MemphisAg1 said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Vance was a "Never Trump" guy for all of Trump's first term (back when Trump's rhetoric and policies were actually America First). I am Never Vance.

---

Gotta roll with what we got!

---

Why?

---

What is the practical alternative that can actually be implemented?

Please spell it out for me because I'm not interested in moral objections that don't result in anything.
quat.

---

Many on here are idealists that apparently don't realize we don't live in fantasyland...

Ag with kids said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Vance was a "Never Trump" guy for all of Trump's first term (back when Trump's rhetoric and policies were actually America First). I am Never Vance.

---

And Trump was once a Democrat.

Still is on some days, lol, but he was clearly the best option given the alternate choice of Kamala.... by a longshot.

I don't care about their history. What are you doing for me today?

Gotta roll with what we got!

---

Also, I think that Vance's wife is a big part of the issue based on someone's past posting history...

---

Nice, throwing shade without replying directly. A little cowardly if you ask me. It's a clear conflict of interest, I spelled it out for you but sure, shriek racism instead of engaging with the argument like a libtard.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Vance was a "Never Trump" guy for all of Trump's first term (back when Trump's rhetoric and policies were actually America First). I am Never Vance.

---

Gotta roll with what we got!

---

Why?

---

What is the practical alternative that can actually be implemented?

Please spell it out for me because I'm not interested in moral objections that don't result in anything.
quat.

---

We've accepted the 'lesser of two evils' from the GOP establishment over and over and over and what has it gotten us? More betrayals, broken promises, and zero accountability. Voters have forgotten that their vote is leverage, that they have a duty as Americans to demand results, and that politicians only perform when pressured. The practical solution isn't fear-voting; it's using that leverage: withhold automatic support, back candidates who actually deliver conservative principles or populist reforms, push for primaries, state-level reforms, and local accountability measures. Do that consistently, and suddenly politicians have to perform. That's how you force real change instead of reinforcing the same broken status quo.

---

I'm still confused on what this has to do with Rubio, Vance, DeSantis. Those are the top contenders after Trump retires. All of them look good to me. None is perfect. I'm not, nor are you. Perfection isn't the standard. "Who can get elected and advance a conservative agenda" should be the standard, even if it's not implemented 100% perfectly to my or your taste. Will you take 80% of what you want now and come back for the other 20%, or do you take all your marbles and go home because you can't get 100% of what you want now?

---

Say goodbye to the marbles...

Idealism uber alles!

Keyno said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Vance was a "Never Trump" guy for all of Trump's first term (back when Trump's rhetoric and policies were actually America First). I am Never Vance.

---

Gotta roll with what we got!

---

Why?

---

What is the practical alternative that can actually be implemented?

Please spell it out for me because I'm not interested in moral objections that don't result in anything.
quat.

---

We've accepted the 'lesser of two evils' from the GOP establishment over and over and over and what has it gotten us? More betrayals, broken promises, and zero accountability. Voters have forgotten that their vote is leverage, that they have a duty as Americans to demand results, and that politicians only perform when pressured. The practical solution isn't fear-voting; it's using that leverage: withhold automatic support, back candidates who actually deliver conservative principles or populist reforms, push for primaries, state-level reforms, and local accountability measures. Do that consistently, and suddenly politicians have to perform. That's how you force real change instead of reinforcing the same broken status quo.

---

I'm still confused on what this has to do with Rubio, Vance, DeSantis. Those are the top contenders after Trump retires. All of them look good to me. None is perfect. I'm not, nor are you. Perfection isn't the standard. "Who can get elected and advance a conservative agenda" should be the standard, even if it's not implemented 100% perfectly to my or your taste. Will you take 80% of what you want now and come back for the other 20%, or do you take all your marbles and go home because you can't get 100% of what you want now?

---

This thread is about Vance but I'll reply. All of these candidates are the return to the GOP status quo. They are Mitt Romney/George Bush/Paul Ryan/John McCain. We were all sick of this in 2016 (for good reason), which is why we went for Trump.

