2024 U.S. Election of President and Vice President

[statquo]

Here's a question for all. Liz Cheney will no doubt lose her primary race this August unless the polls are massively wrong. In an interview by Tapper she was non-committal concerning 2024 when asked might she run. At the end of the interview she said she would do all in her power to see Trump not get re-elected in 2024. Hmm. She couldn't beat him in a primary with all the far right coming out for Trump as we well know. However, could she pull a Ross Perot and run as an Independent thereby siphoning enough votes away from Trump to enable a Democrat to win and once and for all get rid of Trump? This assuming Trump runs and beats out DeSantis which is a probable scenario.

I'm not sure about that though. The question is what is left of the center right/right principled conservative, the 'RINO', the John Kasich Republican, the Liz Cheney Republican, who already voted for Biden in 2020? And if someone who is a principled conservative or RINO like Cheney runs for 3rd Party, can it end up actually hurting Democrats by peeling those votes off? Those people aren't moving from the Republican party to the AOC Green Deal progressives. They're moving from Republican to Democrat because its Biden or right of Biden, or in other words, something centrist. If you give them those opportunities to vote for someone like that they will. If not, I'd imagine they sit out, vote 3rd party Liz Cheney, or they default back to their Republican political base and instinct and help Trump.

[statquo]

Former Republicans and Democrats form new third U.S. political party

LOS ANGELES, July 27 (Reuters) - Dozens of former Republican and Democratic officials announced on Wednesday a new national political third party to appeal to millions of voters they say are dismayed with what they see as America's dysfunctional two-party system.

The new party, called Forward and whose creation was first reported by Reuters, will initially be co-chaired by former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang and Christine Todd Whitman, the former Republican governor of New Jersey. They hope the party will become a viable alternative to the Republican and Democratic parties that dominate U.S. politics, founding members told Reuters.

Party leaders will hold a series of events in two dozen cities this autumn to roll out its platform and attract support. They will host an official launch in Houston on Sept. 24 and the party's first national convention in a major U.S. city next summer.

The new party is being formed by a merger of three political groups that have emerged in recent years as a reaction to America's increasingly polarized and gridlocked political system. The leaders cited a Gallup poll last year showing a record two-thirds of Americans believe a third party is needed.

The merger involves the Renew America Movement, formed in 2021 by dozens of former officials in the Republican administrations of Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush and Donald Trump; the Forward Party, founded by Yang, who left the Democratic Party in 2021 and became an independent; and the Serve America Movement, a group of Democrats, Republicans and independents whose executive director is former Republican congressman David Jolly.

Two pillars of the new party's platform are to "reinvigorate a fair, flourishing economy" and to "give Americans more choices in elections, more confidence in a government that works, and more say in our future."

The party, which is centrist, has no specific policies yet. It will say at its Thursday launch: "How will we solve the big issues facing America? Not Left. Not Right. Forward."

Historically, third parties have failed to thrive in America's two-party system. Occasionally they can impact a presidential election. Analysts say the Green Party's Ralph Nader siphoned off enough votes from Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore in 2000 to help Republican George W. Bush win the White House.

It is unclear how the new Forward party might impact either party's electoral prospects in such a deeply polarized country. Political analysts are skeptical it can succeed.

Public reaction on Twitter was swift. Many Democrats on the social media platform expressed fear that the new party will siphon more votes away from Democrats, rather than Republicans, and end up helping Republicans in close races.

Forward aims to gain party registration and ballot access in 30 states by the end of 2023 and in all 50 states by late 2024, in time for the 2024 presidential and congressional elections. It aims to field candidates for local races, such as school boards and city councils, in state houses, the U.S. Congress and all the way up to the presidency.

`THE FUNDAMENTALS HAVE CHANGED`

In an interview, Yang said the party will start with a budget of about $5 million. It has donors lined up and a grassroots membership between the three merged groups numbering in the hundreds of thousands.

"We are starting in a very strong financial position. Financial support will not be a problem," Yang said.

Another person involved in the creation of Forward, Miles Taylor - a former Homeland Security official in the Trump administration - said the idea was to give voters "a viable, credible national third party."

