. Nikki Haley and Sen. Tim Scott, made for just over a quarter of support.

Haley, who had been lagging behind in polls since February, has started to see polls tick in her favor. She was in second place after Trump with 18% of the votes in the SC primary poll. Meanwhile, Scott was at 10% and DeSantis, who has substantial support in the Upstate in South Carolina, was at 9%..........

 
scary possibility

I don't even want to think about the reaction if this were to actually happen
=======================

In an ordinary time, under ordinary political conditions, the specter of another Trump presidency would be strictly the stuff of nightmares. The former president is facing 40 criminal charges for his mishandling of classified documents, and will have to interrupt his campaign next summer to defend himself in court. Those charges are apart from the 34 felony counts of falsifying business records he faces in New York. And then there’s the rape defamation lawsuit, which will begin in January, and which he will almost certainly lose.

The American people, however, can be awfully forgiving. In current polling, Joe Biden and Donald Trump are tied nationally; no Republican nominee has emerged to challenge Trump. But, as we have been learning pretty much continuously since 2000, the will of the majority of the American people no longer matters all that much in who is running their country.

The abstruse and elaborate mechanisms of the US constitution relating to elections, which used to be matters for historical curiosity, have become more and more relevant every year. In 2024, there is very much a way for Donald Trump to lose the popular vote, lose the electoral college, lose all his legal cases and still end up president of the United States in an entirely legal manner. It’s called a contingent election.

A contingent election is the process put in place to deal with the eventuality in which no presidential candidate reaches the threshold of 270 votes in the electoral college. In the early days of the American republic, when the duopoly of the two-party system was neither desired nor expected, this process was essential.

There have been two contingent elections in US history. The first was in 1825. The year before, Andrew Jackson, the man from the $20 bill, had won the plurality of votes and the plurality of electoral college votes as well, but after extensive, elaborate negotiations, John Quincy Adams took the presidency mostly by offering Henry Clay, who had come third in the election, secretary of state. Jackson, though shocked, conceded gracefully. He knew his time would come. His supporters used the butt area of Adams’s “corrupt bargain” with Clay to ensure Jackson’s victory in 1828.........

The American people are already disinclined to believe in the legitimacy of any election that doesn’t conform to their own desired outcome any more, left or right. In 2016, at the inauguration of Donald Trump, the crowds chanted “not my president”. As of August, the percentage of Republicans who think that 2020 was stolen is near 70%.

So the possibility of the electoral college releasing a confusing result, or being unable to certify a satisfying result by two months after the election, is quite real. The electoral college, even at its best, is an arcane system, unworthy of a 21st-century country. There have been, up to 2020, 165 faithless electors in American history – electors who didn’t vote for the candidate they had pledged to vote for.

In 1836, Virginia faithless electors forced a contingent election for vice-president. If the 270 marker has not been reached by 6 January, the contingent election takes place automatically. And the contingent election isn’t decided by the popular votes or the number of electoral college votes. Each state delegation in the House of Representatives is given a single vote for president. Each state delegation in the Senate is given a single vote for vice-president.

The basic unfairness of this process is obvious: California with its 52 representatives, and Texas with its 38 representatives, would have the same say in determining the presidency as Wyoming and Vermont, which have one apiece. State delegations in the House would favor Republicans as a matter of course. In the struggle for congressional delegates, Republicans would have 19 safe House delegations and the Democrats would have 14, as it stands, with more states leaning Republican than Democrat..........

www.theguardian.com

Here’s the scary way Trump could win without the electoral or popular vote | Stephen Marche

In a ‘contingent election’, he could lose the popular vote, electoral college and all his legal cases and still end up the legal US president
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
For what it’s worth

This doesn’t make sense to me
========================

Either former president Donald Trump’s standing in early 2024 polls is inflated, or we are headed for a sizable realignment in how non-White voters cast their ballots.