---

DeSantis, Rubio, and Vance are not the same thing as Romney and McCain. Trump is not as conservative as those guys. He's a big spender and loves to pick winners and losers in business instead of letting free markets work. On some days, he looks more like a Democrat than a Republican. Truth. That said, he's still our guy and we roll with him because he won the party's nomination.

We'll see who wins the next one. They'll have my vote. I've named three candidates... who's on your list that can practically win the nomination?

---

OK so you have betrayed yourself as a basic GOP partisan. That's fine and it clarifies your position.

The GOP doesn't have anyone I would vote for besides Massie. But I'd honestly prefer the GOP to collapse and something more right wing to fill the vacuum.

---

Why would you want the Democrats to win in perpetuity?

Seems rather dumb to me...

Ag with kids said:

---

Keyno said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Vance was a "Never Trump" guy for all of Trump's first term (back when Trump's rhetoric and policies were actually America First). I am Never Vance.

---

Gotta roll with what we got!

---

Why?

---

What is the practical alternative that can actually be implemented?

Please spell it out for me because I'm not interested in moral objections that don't result in anything.
quat.

---

We've accepted the 'lesser of two evils' from the GOP establishment over and over and over and what has it gotten us? More betrayals, broken promises, and zero accountability. Voters have forgotten that their vote is leverage, that they have a duty as Americans to demand results, and that politicians only perform when pressured. The practical solution isn't fear-voting; it's using that leverage: withhold automatic support, back candidates who actually deliver conservative principles or populist reforms, push for primaries, state-level reforms, and local accountability measures. Do that consistently, and suddenly politicians have to perform. That's how you force real change instead of reinforcing the same broken status quo.

---

I'm still confused on what this has to do with Rubio, Vance, DeSantis. Those are the top contenders after Trump retires. All of them look good to me. None is perfect. I'm not, nor are you. Perfection isn't the standard. "Who can get elected and advance a conservative agenda" should be the standard, even if it's not implemented 100% perfectly to my or your taste. Will you take 80% of what you want now and come back for the other 20%, or do you take all your marbles and go home because you can't get 100% of what you want now?

---

This thread is about Vance but I'll reply. All of these candidates are the return to the GOP status quo. They are Mitt Romney/George Bush/Paul Ryan/John McCain. We were all sick of this in 2016 (for good reason), which is why we went for Trump.

---

DeSantis, Rubio, and Vance are not the same thing as Romney and McCain. Trump is not as conservative as those guys. He's a big spender and loves to pick winners and losers in business instead of letting free markets work. On some days, he looks more like a Democrat than a Republican. Truth. That said, he's still our guy and we roll with him because he won the party's nomination.

We'll see who wins the next one. They'll have my vote. I've named three candidates... who's on your list that can practically win the nomination?

---

OK so you have betrayed yourself as a basic GOP partisan. That's fine and it clarifies your position.

The GOP doesn't have anyone I would vote for besides Massie. But I'd honestly prefer the GOP to collapse and something more right wing to fill the vacuum.

---

Why would you want the Democrats to win in perpetuity?

Seems rather dumb to me...

---

That's not what I said lol.

Keyno said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

The GOP pushing back on net zero insanity is saving this country right now. They are also a million times better on immigration, largely thanks to Trump, because they use to suck at that too. Take a good look at Europe if you want to know how bad things could really get.

I agree the GOP can be disappointing, but the DNC is actively trying to destroy anything and everything that once made this country amazing.

---

The GOP is not "pushing back" on anything related to immigration. Trump didn't build a wall (like he campaigned on doing). So whenever a Democrat gets back in, it opens back up. Trump is deporting like the same number of people as Obama did. Not deporting is the same thing as amnesty.

Yeah I agree the DNC is the enemy. I literally just said that in the post you are responding to. But the GOP is the traitor and the traitor is always worse

---

This is horse*****

A) Obama counted turnbacks as deportations (I.e. he changed the way they were counted to pump up his numbers).
b) I guess you haven't seen the news in the past 13 months because there have been hundreds of thousands of removals and well over a million SELF deportations...

