What have we learned from the 2020 election...so far.

Remember that the Democrats also had a flawed candidate. As Trump said just prior to the election "“I’m running against the single-worst candidate in the history of American politics,” he said as the large crowd chuckled in unison. “Can you imagine if you lose to a guy like this?""

As in 2016, we had to vote for what many considered to be "the lesser of two evils". I voted for Biden and you voted for Trump.

Very doubtful that Biden will run again in 2024. Yes, the Democratic party must decide whether it moves left or stays moderate. But the Republican party must decide whether it looks to Trump going forward as either the 2024 candidate or someone who has major influence in determining who the candidate might be or moving away from him. Over 70 million people voted for him.

Any idea who you think might be a front-runner on the Republican side for 2024? Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

We cant continue nominating guys like mccain romney dole and trump. Back to the question. I dont even have a guess! Id love to have Scott Walker as President but hes a doer and not a baby kissing politician popularity contests winner!
Sad that the most qualified is often shot down due to who can kiss the most folks.

We cant continue nominating guys like mccain romney dole and trump. Back to the question. I dont even have a guess! Id love to have Scott Walker as President but hes a doer and not a baby kissing politician popularity contests winner!
Sad that the most qualified is often shot down due to who can kiss the most folks. Originally Posted by winn dixie

Agreed, replying to SpeedRacer's question, it's a crapshoot as to who will be the frontrunner. Right now you'd have to say Donald Trump, although Republicans would be making a mistake to run him again in 2024.

Governors like Scott Walker who you mention have executive experience in government, which is maybe the best preparation you can have for leading the country. Ronald Reagan, governor of California, in my opinion did the best job of any president during our lifetimes. And Clinton in his second term did the best of the Democrats. George W. Bush was perhaps an exception, although most of us who followed him as governor of Texas wouldn't say he did an exceptional job when he was in Austin.

Still, Rand Paul would probably be my top pick as far as ideology goes. Tim Scott would be interesting. He could attract black voters to the Republican Party. His background is interesting, having grown up in poverty, the son of a single mother, a nurse's assistant. Contrast with Barrack Obama and Kamala Harris, children of white, Kenyan, Jamaican and Indian parents who had comfortable upbringings.

Kasich might be my top pick because although I disagree with him on some issues, he'd be a formidable candidate in a general election, with a good background as governor and Congressman, and a little experience in business to boot.

What we learned is FRAUD happens ,,,,,,

Since, you're buying a pig in the poke, which candidates have been the most qualified? George H.W. Bush was the most qualified candidate in fifty years.
See anyone like that? And he got taken down by the husband/wife team of a failed southern governor.

So who is on the horizon for the GOP? (I'll let the dems make their own picks since Joe won't be around then.)

From the political class:

Scott Walker
Ted Cruz
Marco Rubio
John Kasich
Nikki Haley
Kristi Noem

From the entertainment class:

Sean Hannity
Kanye West

Gheese! Bought and paid for by Hitlery herself, of course through Perkins Coi and Chissy Steele et al. Just examine the first three word of the BS. "Paid Russian activists"

Paid - by whom? How? How much? Got a receipt for that?
Russian - As evidenced by what?
Activists - They got names, addresses? How much were they paid? Countries of origin?

So the thesis is: multiple payments flowed from RUSSIA, to many activists, for many years, across many boarders (presumably) and yet, no actual evidence of any of it to bring charges and prosecute. No paper trail, no bank records, no wire transfer receipts - nothing and nadda in the way of usable evidence. Cracker Jack work there Ace. Sure hope nobody paid the Heir Mueller team $35 Million for that effort.

On top of all that nonsense; they never proved any hacking, i.e. penetration, resulting in document transfer, ever occurred or who the perpetrators were. No need to cut n paste the lines in the report. I am well aware of them and they have been debunked a long time ago.


The general conclusion that Russia would prefer the unknown Trump over the repeatedly anything for a buck, Clinton is just absurd and would only be proffered by her majesty Hillary.

I think we are discussing 2 issues. The Mueller investigation determined that Russia interfered in the 2016 election.

Paid Russian activists spent years crafting convincing social media accounts and fake personas that would go on to engage repeatedly with apparently unwitting members of the Trump campaign, special counsel Robert Mueller concluded after a nearly two-year investigation.

The report details both Moscow's social media influence campaign and Russian intelligence officials’ systemic effort to hack and dump documents stolen from Democratic officials. Together, the report paints a detailed narrative of Russian election interference and the sweeping and elaborate effort to discredit Hillary Clinton and elect Trump to the presidency in 2016. Still, the report notes, the investigation did not conclude the Trump campaign conspired with the Russians in that effort.


On the other hand, there was no evidence that Donald Trump or members of his campaign were involved in the interference.

“Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities,” the report notes.

Which supports what I have consistently said -- the Russians interfered in the 2016 election in favor of Trump but Trump was not involved in the interference.

Just trying to be helpful. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Since, you're buying a pig in the poke, which candidates have been the most qualified? George H.W. Bush was the most qualified candidate in fifty years.
See anyone like that? And he got taken down by the husband/wife team of a failed southern governor.

So who is on the horizon for the GOP? (I'll let the dems make their own picks since Joe won't be around then.)

From the political class:

Scott Walker
Ted Cruz
Marco Rubio
John Kasich
Nikki Haley
Kristi Noem

From the entertainment class:

Sean Hannity
Kanye West
Tucker Carlson Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

ftfy!

Teddy Cruz.

lolling al franken.

He was told to step down from his own party due to MANY sexual assault allegations.

lolling

Since, you're buying a pig in the poke, which candidates have been the most qualified? George H.W. Bush was the most qualified candidate in fifty years.
See anyone like that? And he got taken down by the husband/wife team of a failed southern governor.

So who is on the horizon for the GOP? (I'll let the dems make their own picks since Joe won't be around then.)

From the political class:

Scott Walker
Ted Cruz
Marco Rubio
John Kasich
Nikki Haley
Kristi Noem

From the entertainment class:

Sean Hannity
Kanye West Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Interesting list. Cruz barely won reelection in 2018 and is seemingly not well-liked at the national level. Rubio was really weak in the 2016 Republican debates. Has not been nationally relevant since then. Republicans may not like Kasich's support of Biden. I'm impressed with Walker from what I've seen of him.

What we leaned is that once again, good trumps evil. We also learned that Trump supporters are just as insufferable and annoying in their recent loss as they have been since their last (and distant) victory.

^ I disagree the Bushsss are part of the swamp ,, whole family
The other things we learned is the party of transparent free , every vote , nefarious conspiracy ,liberal privilege ,doesn't ant anybody looking here ??

^ I disagree the Bushsss are part of the swamp ,, whole family
The other things we learned is the party of transparent free , every vote , nefarious conspiracy ,liberal privilege ,doesn't ant anybody looking here ?? Originally Posted by rexdutchman

Again, is this supposed to be english?

^ I disagree the Bushsss are part of the swamp ,, whole family
The other things we learned is the party of transparent free , every vote , nefarious conspiracy ,liberal privilege ,doesn't ant anybody looking here ?? Originally Posted by rexdutchman