Multiple polls in recent weeks have shown Trump performing historically well among Black and Hispanic voters in head-to-head matchups with President Biden, helping put him neck-and-neck with Biden in a way he rarely was during their 2020 matchup.


Across five high-quality polls that have broken out non-White voters in the past month, Trump is averaging 20 percent of Black voters and 42 percent of Hispanic voters.

Both numbers — and especially that for Black voters — could set modern-day records for a Republican in a presidential election. Trump in 2020 took just 8 percent of Black voters and 36 percent of Hispanic voters, according to the Pew Research Center’s validated voter survey.

Exit polls pegged those figures at 12 percent of Black voters and 32 percent of Hispanic voters.
(The validated voter surveys involve conducting a huge poll of American adults and then getting a more accurate picture than the exit polls by verifying whether respondents actually voted, using official records.)


No Republican presidential candidate in the past 50 years has approached receiving 20 percent of the Black vote. Since Republicans took 18 percent in 1972 and 16 percent in 1976, according to exit polls, they haven’t taken more than 12 percent of Black voters. Their average share over the past 50 years is 9 percent — about half of where Trump currently sits in the polls.

Hispanic voters have trended toward the GOP in recent elections, but the party’s current high-water marks over the past half-century are 37 percent in 1984 and a disputed 44 percent in 2004. (Other estimates placed President George W. Bush’s actual share of the Hispanic vote that year at about 40 percent, which would be shy of where Trump currently is in the polls.)


So how plausible is this?


The first thing to note is that individual polls tend to feature small sample sizes of Black and Hispanic voters, which is why we have combined multiple surveys. Trump actually takes as much as 25 percent of Black voters in a recent Quinnipiac University poll and 47 percent of Hispanic voters in a recent CBS News poll — numbers that would appear implausible even if those voters have trended toward him significantly.


Another point is that despite the GOP’s claims about Trump’s ability to appeal to Black voters and especially Black men, this wouldn’t appear to be strictly about Trump. Fox News’s pollsters last week tested seven 2024 Republicans against Biden, and just about every GOP candidate was near 20 percent…….

 
Optimus Prime said:
For what it’s worth

This doesn’t make sense to me
========================

Either former president Donald Trump’s standing in early 2024 polls is inflated, or we are headed for a sizable realignment in how non-White voters cast their ballots.


Multiple polls in recent weeks have shown Trump performing historically well among Black and Hispanic voters in head-to-head matchups with President Biden, helping put him neck-and-neck with Biden in a way he rarely was during their 2020 matchup.


Across five high-quality polls that have broken out non-White voters in the past month, Trump is averaging 20 percent of Black voters and 42 percent of Hispanic voters.

Both numbers — and especially that for Black voters — could set modern-day records for a Republican in a presidential election. Trump in 2020 took just 8 percent of Black voters and 36 percent of Hispanic voters, according to the Pew Research Center’s validated voter survey.

Exit polls pegged those figures at 12 percent of Black voters and 32 percent of Hispanic voters.
(The validated voter surveys involve conducting a huge poll of American adults and then getting a more accurate picture than the exit polls by verifying whether respondents actually voted, using official records.)


No Republican presidential candidate in the past 50 years has approached receiving 20 percent of the Black vote. Since Republicans took 18 percent in 1972 and 16 percent in 1976, according to exit polls, they haven’t taken more than 12 percent of Black voters. Their average share over the past 50 years is 9 percent — about half of where Trump currently sits in the polls.

Hispanic voters have trended toward the GOP in recent elections, but the party’s current high-water marks over the past half-century are 37 percent in 1984 and a disputed 44 percent in 2004. (Other estimates placed President George W. Bush’s actual share of the Hispanic vote that year at about 40 percent, which would be shy of where Trump currently is in the polls.)


So how plausible is this?


The first thing to note is that individual polls tend to feature small sample sizes of Black and Hispanic voters, which is why we have combined multiple surveys. Trump actually takes as much as 25 percent of Black voters in a recent Quinnipiac University poll and 47 percent of Hispanic voters in a recent CBS News poll — numbers that would appear implausible even if those voters have trended toward him significantly.