Taylor acknowledged that third parties had failed in the past, but said: "The fundamentals have changed. When other third party movements have emerged in the past it’s largely been inside a system where the American people aren’t asking for an alternative. The difference here is we are seeing an historic number of Americans saying they want one."

Stu Rothenberg, a veteran non-partisan political analyst, said it was easy to talk about establishing a third party but almost impossible to do so.

"The two major political parties start out with huge advantages, including 50 state parties built over decades," he said.

Rothenberg pointed out that third party presidential candidates like John Anderson in 1980 and Ross Perot in 1992 and 1996 flamed out, failing to build a true third party that became a factor in national politics.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well there's the 3rd party. Let's see if it gains any traction.

[tbm3fan]

I'm not sure about that though. The question is what is left of the center right/right principled conservative, the 'RINO', the John Kasich Republican, the Liz Cheney Republican, who already voted for Biden in 2020? And if someone who is a principled conservative or RINO like Cheney runs for 3rd Party, can it end up actually hurting Democrats by peeling those votes off? Those people aren't moving from the Republican party to the AOC Green Deal progressives. They're moving from Republican to Democrat because its Biden or right of Biden, or in other words, something centrist. If you give them those opportunities to vote for someone like that they will. If not, I'd imagine they sit out, vote 3rd party Liz Cheney, or they default back to their Republican political base and instinct and help Trump.

So we are left with the possibility that Trump and his little playground nazis will run in 2024. One day, someone more capable than him, will try to use his populist coattails.

[TopHatter]

Who Would Staff a Second Trump Term?
Spineless sycophants, that’s who.

Donald Trump came into office in 2017 already possessing many of the instincts and inclinations of a mob boss—and he left office having learned a basic mob boss’s lesson, after a handful of individuals more loyal to the country than to him hindered his willful rule. Now, as Trump and his acolytes plot a return to power, they intend to make sure that if he’s re-elected, he won’t have to put up with anything less than total loyalty.

In a speech this week to the America First Policy Institute, a new pro-Trump group in Washington, the former president outlined his vision for his second administration. As David Frum recounted in the Atlantic:
.

Trump sketched out a vision . . . [involving] sweeping new emergency powers for the next Republican president. The president would be empowered to disregard state jurisdiction over criminal law. The president would be allowed to push aside a “weak, foolish, and stupid governor,” and to fire “radical and racist prosecutors”—racist here meaning “anti-white.” The president could federalize state National Guards for law-enforcement duties, stop and frisk suspects for illegal weapons, and impose death sentences on drug dealers after expedited trials.

Of course, the defeated, twice-impeached president might not pull off a comeback. The House January 6th Committee is continuing to gather and publish damning evidence regarding his involvement in, and failure to respond to, the insurrection. The Justice Department reportedly has him in its prosecutorial sights. His support among Republicans is apparently deteriorating.

But a Trump re-election remains far from impossible. And if he does return, he will further erode public faith in government and end the rule of law—and he’ll do it with yes men.

Imagine his next cabinet. There won’t be the likes of Rex Tillerson, John Kelly, James Mattis, or H.R. McMaster hanging around—no one with a spine, let alone a conscience.

Former Trump trade advisor Peter Navarro, currently under indictment for contempt of Congress after he defied a Jan. 6th Committee subpoena, has offered some names for Trump Team 2.0. They include the bombastic Fox News host Jeanine Pirro as attorney general and Kash Patel, the sycophantic and ambitious former aide to Rep. Devin Nunes who was briefly the chief of staff to the acting secretary of defense, as the director of national intelligence.

Next, imagine Mike Flynn, a convicted felon, as secretary of defense, Fox host Dan Bongino as the next FBI director. Secretary of Commerce Mike Lindell or Patrick Byrne. Tony Ornato as Secret Service director. How about Solicitor General John Eastman, whom a federal judge has said likely engaged in a criminal conspiracy with Trump? A Democratic-controlled Senate would reject all of these individuals, but who’s to say what a Republican-controlled Senate would do?

