In the code of Federal Regulations there are 50 books that cover everything from transportation to meat packing.If you have trouble sleeping just start reading the code.
What if the use of the term "conservative" was avoided when speaking of the election? Instead, speak of the important issues in descriptive terms, eg, economy, border, massive number of illegals, high taxes, national security, failure in Afghanistan, high prices in grocery stores, govt regulation, energy independence, you know the drill. Focus on important items and not ideology. Reproductive rights are personal decisions and not appropriate for federal govt legislation. Labels are not helpful.
THIS says it all! Succinct, easy for anyone to understand, and absolutely true - thank you, Erick. Immediately after reading, recommended to three friends.
I think Erick has captured the essence of this election. It is highly disappointing that in this great nation we are down to these two choices but that said, they aren't equally bad. In terms of America, Kamala Harris would be a disaster and her policy preferences are well known, notwiithstanding the shallow attempts of "anonymous staffers" suggesting otherwise or an enlightenment. Frankly, the audacity to not publish policy statements do.press conferences and take open questions alone disqualify her as a viable candidate in my opinion.
The choice is clear. The argument for a Trump presidency is overwhelming, despite his personality. Personality figures very little into the equation. The needs of the nation are bigger than any individual. We all need to stick to the facts. Thank you Erick, and keep up the good work.
I agree with you 100% Erick I’ve held my nose and voted for McCain and Romney and I’ll do it for Trump because the alternative is a nightmare maybe Trump can pull homeland security out of our private lives and give us some of our freedoms back
My biggest disagreement with Erick's video commentary is his take on foreign affairs. First of all, the mere fact that the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza occurred while Biden was President does not mean that Trump could have prevented them; any more than the lack of any pandemic during the Obama administration means that Covid would not have occurred had he still been in charge. Believe it or not, especially with other countries, there are a lot of things that our President simply does not control.
My more significant disagreement concerns NATO, where longtime allies would take Trump's reelection to mean that they are now on their own. If America steps back from the role that it has played since the end of WWII as the guarantor of world peace, the smartest thing for everybody else to do would be to nuke up; in which case the unthinkable could become simply a matter of time.
Trump is also unlikely to continue Biden's resolute (albeit inadequate) opposition to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. This could lead the Chinese to make a move on Taiwan, where our commitment to its defense is so much clearer that we would almost have to do something, and this could also lead to the unthinkable.
After WWI, America pulled back from world leadership, letting aggression go unchecked until it was almost too late. After WWII, however, Democratic and Republican administrations alike have been firm in their commitment both to NATO and America's role more generally in maintaining world peace. And it has worked. Trump (and now Vance, perhaps even more so) seems to think this no longer necessary. We could make no bigger mistake.
I am unaware of Trump or Vance ever waivering on NATO. I have always heard there position that the EU community needs to pay the agreed and fair share of the costs. I firmly believe that if they do, NATO will survive just fine and if they don't, ultimately the outcome is on them to own
You might also note that contrary to Trump's misstatement of how NATO operates, member nations don't "pay" anything. Rather, members have a target (meaning it's not mandatory) of spending at least 2% of gross domestic product on defense. So when Trump talks about member nations not "paying," this reflects a shocking level of ignorance about the most significant treaty that we have.
Erick's argument centers in large measure on the changes a Trump presidency would make through his appointments throughout the federal government. It should be noted that transition teams are typically put together well before the election. Trump is late. Now one can argue that he had a transition team. But that team came up with the 2025 Project which became a political liability, so he basically fired them.
In its place he appointed two former Democrats: Robert F. KENNEDY, jr. and Tulsi Gabbard. Now, who are they going recommend? As James Newberry in the comments section noted, just about every appointee in his first administration will not work for him again. So, who the hell are they going to recommend? Who will work for him? Unknown and probably incompetent sycophants aka yes men and women. Excellent, just what an aspiring autocrat desires, a room full of "leg humpers" to borrow a phase.
Yes, in a way I hope he wins so you all can revel in the chaos you will have visited on this country. God help me, but politics has turned me into a nihilist.
