Yeah. Who would admit to saying something like that?
Thats what was so striking about the title!
Conspiracy bros have a lot to say about the Bush family. Mentioning “Destiny” in a book about a super rich, connected guy being President almost seems like a nod to them.
Ah. Sorry if I came across as hostile. Bush 41 is a saint in my neck of the woods.
Oops! I thought you guys were being facetious.
Yeah, 100%!
To be clear, I don’t believe in the ZOG Machine.
No comment about that whole Yale thing.
@Mufasa. The thread had moved on, but I liked this tweet. Honestly, I think my people feel caught between a rock and a hard place. We’re not alone in that, but this is nice for me to see.
2 Likes
Thanks for putting that up. For reference, Utah is 62% Mormon, although only 41% would be considered active or practicing the faith. The church maintains political neutrality.
I’ve seen several polls about how the number of LDS Republicans has been falling across the country. It was closer to 70%, but I recently saw a Pew poll that had LDS people now at only 48% Republican, slipping a bit after Romney’s loss and now with the Trump nomination.
As far as why Utah might find populist campaign policies less attractive? Mormons tend to be married at higher rates than the general population. That one factor alone makes people less likely to live in poverty. People raised LDS have slightly higher educational levels than the general population.
Utah has the 14th highest median average income, and the least income inequality of the states. It hasn’t voted Democrat since Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964, after the Kennedy assassination.
I’m going to predict that Trump ends up with somewhere between 190-220 electoral votes (Hillary 300-320+), as I’m not sure how AZ is going to go this election, and Florida is still too close for me to comfortably call, though I’d bet on a Clinton win there at this point. This gives Clinton a decisive victory.
Popular vote wise, Trump comes in at 40-45%, with Clinton at probably 45-50%.
This is an interesting article about what would happen in Johnson could win NM. He is polling around 20 percent there. That would be GREAT if he could take their electoral votes. Unfortunately it won’t happen.
New Mexico is number one in teen pregnancy rates, and is number 8 in terms of states who get the most federal aide. Not exactly a recipe for people who want less government. They are sort of the flip side of Utah, where you have lots of people who are doing well economically and socially so they are less attracted to populist candidates who’s message is, “Let government, or (insert Trump or Hillary here) solve all your problems!” I thought Trump’s comments about Latinos and building walls might push things Johnson’s way since he was a 2 time governor.
If I were Johnson I would probably concentrate my efforts in Utah with a 2nd push in New Mexico. Utah at this point is a toss up within polling error, or nearly. And New Mexico wss his old stomping grounds. If he could get either of those it would be great. Both, fantastic.
3 Likes
I’d prefer Johnson drop out of Utah to pave the way for McMullin and concentrate on New Mexico as he should have been doing all along. Unless the GOP grows the balls to drop Trump by the end of this week, the only winning solution is to convince swing state voters to vote Trump so that no one gets to 270 and then let the house choose McMullin or Johnson.
It’s one solution that could actually work. It’s the only way to get the Trump vote and anti-Trump vote to work together, as unwittingly as it would be.
Trump will carry the electoral votes here so I don’t have the burden of voting against my principles, but if I lived in Ohio and was convinced the house would choose McMullin/Johnson in an electoral college stalemate, then I would certainly make the strategic vote.
2 Likes
As much as I would prefer that scenario, I feel like their would be full on riots should no one get 270 and it gets sent to the house.
I’d take either, but preferably McMullin.
1 Like
I’m probably 50/50 with Johnson. He’s got a solid record and fiscal sense, but his foreign policy is abysmal. McMullin is a bit of an unknown, but I’ve liked what I’ve read.
Here’s the thing though, I would trust somebody like Johnson–who has shown sense on the past, has a record, and is demonstrably a teachable guy–to learn foreign policy chops or at least listen to advisors and pick sensible regional ambassadors much more than I would trust Trump or even somebody like Ron Paul.
Abysmal opinions is bad, but being able to learn and adapt is great counterbalance and he shows significant signs of being able to do that in my opnion.
1 Like
He seems to understand it pretty well to me.
Oh, I totally agree. He is my favorite candidate other than McMullin, but I’ve only read a little bit about the latter.
1 Like
I get the first part, but I don’t really follow the second. I thought he was a viability guy, which isn’t ideal imo, but it is far far better than what we have now. Is that not his stance?
Aleppo was a gaffe to be sure, but I think he knows a bit more about foreign policy than he’s given credit for. I don’t think he’s the ideal CIC or that he’ll be strong in foreign policy, though. They are definitely weak points for him.
This stance makes no sense to me. I’m pro-abortion, but have trouble respecting people who argue that it is ok to abort a child minutes before birth.
Pro Choice Bro!
You aren’t out there urging ladies into it. Or trying to make it mandatory.