Biden's new 'ultra-MAGA' label came after six months of liberal-funded focus group research: Report

[bomberfox]

I don't know, I don't. Trump had a lot of policies that were good (you would probably disagree), but he was too disruptive, and too much of a loose cannon.
He did some good things, like turning the Republican party to a more populist message, and standing up against the woke left. But I don't want to see him run for president again.

You dont but republicans do. That is a problem only you can fix. Your culture war non issues blind you.

Take responsibility for once.

 

[forn]

You dont but republicans do. That is a problem only you can fix. Your culture war non issues blind you.

The culture war is important. As for Trump, we'll see if he runs again, and whether or not he gets the nomination.

 

[bomberfox]

The culture war is important. As for Trump, we'll see if he runs again, and whether or not he gets the nomination.

He will and he will. The culture war is just a distraction. Your pockets will hardly be effected.

 

[substantialmajestic]

This is actually a great juxtaposition.

Pay thousands, millions, for one phrase that doesn't even work: Ultra Maga.

vs.

Get hundreds of names for FREE that actually did work: Low Energy Jeb, Little Marco, Lyin Ted, etc., etc.

This is exactly why people are so hungry for non-politican non-establishment candidates.

 

[trouble13]

I don't know, I don't. Trump had a lot of policies that were good (you would probably disagree), but he was too disruptive, and too much of a loose cannon.
He did some good things, like turning the Republican party to a more populist message, and standing up against the woke left. But I don't want to see him run for president again.

I would vote for him again because he is a good leader. The problem with him is that he poisons the well when he speaks. His attacks are personal and the reaction they get is counterproductive to the larger picture. It would serve him to grow a thicker skin but I see no signs that he has.

 

[forn]

I would vote for him again because he is a good leader. The problem with him is that he poisons the well when he speaks. His attacks are personal and the reaction they get is counterproductive to the larger picture. It would serve him to grow a thicker skin but I see no signs that he has.

Like you say, he creates a reaction that is counterproductive. The Democrats hated him so much that they've been trying to wipe out all trace of him and his policies since biden got elected. It's kind of pointless to elect him, because even if you like what he does, he creates such a backlash that you're almost guaranteeing a reversal of direction at the next opportunity. Also, he'd be 78 in 2024, and as we can see from Biden, that is too old. The Republicans have younger, better options. But unfortunately, he probably won't step out of the way for them because of his ego.

 

[trouble13]

Like you say, he creates a reaction that is counterproductive. The Democrats hated him so much that they've been trying to wipe out all trace of him and his policies since biden got elected. It's kind of pointless to elect him, because even if you like what he does, he creates such a backlash that you're almost guaranteeing a reversal of direction at the next opportunity. Also, he'd be 78 in 2024, and as we can see from Biden, that is too old. The Republicans have younger, better options. But unfortunately, he probably won't step out of the way for them because of his ego.

His age is a concern for me as well.

 

[Davin]

Nope, deplorables (as used by Hillary) was merely a half measure.

Let's take this apart. Hillary called the Trump supporters deplorable. Trump supporters, with the assistance of Trump to "fight", caused 1/6 riots at best (insurrection at worse). Today, we still have the GOP DOMINATED by Trump. So how was Hillary wrong about Trump supporters at this point?

Or do you think having a man like Trump saying EVEN TODAY there was RAMPANT election FRAUD as the FACE OF THE GOP NOT DEPLORABLE?

 

[forn]

Let's take this apart. Hillary called the Trump supporters deplorable. Trump supporters, with the assistance of Trump to "fight", caused 1/6 riots at best (insurrection at worse). Today, we still have the GOP DOMINATED by Trump. So how was Hillary wrong about Trump supporters at this point?

Hillary called half of Trump supporters the "basket of deplorables". But only a relative handful of people stormed the capitol. Half the people who voted for Trump did not storm the capitol. And most conservatives did not support their storming the capitol. In fact, that bunch gave Democrats the biggest gift they could have, a talking point they could cudgel Republicans with for years. But what those "insurrectionists" did was no worse than what the leftist rioters did in 2020, does that make all Democrats deplorable? Because logically, if you apply the same standard, it should.

 

[gbg3]

The people on the left might respond to it, which I guess is the objective.
But for people on the right, "Ultra MAGA" and "The Great MAGA King" is met with laughter.

Laughter and I expect tee shirts, hats and more (produced by the right). I think there are already several options available for purchase.

 

[gbg3]

Perhaps you might swallow it easier from the Washington Post?

Biden’s attempt to appropriate the “MAGA” brand as a political attack was hardly accidental. It arose from a six-month research project to find the best way to target Republicans, helmed by Biden adviser Anita Dunn and by the Center for American Progress Action Fund, a liberal group.

And I heard it was a rather expensive 6-month endeavor for the perfect label, lol.

 

[gbg3]

I see you have nothing of substance to add so thank you and good day.

OMG, it seems acceptance was just too much of a struggle for some tonight. That's the way several threads have been going lately. NOOOOOO-it's just not true!

 

[gbg3]

The Republicans have younger, better options.

Yes, an excellent one IMO. DeSantis!