And then there are the 4,000 subcabinet political appointments each administration gets to make. Jonathan Swan reports that the Trump-worshiping nonprofit conservative world has been building databases of future loyalists to fill those jobs. The Heritage Foundation, per Swan, has organized fifteen conservative groups into a loose confederation to divvy up the work.

Among them is the Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI), with whom Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows has affiliated. CPI’s immediate priority “is to have at least 300 fully vetted ‘America First’ staffers to supply GOP congressional offices after the midterms.” They would have two years of Hill experience for the next Trump administration.

An outfit called America First Legal, founded by Stephen Miller, is focusing on “identifying and assembling a list of lawyers who would be ready to fill the key general counsel jobs across government in a second-term Trump administration.” The American Moment group, whose board includes Trump convert J.D. Vance, the GOP’s Ohio Senate candidate, seeks to establish a pipeline straight into government from Hillsdale College and other conservative schools.

---

Beyond the political appointees are the hundreds of thousands of civil servants who fill out the federal bureaucracy. Here, too, the Trump team has made clear that it intends to exert much more control.

The key tool for removing any disloyal civil servant is an executive order that Trump signed late in his term, in October 2020. It erased civil service protections for any government worker who has the slightest influence with policymaking, classifying such individuals as “Schedule F.” President Joe Biden rescinded the executive order on January 22, 2021, but Trump is expected to reinstate it if he is re-elected.

Trump had little time to wield Schedule F during his first term, but he would likely use it vigorously in a second term. Estimates are that 50,000 federal workers would come under Trump’s thumb.

Schedule F would effectively eradicate a century and a half of civil service reforms. After President James Garfield was shot to death in 1881 by a disgruntled assassin who believed he was owed a patronage job, national outrage overcame decades of resistance to civil service reform from machine politicians and party hacks. Fifteen months later, the Pendleton Act became law, putting an end to the notion that “to the victors go the spoils.”

With Trump’s reissuance of the Schedule F executive order, our national government would start to resemble Tammany Hall—a corrupt political machine. Mike Lindell might end up determining how federal health and safety regulations apply to the pillow business.

The consequences of this assault would be nothing less than the dismantling of orderly governmental procedures that, in the end, protect everyone’s freedom by curbing arbitrary and corrupt power. As historian Heather Cox Richardson wrote this week, “Authoritarian figures expect loyalty to themselves alone, rather than to a nonpartisan government.”

Of course, the danger is not confined to Trump. As Jonathan V. Last has emphasized, Ron DeSantis and every other potential GOP candidate should be asked their position on Schedule F and related issues. But Trump, still the leading contender for the GOP nomination, has shown he is ready and eager to use Schedule F. As his former deputy director of the White House Office of Presidential Personnel, Andrew R. Kloster, put it: “The first thing you need to hire for is loyalty. . . . [Y]ou can learn policy. You can’t learn loyalty.”

Any mob boss would agree.
__________

[Albany Rifles]

Beyond the political appointees are the hundreds of thousands of civil servants who fill out the federal bureaucracy.

So happy I retire in January. When this ruling came about I was worried. I was terrified when my boss said it would impact my position. I may be # 49,998 on the list but I would still be there.

How many of these clowns had to take a job prior to this which required them to swear an oath...cause every federal employee does.

[TopHatter]

6 in 10 Republicans say Trump should be 2024 GOP nominee: survey
Approximately 6 in 10 Republican respondents in a new poll said that former President Trump should be the GOP nominee in the 2024 election.

The USA Today-Ipsos survey found that 59 percent of Republican respondents favor Trump, who has said he has made up his mind about running again, while 41 percent believe that another candidate should represent the GOP.

By comparison, 44 percent of Democratic respondents said that President Biden should be the party’s nominee in 2024, while 56 percent believe that another candidate should represent their party.

When asked to list the former president’s positive traits, Trump’s willingness to use all tools at his disposal to get things done was cited by the most Republican respondents — 90 percent.

Eighty-two percent of Republican respondents also said they believe that Trump can win a reelection bid in 2024, pollsters noted.

The poll comes after a redacted affidavit used to convince a judge to approve this month’s FBI search of Trump’s Florida residence was released on Friday. Trump has denied any wrongdoing related to the documents seized at Mar-a-Lago.