Ag with kids said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

The GOP pushing back on net zero insanity is saving this country right now. They are also a million times better on immigration, largely thanks to Trump, because they use to suck at that too. Take a good look at Europe if you want to know how bad things could really get.

I agree the GOP can be disappointing, but the DNC is actively trying to destroy anything and everything that once made this country amazing.

---

The GOP is not "pushing back" on anything related to immigration. Trump didn't build a wall (like he campaigned on doing). So whenever a Democrat gets back in, it opens back up. Trump is deporting like the same number of people as Obama did. Not deporting is the same thing as amnesty.

Yeah I agree the DNC is the enemy. I literally just said that in the post you are responding to. But the GOP is the traitor and the traitor is always worse

---

This is horse*****

A) Obama counted turnbacks as deportations (I.e. he changed the way they were counted to pump up his numbers).
b) I guess you haven't seen the news in the past 13 months because there have been hundreds of thousands of removals and well over a million SELF deportations...

---

No dude, you forgot to say 2 MILLION SELF DEPORTED

Keyno said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Keyno said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

What does "empty suit" even mean in this context?

That he has financial backers? That isn't really a negative thing. If he was smart enough to attract the attention of VC guys while he was still writing the law review at Yale, why is that, in isolation, a bad thing? There has to be an insinuation or connotation in there that this is something more nefarious. What exactly is that?

---

It means Vance is a creature created by Theil

---

But, what does that mean, exactly? To be a creature created by Thiel?

Do you believe:

1) Vance doesn't think for himself at all? That 100% of his opinions are fed to him by Thiel

2) Vance would not have been successful except for Thiel, and that alone makes him an empty suit?

3) Vance is literally a ghost, and his ghost makes his suit look like there is something inside of it, but there isn't, so Vance is literally just and empty piece of fabric?

4) Vance completely reinvented himself when he met Theil, and changed who he is, and that alone is enough to call him an empty suit?

I'm trying to get past name calling and cliche phrases to understand if you are actually trying to make a point, or just like gaslight-throwing mud.

---

No, Vance is a political creature created by Theil. He was given a no show finance job as a favor to Theil. His Senate run was backed by Theil. He was tapped as VP after Trump was shot on the "suggestion" of Theil ally Elon.

Vance did I guess 2 years in the Senate? His name isn't even JD Vance. It's James Bowman. He was a "Never Trump" guy in Trump's first term when Trump was America First. Who is this guy?

I am Never Vance

---

This is BS. You are now just making **** up.

Keyno said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Keyno said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Vance was a "Never Trump" guy for all of Trump's first term (back when Trump's rhetoric and policies were actually America First). I am Never Vance.

---

And Trump was once a Democrat.

Still is on some days, lol, but he was clearly the best option given the alternate choice of Kamala.... by a longshot.

I don't care about their history. What are you doing for me today?

Gotta roll with what we got!

---

Yeah I am done with the "we have to vote GOP because what if the democrats win"?! The GOP has betrayed me (and probably you) so many times that its just not worth it anymore.

In 2016, Trump's rhetoric was "build a wall, deport everyone, lock her up, end corruption, tariffs, Iraq was a mistake, no new wars, nationalism not globalism will be our credo, etc". Vance was a "Never Trump" guy during this time.

I am Never Vance.

---

The Democrats won't betray you. They'll look you straight in the eye and tell you they're going to **** you over.

Good luck with them...

---

Correct. The enemy (democrats) is open. The traitor (the GOP) pretends they for you and then betrays you. The traitor is worse

---

You're going to get > 0% of what you want with the GOP.

You're going to get < 0% of what you want with the Dems...

Have fun living in socialist land...

But, at least you can tell people that you were a pure idealist!!!

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Vance was a "Never Trump" guy for all of Trump's first term (back when Trump's rhetoric and policies were actually America First). I am Never Vance.

---

And Trump was once a Democrat.

Still is on some days, lol, but he was clearly the best option given the alternate choice of Kamala.... by a longshot.

I don't care about their history. What are you doing for me today?

Gotta roll with what we got!

---

Also, I think that Vance's wife is a big part of the issue based on someone's past posting history...