Another point is that despite the GOP’s claims about Trump’s ability to appeal to Black voters and especially Black men, this wouldn’t appear to be strictly about Trump. Fox News’s pollsters last week tested seven 2024 Republicans against Biden, and just about every GOP candidate was near 20 percent…….

Click to expand...
This doesn't surprise me tbh. There's always been a conservative/religious segment of minority populations. It no doubt fluctuates, and it's part of the overall political calculus. And yeah, it's less about Trump and more about broader trends in people trending conservative in some segments of the population.

Getting out the vote is going to be critical because history shows that Republicans generally do a better job of mobilizing their base than the Democrats have. Beating Trump is absolutely not a given.
 
Optimus Prime said:
For what it’s worth

This doesn’t make sense to me
========================

Either former president Donald Trump’s standing in early 2024 polls is inflated, or we are headed for a sizable realignment in how non-White voters cast their ballots.


Multiple polls in recent weeks have shown Trump performing historically well among Black and Hispanic voters in head-to-head matchups with President Biden, helping put him neck-and-neck with Biden in a way he rarely was during their 2020 matchup.


Across five high-quality polls that have broken out non-White voters in the past month, Trump is averaging 20 percent of Black voters and 42 percent of Hispanic voters.

Both numbers — and especially that for Black voters — could set modern-day records for a Republican in a presidential election. Trump in 2020 took just 8 percent of Black voters and 36 percent of Hispanic voters, according to the Pew Research Center’s validated voter survey.

Exit polls pegged those figures at 12 percent of Black voters and 32 percent of Hispanic voters.
(The validated voter surveys involve conducting a huge poll of American adults and then getting a more accurate picture than the exit polls by verifying whether respondents actually voted, using official records.)


No Republican presidential candidate in the past 50 years has approached receiving 20 percent of the Black vote. Since Republicans took 18 percent in 1972 and 16 percent in 1976, according to exit polls, they haven’t taken more than 12 percent of Black voters. Their average share over the past 50 years is 9 percent — about half of where Trump currently sits in the polls.

Hispanic voters have trended toward the GOP in recent elections, but the party’s current high-water marks over the past half-century are 37 percent in 1984 and a disputed 44 percent in 2004. (Other estimates placed President George W. Bush’s actual share of the Hispanic vote that year at about 40 percent, which would be shy of where Trump currently is in the polls.)


So how plausible is this?


The first thing to note is that individual polls tend to feature small sample sizes of Black and Hispanic voters, which is why we have combined multiple surveys. Trump actually takes as much as 25 percent of Black voters in a recent Quinnipiac University poll and 47 percent of Hispanic voters in a recent CBS News poll — numbers that would appear implausible even if those voters have trended toward him significantly.


Another point is that despite the GOP’s claims about Trump’s ability to appeal to Black voters and especially Black men, this wouldn’t appear to be strictly about Trump. Fox News’s pollsters last week tested seven 2024 Republicans against Biden, and just about every GOP candidate was near 20 percent…….

Click to expand...

There's no way. They need to increase their sample size. Regardless, polls are fundamentally broken, the only people that are bothering to respond to them are activist/extremist. Most people avoid responding to them at all cost. Also, Democrats are outperforming Republicans and the polls in just about every election the last 3 years by something like 11 points.
 
coldseat said:
There's no way. They need to increase their sample size. Regardless, polls are fundamentally broken, the only people that are bothering to respond to them are activist/extremist. Most people avoid responding to them at all cost. Also, Democrats are outperforming Republicans and the polls in just about every election the last 3 years by something like 11 points.
Click to expand...
Yes, I see the actual results in the midterms and all the special elections since then and the polls are utterly failing to register those results. Polls are pretty worthless at this point in the election cycle anyway.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Share this page

Advertisement

General News Feed

Fact Checkers News Feed

Sponsored

Back
Top Bottom