The USA Today-Ipsos poll of 2,345 respondents was conducted from Aug. 18 to Aug. 22. Its margin of error is 4.2 percentage points.
__________

[DOR]

6 in 10 Republicans say Trump should be 2024 GOP nominee: survey

__________

Bring it on.
When the party gets to the convention and someone notices that their candidate is in jail, we should be able to finally bury the wrong wing of the GOP.

[tbm3fan]

Well it is a 2024 election but for House.

Sarah Palin has lost and is out. Trump endorsed too.Thank you. She has complained that the rank choice voting system was unfair. Well, of course. She spent 4x as much as the winner. How is that fair, right Sarah? Try again in November again Sarah, and spend as much.

What we have here is an actual native Alaskan representing Alaska. Imagine that!

https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/31/polit...ots/index.html

[JRT]

When the party gets to the convention and someone notices that their candidate is in jail, we should be able to finally bury the wrong wing of the GOP.

The wrong wing of the GOP is going strong in Ron DeSantis, Elise Stefanik,Ted Cruze, Marco Rubio, Devin Nunes (gone but not forgotten), Marjorie Greene, Loren Boebert, etc., and regardless that the last two are media sideshow characters who won't advance, the first two on this list seem like contenders to be the GOP candidates President and Vice President.

[TopHatter]

The wrong wing of the GOP is going strong in Ron DeSantis, Elise Stefanik,Ted Cruze, Marco Rubio, Devin Nunes (gone but not forgotten), Marjorie Greene, Loren Boebert, etc., and regardless that the last two are media sideshow characters who won't advance, the first two on this list seem like contenders to be the GOP candidates President and Vice President.

We'll see if we can throw Little Marco out of the game in a couple months.

[tbm3fan]

The wrong wing of the GOP is going strong in Ron DeSantis, Elise Stefanik,Ted Cruze, Marco Rubio, Devin Nunes (gone but not forgotten), Marjorie Greene, Loren Boebert, etc., and regardless that the last two are media sideshow characters who won't advance, the first two on this list seem like contenders to be the GOP candidates President and Vice President.

To me DeSatan is the most dangerous of the bunch and more so than Trump. He is not prone to Trumpisms or gaffes like Trump where he spouts off with his mouth contradicting himself everyday. He is more authoritarian than Trump as we just saw when he tried to restrict the Freedom of Speech in Florida via his own order. He is becoming the type of person my father had to fight against in WWII if you catch my drift.

[TopHatter]

DeSantis Is a Test Case for Democracy
Thomas Edsall is another columnist who usually makes good sense. This week's column is how Donald Trump's legacy may be getting many Americans to tolerate, if not embrace, authoritarian leaders. After Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) took office in 2019, the first thing he asked his general counsel was to make a list of all the things he could do as governor without the legislature or the courts or anyone else checking him. He wanted to know those areas where he had unbridled authority. Then he knew his starting point and worked from there.

For example, he banned public schools from using 54 math textbooks because they had "social-emotional learning content." He told a reporter: "Math is about getting the right answer. It's not about how you feel about the problem." As another example, during the pandemic, he threatened the Special Olympics with a $27.5 million fine is they insisted the athletes be vaccinated. After all, his base just lapped up the idea of forcing vulnerable people to take a potentially fatal risk to engage in sports they loved. The Special Olympics caved. Then DeSantis threatened to "Tax the Mouse" over Disney's position on his pet "Don't say gay" law. The list goes on and on. It's all about riling up the base. There is no evidence that DeSantis cares a whit about any of these things.

A poll by Democratic pollster Peter Hart in May in seven battleground states showed the depth of feeling DeSantis clearly understands and is exploiting. For example, a message saying schools must stop teaching kids that biological sex is a myth and there are many genders got strong support. So did one saying schools should stop teaching about race and focus on readin', writin', and 'rithmetic. Other culture wars subjects also got strong support. DeSantis (and Donald Trump) understand this.