---

Nice, throwing shade without replying directly. A little cowardly if you ask me. It's a clear conflict of interest, I spelled it out for you but sure, shriek racism instead of engaging with the argument like a libtard.

---

Sounds like I struck a nerve somewhere...maybe the truth hurts...

Ag with kids said:

---

Keyno said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Keyno said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

What does "empty suit" even mean in this context?

That he has financial backers? That isn't really a negative thing. If he was smart enough to attract the attention of VC guys while he was still writing the law review at Yale, why is that, in isolation, a bad thing? There has to be an insinuation or connotation in there that this is something more nefarious. What exactly is that?

---

It means Vance is a creature created by Theil

---

But, what does that mean, exactly? To be a creature created by Thiel?

Do you believe:

1) Vance doesn't think for himself at all? That 100% of his opinions are fed to him by Thiel

2) Vance would not have been successful except for Thiel, and that alone makes him an empty suit?

3) Vance is literally a ghost, and his ghost makes his suit look like there is something inside of it, but there isn't, so Vance is literally just and empty piece of fabric?

4) Vance completely reinvented himself when he met Theil, and changed who he is, and that alone is enough to call him an empty suit?

I'm trying to get past name calling and cliche phrases to understand if you are actually trying to make a point, or just like gaslight-throwing mud.

---

No, Vance is a political creature created by Theil. He was given a no show finance job as a favor to Theil. His Senate run was backed by Theil. He was tapped as VP after Trump was shot on the "suggestion" of Theil ally Elon.

Vance did I guess 2 years in the Senate? His name isn't even JD Vance. It's James Bowman. He was a "Never Trump" guy in Trump's first term when Trump was America First. Who is this guy?

I am Never Vance

---

This is BS. You are now just making **** up.

---

https://fortune.com/2024/07/26/jd-vance-peter-thiel-venture-capital-mithril/

Keyno said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Keyno said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Vance was a "Never Trump" guy for all of Trump's first term (back when Trump's rhetoric and policies were actually America First). I am Never Vance.

---

Gotta roll with what we got!

---

Why?

---

What is the practical alternative that can actually be implemented?

Please spell it out for me because I'm not interested in moral objections that don't result in anything.
quat.

---

We've accepted the 'lesser of two evils' from the GOP establishment over and over and over and what has it gotten us? More betrayals, broken promises, and zero accountability. Voters have forgotten that their vote is leverage, that they have a duty as Americans to demand results, and that politicians only perform when pressured. The practical solution isn't fear-voting; it's using that leverage: withhold automatic support, back candidates who actually deliver conservative principles or populist reforms, push for primaries, state-level reforms, and local accountability measures. Do that consistently, and suddenly politicians have to perform. That's how you force real change instead of reinforcing the same broken status quo.

---

I'm still confused on what this has to do with Rubio, Vance, DeSantis. Those are the top contenders after Trump retires. All of them look good to me. None is perfect. I'm not, nor are you. Perfection isn't the standard. "Who can get elected and advance a conservative agenda" should be the standard, even if it's not implemented 100% perfectly to my or your taste. Will you take 80% of what you want now and come back for the other 20%, or do you take all your marbles and go home because you can't get 100% of what you want now?

---

This thread is about Vance but I'll reply. All of these candidates are the return to the GOP status quo. They are Mitt Romney/George Bush/Paul Ryan/John McCain. We were all sick of this in 2016 (for good reason), which is why we went for Trump.

---

DeSantis, Rubio, and Vance are not the same thing as Romney and McCain. Trump is not as conservative as those guys. He's a big spender and loves to pick winners and losers in business instead of letting free markets work. On some days, he looks more like a Democrat than a Republican. Truth. That said, he's still our guy and we roll with him because he won the party's nomination.

We'll see who wins the next one. They'll have my vote. I've named three candidates... who's on your list that can practically win the nomination?

---

OK so you have betrayed yourself as a basic GOP partisan. That's fine and it clarifies your position.

The GOP doesn't have anyone I would vote for besides Massie. But I'd honestly prefer the GOP to collapse and something more right wing to fill the vacuum.

