It will never cease to amaze me...
My political philosophy is the median Republican voter from a decade or so ago: socially conservative, pro-small government, pro-free trade, pro-national defense with a muscular foreign policy.
And there's no place for that in today's GOP.
We literally have the videos of Hezbollah rockets streaking across the sky, breaking the ceasefire first.
It doesn’t matter, though. The quickest way to engagement on this site is to give the Pakistani bot networks what they want.
Among pro-Israel voters, as with pro-life voters & other factions, Trump has earned enough credibility that people are disinclined to turn on him right away. Vance is spending capital he hasn't earned.
Good news: literally no one proposes “forever wars.” So I agree “proponents of forever wars” don’t have credibility. Neither do leprechauns. Try arguing against a position that actually exists.
So many people are lumping together the decision to go to war with Iran with how it was subsequently executed (or botched) as one big package deal. Don’t do this. It’s a Jedi mind trick. These are two separate issues that need to be to be analyzed separately. Just admit that you would prefer Iran as it was before we went to war and save me a lot of time.
His approval has tanked, and with his name attached to this "deal" it's only going to get worse. The reason his approval has tanked - his association with Trump - isn't going away, ever.
An arguably bigger issue for Vance - and for any Republican - is the national trend over the last 40+ years. Reagan/Bush 1 in '88 was the last time two Presidents from the same party were elected back-to-back. In '16, '20, and '24, this was especially pronounced - the voters saying "I just want the current system gone." It's a fatigue with whatever party is currently in power (which is exacerbated by 24 hour news and now social media, but that's another conversation). The idea that Trump and Vance - as unpopular as they both are - will be the ones to break that cycle is nearly impossible to believe.
Optimistic take: Vance is now damaged goods and won't run for President in '28. Rubio wins and has the opportunity to remake the conservative coalition.
Realistic take: No Republican is winning in '28. Rubio wins the nomination and loses the general - MAGA digs its heals in.
Just flew from Columbus Ohio to Miami in 2.5 hours and all I could think the entire way was how nice it would be to have high speed rail so I could do it in 7.
@WalshFreedom@benshapiro Ben Shapiro has been increasingly willing - at least compared to the beginning of this term - to call Trump out. I don't think this is fear.
This is strategy. Making sure Vance owns this disaster is one way to keep him from getting the nomination and ending his political future.
Calling Obama a footnote because very little truly earthshattering happened on his watch. A meh economy recovering very, very slowly from the inherited Great Recession. Obamacare as the only big thing. Some dumb foreign policy decisions.
Trump I had a great stock market but passed little important legislation. Very few lasting foreign policy wins, and certainly didn't articulate a coherent philosophy. But then his response to COVID was bad - libs will think he didn't do enough and conservatives will think he did too much - and he didn't try to unite the country.
IMO.... When historians look back at the beginning of the 21st century, they'll view the GWB presidency as extremely consequential but controversial. Obama will be a footnote, despite the strong feelings of both supporters/critics. Biden will be historically bad.
If Trump had just quietly retired after losing in 2020, he would have been considered an average to slightly below average President, once the dust cleared. But between January 6th and then this dumpster fire of a second term, history will be brutally unkind to Trump, and deservedly so.
If demagoguing the people who supported the President going into Iran as wanting "forever wars" as opposed to an end to the regime that fuels the forever wars is the best they have, the deal is really bad.
“If they don’t comply the straits are still open, we’ve done incredible damage to their nuclear program, and we can get on with our lives as a country”
So he’s telling Iran they don’t need to comply with the deal before it’s even signed? I promise you that is not Trump’s position.