Edsall asked N.Y.U. political science professor Arturas Rozenas, who studies backsliding democracies, what authoritarians do to get maximum bang for the buck (or zloty or forint). He says using the "salami technique" is popular. Make small changes that fly under the radar, like changing election laws, strengthening political control over the civil service, and weakening the judiciary. If done in small steps, they may not be noticed until it is too late. Stealth is the key here. Political elites might notice, but the average voter won't. Taxing the Mouse is a good example. It makes clear that even multibillion-dollar corporations had better knuckle under to the authoritarian or they will be hit hard in a way they hurts them badly but nobody else will notice. After all, if the Reedy Creek Improvement District were abolished, how many Floridians would care?

Prof. Rick Hasen, a top election-law specialist who recently was upgraded from UCI to UCLA, says the test of democracy could come as soon as 2024 if some Republican becomes president. What will matter is how the victory was achieved. If it was by genuinely winning more electoral votes than the Democrat, fine, but if it is due to some form of election subversion, the U.S. will then cease to be a democracy. The new president's agenda would surely be focused like a laser on solidifying and maintaining power, such as using the president's powers over the military and reformulating election rules so the regime would be self-perpetuating. This would lead to massive street protests that would be put down with violence. Media outlets that dared to report the situation honestly would be hit hard using the full power of government. How about an executive order saying the reporters must have a license from the newly created Dept. of Information? Would that be legal? We haven't had a chance to ask Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito so we don't know. Sorry

Another professor of law specializing in elections and politics, Richard Pildes of NYU, envisions some of the things Trump or DeSantis might do. One would be to dramatically expand the courts and appoint hundreds of judges loyal to the president. Another is to implement "Schedule F," to allow the president to fire all high-level civil servants and replace them with toadies. Another is to use government power to pressure businesses and states to toe the line. During the pandemic, for example, Trump said that governors who were nice to him would get desperately needed life-saving equipment and supplies. Governors who weren't were on their own. Bidding rules on lucrative government contracts could be changed to give cabinet officials far more discretion. They could then let it be known that CEOs who publicly praised their actions would be more "likely" to get big contracts than CEOs who opposed the regime or who were silent. In China, everyone has a "social credit" score, like a FICO score. Except that it doesn't deal with finances. It deals with how often you have praised (or opposed) the regime on social media. The higher your score, the better the apartment and job you get. Surely Facebook and Twitter could implement that pretty easily.

Donald Moynihan, a professor of public policy at Georgetown University, said that democratic backsliding would affect different constituencies differently. Conservatives would believe that their rights were not threatened and life would be normal. Historically marginalized groups, including Black and LGBTQ+ people would suddenly fear new restrictions and voting laws could be changed to make it harder for them to vote. One could imagine state laws saying that each county must have exactly 5 polling places, no more and no less, which would mean massive lines in urban counties but have little effect in rural ones. It would not be hard to imagine the Supreme Court ruling that if that is what the people's chosen state legislators want, that is up to them. Moynihan also believes DeSantis better represents these threats than Trump because he has shown his interest and ability to do a long list of authoritarian things. Trump talked a lot, but did little. DeSantis both talked and acted. If he is reelected—especially if it is by a substantial margin over a strong candidate (Charlie Crist)—that will show that Americans don't object to authoritarians. They even like them. And if that works in a demographically mixed state with many minority voters like Florida, it will certainly go over in Nebraska or Idaho.

Edsall believes that the right-wing populism that DeSantis and Trump are exploiting has two causes. The first is essentially an outgrowth of Richard Nixon's Southern strategy, which was a not-so-subtle appeal to white racists in the South (and later, nationally) who were none too happy with the Civil Rights Movement and enfranchisement of millions of Black voters. The second is economic uncertainty for millions of working-class voters, in part due to outsourcing of jobs to China and in part due to the economic crisis of 2008. To this list, we would add immigration and the changing demographics of the country. (V)
_______

[TopHatter]

Ted Cruz plots a 2024 bid even as he waits on Trump
LONDONDERRY, New Hampshire — Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) shook hands and posed for pictures with the crowd for an hour, then grabbed a stool at the bar at American Legion Post 27 and joined everyone for a beer.