---

Why would you want the Democrats to win in perpetuity?

Seems rather dumb to me...

---

That's not what I said lol.

---

If you do something KNOWING what the result will be, then that's what you're choosing...

Keyno said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

The GOP pushing back on net zero insanity is saving this country right now. They are also a million times better on immigration, largely thanks to Trump, because they use to suck at that too. Take a good look at Europe if you want to know how bad things could really get.

I agree the GOP can be disappointing, but the DNC is actively trying to destroy anything and everything that once made this country amazing.

---

The GOP is not "pushing back" on anything related to immigration. Trump didn't build a wall (like he campaigned on doing). So whenever a Democrat gets back in, it opens back up. Trump is deporting like the same number of people as Obama did. Not deporting is the same thing as amnesty.

Yeah I agree the DNC is the enemy. I literally just said that in the post you are responding to. But the GOP is the traitor and the traitor is always worse

---

This is horse*****

A) Obama counted turnbacks as deportations (I.e. he changed the way they were counted to pump up his numbers).
b) I guess you haven't seen the news in the past 13 months because there have been hundreds of thousands of removals and well over a million SELF deportations...

---

No dude, you forgot to say 2 MILLION SELF DEPORTED

---

Perhaps you should learn to read...

Ag with kids said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Vance was a "Never Trump" guy for all of Trump's first term (back when Trump's rhetoric and policies were actually America First). I am Never Vance.

---

And Trump was once a Democrat.

Still is on some days, lol, but he was clearly the best option given the alternate choice of Kamala.... by a longshot.

I don't care about their history. What are you doing for me today?

Gotta roll with what we got!

---

Also, I think that Vance's wife is a big part of the issue based on someone's past posting history...

---

Nice, throwing shade without replying directly. A little cowardly if you ask me. It's a clear conflict of interest, I spelled it out for you but sure, shriek racism instead of engaging with the argument like a libtard.

---

Sounds like I struck a nerve somewhere...maybe the truth hurts...

---

Still won't engage with the argument. Do you have anything of value to add to the conversation instead of just instigating?

Keyno said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Keyno said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Keyno said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

What does "empty suit" even mean in this context?

That he has financial backers? That isn't really a negative thing. If he was smart enough to attract the attention of VC guys while he was still writing the law review at Yale, why is that, in isolation, a bad thing? There has to be an insinuation or connotation in there that this is something more nefarious. What exactly is that?

---

It means Vance is a creature created by Theil

---

But, what does that mean, exactly? To be a creature created by Thiel?

Do you believe:

1) Vance doesn't think for himself at all? That 100% of his opinions are fed to him by Thiel

2) Vance would not have been successful except for Thiel, and that alone makes him an empty suit?

3) Vance is literally a ghost, and his ghost makes his suit look like there is something inside of it, but there isn't, so Vance is literally just and empty piece of fabric?

4) Vance completely reinvented himself when he met Theil, and changed who he is, and that alone is enough to call him an empty suit?

I'm trying to get past name calling and cliche phrases to understand if you are actually trying to make a point, or just like gaslight-throwing mud.

---

No, Vance is a political creature created by Theil. He was given a no show finance job as a favor to Theil. His Senate run was backed by Theil. He was tapped as VP after Trump was shot on the "suggestion" of Theil ally Elon.

Vance did I guess 2 years in the Senate? His name isn't even JD Vance. It's James Bowman. He was a "Never Trump" guy in Trump's first term when Trump was America First. Who is this guy?

I am Never Vance

---

This is BS. You are now just making **** up.

---

https://fortune.com/2024/07/26/jd-vance-peter-thiel-venture-capital-mithril/

---

Gee...a left wing magazine wrote a left wing article attacking a conservative...


Welp. You got me. I guess all those articles about Trump being bad are all correct now, too...

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Vance was a "Never Trump" guy for all of Trump's first term (back when Trump's rhetoric and policies were actually America First). I am Never Vance.

---

And Trump was once a Democrat.

Still is on some days, lol, but he was clearly the best option given the alternate choice of Kamala.... by a longshot.