Just like 2020. catastrophes are possible ( Dem manufactured) but not likely to result in a cancellation of the election. What is more likely is that they will be used by Democrats to cheat using mail-in ballots and ballot harvesting with even less accountability than usual because of the crises you do not foresee at this time. What could happen is that Trump will win the Electoral College vote on November 5 but will be disqualified from being president on January 6, 2025, on grounds of being an “insurrectionist” under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. IANA but I would believe that USSC would cancel void any 01-06-2020 charges against DT. Then comes Civil War II> Selah
The irony in the media chattering class that claims the cult of personality for Trump supporters is that the anti-Trumpers that claim it are in fact the ones stuck in it. They make up a garbage pile of pseudo intellectual hogwash to back their twisted logic... when they are just undisciplined hypertensive emotes. In consideration of the Democrat collective evil starting with the fake Trump-Russia collusion malice, the Twitter Files revelations that Mark Zuckerberg yet confirmed again and the breathtaking unconstitutional lawfare that is still continuing today... if I hear another "but Trump and Jan-6" excuse, I am going to get some paint and start applying the big "L" on foreheads.
Voting for Harris at this point? Well there is this thing called respect for other's opinions. But then there is a need to recognize profound stupidity and call it what it is.
I think one could make a reasonable case for voting for either candidate...or none at all. The problem you don't address is the potential damage Trump will do the conservative and GOP brand -- not to mention the cause of Christianity. He sticks his foot in his mouth practically every time he speaks. His denigration of the Medal of Honor is just the latest example.
I think our movement would be better off in the long-run if Trump lost. That doesn't mean I think people should not vote -- or vote for Harris. Yes, vote down ballot for Republicans as long as they aren't crazy like Taylor-Greene, but for presidency I suggest a write-in or Libertarian.
My biggest reservation against Trump is not Jan. 6, Erick. Instead, it's all his former staff members, cabinet officers and VP Pence that aren't supporting him. They've seen firsthand how bad he is.
"it's all his former staff members, cabinet officers and VP Pence that aren't supporting him. They've seen firsthand how bad he is". - Bingo
For me its also the number of former elected Republicans who will not support him. Its amazing what happens when people who are truly informed on what he is no longer depend on his cult of followers for votes or income - they are free to speak truth.
In the code of Federal Regulations there are 50 books that cover everything from transportation to meat packing.If you have trouble sleeping just start reading the code.
https://www.ecfr.gov/
I read this just this morning :
Dr. Sheila Nazarian @ @D....3h
Minneapolis becomes the first American city to broadcast the Muslim call to prayer 5x a day for the entire city to hear.
But the 10 commandments in schools is absolutely not okay? Got it.
What if the use of the term "conservative" was avoided when speaking of the election? Instead, speak of the important issues in descriptive terms, eg, economy, border, massive number of illegals, high taxes, national security, failure in Afghanistan, high prices in grocery stores, govt regulation, energy independence, you know the drill. Focus on important items and not ideology. Reproductive rights are personal decisions and not appropriate for federal govt legislation. Labels are not helpful.
Where can I find transcript of Mondays monologue?
THIS says it all! Succinct, easy for anyone to understand, and absolutely true - thank you, Erick. Immediately after reading, recommended to three friends.
I think Erick has captured the essence of this election. It is highly disappointing that in this great nation we are down to these two choices but that said, they aren't equally bad. In terms of America, Kamala Harris would be a disaster and her policy preferences are well known, notwiithstanding the shallow attempts of "anonymous staffers" suggesting otherwise or an enlightenment. Frankly, the audacity to not publish policy statements do.press conferences and take open questions alone disqualify her as a viable candidate in my opinion.
The choice is clear. The argument for a Trump presidency is overwhelming, despite his personality. Personality figures very little into the equation. The needs of the nation are bigger than any individual. We all need to stick to the facts. Thank you Erick, and keep up the good work.
I agree with you 100% Erick I’ve held my nose and voted for McCain and Romney and I’ll do it for Trump because the alternative is a nightmare maybe Trump can pull homeland security out of our private lives and give us some of our freedoms back
Other than perhaps reproductive freedom, I was not aware that we had lost any.
My biggest disagreement with Erick's video commentary is his take on foreign affairs. First of all, the mere fact that the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza occurred while Biden was President does not mean that Trump could have prevented them; any more than the lack of any pandemic during the Obama administration means that Covid would not have occurred had he still been in charge. Believe it or not, especially with other countries, there are a lot of things that our President simply does not control.
My more significant disagreement concerns NATO, where longtime allies would take Trump's reelection to mean that they are now on their own. If America steps back from the role that it has played since the end of WWII as the guarantor of world peace, the smartest thing for everybody else to do would be to nuke up; in which case the unthinkable could become simply a matter of time.
Trump is also unlikely to continue Biden's resolute (albeit inadequate) opposition to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. This could lead the Chinese to make a move on Taiwan, where our commitment to its defense is so much clearer that we would almost have to do something, and this could also lead to the unthinkable.