This is what running for president looks like in New Hampshire, the host of the second nominating contest and the first traditional primary on the Republican Party’s quadrennial nominating calendar. And Cruz, the runner-up for the GOP nod in 2016 (the last time the party did not field an incumbent), conceded he has not ruled out mounting a second campaign — even if former President Donald Trump enters the race.

But the senator also confirmed in a brief interview with the Washington Examiner Thursday evening he will make no decision about 2024 until he knows Trump’s plans. Any Republican mulling a White House bid who says otherwise (and at the very least, that includes former Vice President Mike Pence and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo) is, Cruz insists, being dishonest about his or her internal deliberations.

“There are a lot of candidates out there feeling their oats and boasting, ‘I’m running no matter what. I don’t care what Donald Trump says.’ Anyone who says that is lying. That’s an idiotic statement for someone to make who’s actually thinking about running,” Cruz said after headlining a rally for Karoline Leavitt, the Republican candidate for New Hampshire’s 1st Congressional District, before a couple of hundred voters and activists.

“I don’t know what Trump’s going to decide — nobody does. Anybody who tells you they do is making things up,” the senator said. “The whole world will change depending on what Donald Trump decides. That’s true for every candidate. That’s true of every potential candidate.”

Trump has given all indications he intends to run.

Even before the FBI executed a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago, the former president’s residence and private social club in Palm Beach, Florida, as part of a federal investigation into the alleged mishandling of classified documents since leaving the White House, he was toying with announcing a campaign before the midterm elections. Top Republicans were so concerned Trump might pull the trigger this month or next that they worked furiously to talk him out of it.

Beyond polling that shows Trump being a prohibitive favorite at the outset of any primary, it’s easy to understand why Cruz is hesitating on a 2024 bid despite the fact that he loves campaigning and desperately wants to run for president again. After all, Republicans have a history of nominating previous runners-up, as they did in 1980 with Ronald Reagan, 2008 with John McCain, and 2012 with Mitt Romney.

Despite Trump’s flaws and downsides, and despite the party losing the House, Senate, and White House on his watch, he remains an iconic Republican figure with a hold on the imagination of many grassroots conservatives. Cruz understands that.

But just in case he needed reminding: One of his bartenders at the American Legion, a hangout for military veterans, in this conservative corner of southern New Hampshire was sporting a “Trump 2024” T-shirt that seemed to loom like a shadow over the senator as he sipped his beer. Peter Duffy, 60, a Republican voter and volunteer for Leavitt’s campaign, illustrated the Trump factor another way.

“I love Ted Cruz,” he said after the senator delivered a rousing 20-minute speech for Leavitt, a former Trump administration official, that had the crowd cheering and laughing. “Ted Cruz is very intelligent. He is very sophisticated. He knows the law, first of all. He’s very pro-American. And I believe him — bottom line.” So, would Duffy like to see Cruz run for president again?

“I would like to see Ted Cruz [become] attorney general of the United States,” he said. Duffy’s preference against President Joe Biden, or whomever the Democrats nominate, is Trump. “Nobody can do it like he can do it. And I believe he will [run]. And I believe he will win, no doubt about it.”

If Cruz is undecided about running for president, he is not undecided about running.

The senator will run for reelection in Texas in 2024 if he does not seek to lead the Republican Party’s national ticket and has spent the past nearly two years preparing to field a $100 million campaign that makes both options available to him. Texas law allows Cruz to run for the Republican nomination for Senate and president simultaneously.

As part of Cruz’s effort to seed a potential presidential bid, he is crisscrossing the country this fall campaigning for Republicans on the 2022 ballot, raising millions of dollars for the candidates he is supporting. The plan is to connect with voters in key battlegrounds and early primary states, such as New Hampshire, and create a network of allies in the House and Senate whose assistance could prove crucial in a crowded and competitive nominating contest.

But for now, Cruz waits on Trump.

“He was the last Republican president, and one of the prerogatives that comes with that is he gets to decide what he’s going to do, and then, everyone else will decide accordingly,” the senator said.
__________

[tbm3fan]

Can't we send Cruz back to Canada? It's not like anyone up there is standing in the way...

[tbm3fan]

Besides how the hell does he think natural born citizen doesn't apply? Oh, his mother... DAMN!