I don't care about their history. What are you doing for me today?

Gotta roll with what we got!

---

Also, I think that Vance's wife is a big part of the issue based on someone's past posting history...

---

Nice, throwing shade without replying directly. A little cowardly if you ask me. It's a clear conflict of interest, I spelled it out for you but sure, shriek racism instead of engaging with the argument like a libtard.

---

Sounds like I struck a nerve somewhere...maybe the truth hurts...

---

Still won't engage with the argument. Do you have anything of value to add to the conversation instead of just instigating?

---

I've posted like 20 times on this thread.

I also had ANOTHER comment in the post you quoted but apparently you deleted it...

Perhaps your "views" have blinded you...

Ag with kids said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Vance was a "Never Trump" guy for all of Trump's first term (back when Trump's rhetoric and policies were actually America First). I am Never Vance.

---

And Trump was once a Democrat.

Still is on some days, lol, but he was clearly the best option given the alternate choice of Kamala.... by a longshot.

I don't care about their history. What are you doing for me today?

Gotta roll with what we got!

---

Also, I think that Vance's wife is a big part of the issue based on someone's past posting history...

---

Nice, throwing shade without replying directly. A little cowardly if you ask me. It's a clear conflict of interest, I spelled it out for you but sure, shriek racism instead of engaging with the argument like a libtard.

---

Sounds like I struck a nerve somewhere...maybe the truth hurts...

---

Still won't engage with the argument. Do you have anything of value to add to the conversation instead of just instigating?

---

I've posted like 20 times on this thread.

I also had ANOTHER comment in the post you quoted but apparently you deleted it...

Perhaps your "views" have blinded you...

---

You don't actually post anything of value or engage with the discourse, you just throw insults around. The adults are talking.

Ag with kids said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Keyno said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Vance was a "Never Trump" guy for all of Trump's first term (back when Trump's rhetoric and policies were actually America First). I am Never Vance.

---

Gotta roll with what we got!

---

Why?

---

What is the practical alternative that can actually be implemented?

Please spell it out for me because I'm not interested in moral objections that don't result in anything.
quat.

---

We've accepted the 'lesser of two evils' from the GOP establishment over and over and over and what has it gotten us? More betrayals, broken promises, and zero accountability. Voters have forgotten that their vote is leverage, that they have a duty as Americans to demand results, and that politicians only perform when pressured. The practical solution isn't fear-voting; it's using that leverage: withhold automatic support, back candidates who actually deliver conservative principles or populist reforms, push for primaries, state-level reforms, and local accountability measures. Do that consistently, and suddenly politicians have to perform. That's how you force real change instead of reinforcing the same broken status quo.

---

I'm still confused on what this has to do with Rubio, Vance, DeSantis. Those are the top contenders after Trump retires. All of them look good to me. None is perfect. I'm not, nor are you. Perfection isn't the standard. "Who can get elected and advance a conservative agenda" should be the standard, even if it's not implemented 100% perfectly to my or your taste. Will you take 80% of what you want now and come back for the other 20%, or do you take all your marbles and go home because you can't get 100% of what you want now?

---

This thread is about Vance but I'll reply. All of these candidates are the return to the GOP status quo. They are Mitt Romney/George Bush/Paul Ryan/John McCain. We were all sick of this in 2016 (for good reason), which is why we went for Trump.

---

DeSantis, Rubio, and Vance are not the same thing as Romney and McCain. Trump is not as conservative as those guys. He's a big spender and loves to pick winners and losers in business instead of letting free markets work. On some days, he looks more like a Democrat than a Republican. Truth. That said, he's still our guy and we roll with him because he won the party's nomination.

We'll see who wins the next one. They'll have my vote. I've named three candidates... who's on your list that can practically win the nomination?

---

OK so you have betrayed yourself as a basic GOP partisan. That's fine and it clarifies your position.

The GOP doesn't have anyone I would vote for besides Massie. But I'd honestly prefer the GOP to collapse and something more right wing to fill the vacuum.

---

Why would you want the Democrats to win in perpetuity?