After WWI, America pulled back from world leadership, letting aggression go unchecked until it was almost too late. After WWII, however, Democratic and Republican administrations alike have been firm in their commitment both to NATO and America's role more generally in maintaining world peace. And it has worked. Trump (and now Vance, perhaps even more so) seems to think this no longer necessary. We could make no bigger mistake.
I am unaware of Trump or Vance ever waivering on NATO. I have always heard there position that the EU community needs to pay the agreed and fair share of the costs. I firmly believe that if they do, NATO will survive just fine and if they don't, ultimately the outcome is on them to own
You might also note that contrary to Trump's misstatement of how NATO operates, member nations don't "pay" anything. Rather, members have a target (meaning it's not mandatory) of spending at least 2% of gross domestic product on defense. So when Trump talks about member nations not "paying," this reflects a shocking level of ignorance about the most significant treaty that we have.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/15/politics/trump-nato-us-withdraw/index.html?sp_amp_linker=1*1ksopmv*amp_id*cmJNeWwwUEJSVWxkcmxpblpzRS11Q1U2TmsydkpXZWFBWU4tMlFNZTBCNnFicUZheXktSHkwXzk0MnlUazVRNg..
Well done steak, with ketchup? Heathen!
Erick's argument centers in large measure on the changes a Trump presidency would make through his appointments throughout the federal government. It should be noted that transition teams are typically put together well before the election. Trump is late. Now one can argue that he had a transition team. But that team came up with the 2025 Project which became a political liability, so he basically fired them.
In its place he appointed two former Democrats: Robert F. KENNEDY, jr. and Tulsi Gabbard. Now, who are they going recommend? As James Newberry in the comments section noted, just about every appointee in his first administration will not work for him again. So, who the hell are they going to recommend? Who will work for him? Unknown and probably incompetent sycophants aka yes men and women. Excellent, just what an aspiring autocrat desires, a room full of "leg humpers" to borrow a phase.
Yes, in a way I hope he wins so you all can revel in the chaos you will have visited on this country. God help me, but politics has turned me into a nihilist.
Just like 2020. catastrophes are possible ( Dem manufactured) but not likely to result in a cancellation of the election. What is more likely is that they will be used by Democrats to cheat using mail-in ballots and ballot harvesting with even less accountability than usual because of the crises you do not foresee at this time. What could happen is that Trump will win the Electoral College vote on November 5 but will be disqualified from being president on January 6, 2025, on grounds of being an “insurrectionist” under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. IANA but I would believe that USSC would cancel void any 01-06-2020 charges against DT. Then comes Civil War II> Selah
You boiled it down nicely. Thanks. It is a binary choice...and the Harris choice is dark.
Erick, the last two minutes is GOLD.
The irony in the media chattering class that claims the cult of personality for Trump supporters is that the anti-Trumpers that claim it are in fact the ones stuck in it. They make up a garbage pile of pseudo intellectual hogwash to back their twisted logic... when they are just undisciplined hypertensive emotes. In consideration of the Democrat collective evil starting with the fake Trump-Russia collusion malice, the Twitter Files revelations that Mark Zuckerberg yet confirmed again and the breathtaking unconstitutional lawfare that is still continuing today... if I hear another "but Trump and Jan-6" excuse, I am going to get some paint and start applying the big "L" on foreheads.
Voting for Harris at this point? Well there is this thing called respect for other's opinions. But then there is a need to recognize profound stupidity and call it what it is.
I think one could make a reasonable case for voting for either candidate...or none at all. The problem you don't address is the potential damage Trump will do the conservative and GOP brand -- not to mention the cause of Christianity. He sticks his foot in his mouth practically every time he speaks. His denigration of the Medal of Honor is just the latest example.
I think our movement would be better off in the long-run if Trump lost. That doesn't mean I think people should not vote -- or vote for Harris. Yes, vote down ballot for Republicans as long as they aren't crazy like Taylor-Greene, but for presidency I suggest a write-in or Libertarian.
My biggest reservation against Trump is not Jan. 6, Erick. Instead, it's all his former staff members, cabinet officers and VP Pence that aren't supporting him. They've seen firsthand how bad he is.
"it's all his former staff members, cabinet officers and VP Pence that aren't supporting him. They've seen firsthand how bad he is". - Bingo
For me its also the number of former elected Republicans who will not support him. Its amazing what happens when people who are truly informed on what he is no longer depend on his cult of followers for votes or income - they are free to speak truth.