Seems rather dumb to me...

---

That's not what I said lol.

---

If you do something KNOWING what the result will be, then that's what you're choosing...

---

I can restate what I said if you'd like. I would prefer the GOP to collapse and something more right wing to fill the vacuum.

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Vance was a "Never Trump" guy for all of Trump's first term (back when Trump's rhetoric and policies were actually America First). I am Never Vance.

---

And Trump was once a Democrat.

Still is on some days, lol, but he was clearly the best option given the alternate choice of Kamala.... by a longshot.

I don't care about their history. What are you doing for me today?

Gotta roll with what we got!

---

Also, I think that Vance's wife is a big part of the issue based on someone's past posting history...

---

Nice, throwing shade without replying directly. A little cowardly if you ask me. It's a clear conflict of interest, I spelled it out for you but sure, shriek racism instead of engaging with the argument like a libtard.

---

Sounds like I struck a nerve somewhere...maybe the truth hurts...

---

Still won't engage with the argument. Do you have anything of value to add to the conversation instead of just instigating?

---

I've posted like 20 times on this thread.

I also had ANOTHER comment in the post you quoted but apparently you deleted it...

Perhaps your "views" have blinded you...

---

You don't actually post anything of value or engage with the discourse, you just throw insults around. The adults are talking.

---

Ummm...tell me you haven't read my posts without telling me you haven't read my posts...

As to the adults talking, you're correct. Too bad you're at the kid's table...

Keyno said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Keyno said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Vance was a "Never Trump" guy for all of Trump's first term (back when Trump's rhetoric and policies were actually America First). I am Never Vance.

---

Gotta roll with what we got!

---

Why?

---

What is the practical alternative that can actually be implemented?

Please spell it out for me because I'm not interested in moral objections that don't result in anything.
quat.

---

We've accepted the 'lesser of two evils' from the GOP establishment over and over and over and what has it gotten us? More betrayals, broken promises, and zero accountability. Voters have forgotten that their vote is leverage, that they have a duty as Americans to demand results, and that politicians only perform when pressured. The practical solution isn't fear-voting; it's using that leverage: withhold automatic support, back candidates who actually deliver conservative principles or populist reforms, push for primaries, state-level reforms, and local accountability measures. Do that consistently, and suddenly politicians have to perform. That's how you force real change instead of reinforcing the same broken status quo.

---

I'm still confused on what this has to do with Rubio, Vance, DeSantis. Those are the top contenders after Trump retires. All of them look good to me. None is perfect. I'm not, nor are you. Perfection isn't the standard. "Who can get elected and advance a conservative agenda" should be the standard, even if it's not implemented 100% perfectly to my or your taste. Will you take 80% of what you want now and come back for the other 20%, or do you take all your marbles and go home because you can't get 100% of what you want now?

---

This thread is about Vance but I'll reply. All of these candidates are the return to the GOP status quo. They are Mitt Romney/George Bush/Paul Ryan/John McCain. We were all sick of this in 2016 (for good reason), which is why we went for Trump.

---

DeSantis, Rubio, and Vance are not the same thing as Romney and McCain. Trump is not as conservative as those guys. He's a big spender and loves to pick winners and losers in business instead of letting free markets work. On some days, he looks more like a Democrat than a Republican. Truth. That said, he's still our guy and we roll with him because he won the party's nomination.

We'll see who wins the next one. They'll have my vote. I've named three candidates... who's on your list that can practically win the nomination?

---

OK so you have betrayed yourself as a basic GOP partisan. That's fine and it clarifies your position.

The GOP doesn't have anyone I would vote for besides Massie. But I'd honestly prefer the GOP to collapse and something more right wing to fill the vacuum.

---

Why would you want the Democrats to win in perpetuity?

Seems rather dumb to me...

---

That's not what I said lol.

---

If you do something KNOWING what the result will be, then that's what you're choosing...

---

I can restate what I said if you'd like. I would prefer the GOP to collapse and something more right wing to fill the vacuum.

---

The result of that would be the Democrats winning in perpetuity.

Hence my comment...