Passing the Torch

1. 86

   Valeantposted 23 months ago

   So it's pretty clear that the GOP has a few mini-Trump options of the younger, less crazy variety, but still along the America First agenda line.  Chief among those is Ron DeSantis.
   Over in the ladies section, Kristi Noem, Nikki Haley and even Tulsi Gabbard might throw their purses into the ring. 
   
   On the Democratic side, it's pretty obvious that Biden might be the only one who thinks Biden should run again in 2024.  Harris might have aspirations, but not near enough support.
   
   As far as searching for the next up-and-comer to match a Ron DeSantis, only Pete Buttigieg comes to mind.  Amy Klobuchar is on par with any of the female versions of potential GOP nominees in terms of street credit.  Michelle Obama would win in a landslide, but would never choose to run.
   
   Is there another bright, young star akin to Barack Obama anyone sees?

   replyreport
   1. 78

      Credence2posted 23 months agoin reply to this

      Any one supporting the Trump so called line of "America First" is automatically disqualified in my book.
      
      Klobuchar, while too much of a mainstream, Wall Street type Democrat for my taste, is the closest to my ideals.
      
      But, I still prefer Warren and while her possibility is remote, I would sure like to hear her opinion on who she would consider a candidate that would more closely share her and my values.
      
      Otherwise, we appear rudderless right now....

      replyreport
      1. 95

         wildernessposted 23 months agoin reply to this

         Which country or countries would you put a higher priority on than America?  Syria?  Colombia?  Russia?  Should we spend our resources improving the living standards in China? 
         
         Which countries and people would get our efforts and priorities before America and Americans in your opinion?

         replyreport
         1. 86

            Valeantposted 23 months agoin reply to this

            In terms of twisting what someone just said in jibberish, this post is near the top.
            
            As we consider how the United States' economy is tied up into global markets, a health crisis that originated globally and reached us, let alone our involvement in promoting democracy throughout the globe, there argument can be made that America first helped facilitate many of the issues we are facing in 2022.
            
            When the US leader ignores the warnings about the dangers of a lab in China that ends up wreaking havoc on the world's supply chains, that America First view has failed us, for sure:  https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ … rpt-474322

            replyreport
            1. 95

               wildernessposted 23 months agoin reply to this

               As you didn't list any countries, may I assume that you, too, put America and Americans first in your priorities?

               replyreport
               1. 86

                  Valeantposted 23 months agoin reply to this

                  I put humanity first.  That doesn't exclude someone from loving their own country, however, contrary to the Trumpist views on their own warped patriotism that allows them to attack their own country if they don't get their own selfish way on any issue.

                  replyreport
         2. 78

            Credence2posted 23 months agoin reply to this

            How do we have international cooperation with an attitude that our sole interests are of the only import? Is that not what Putin is saying in Russia or China's leader is saying in its regard? Everybody says that. Mutual cooperation and respect is the only course available if we are interested in not ultimately destroying ourselves.
            
            Is that globalism? Whether you like it or not no one is free to just do as they please without regard for the rights and preferences of others. But again, that is what makes me a progressive.
            
            It was no wonder that the "America First" attitude was not well received by our NATO allies.
            
            Sole pursuit of our interests in a absolute manner is not the attitude we should be taking.

            replyreport
            1. 95

               wildernessposted 23 months agoin reply to this

               Yeah, NATO allies didn't like it...when we made it clear we would no longer be the pocketbook or morgue for their own military needs.
               
               Cooperation is wonderful...until it is grossly one sided.  No one said anything about sole pursuit, but you appear to feel that American should not be the top priority on our list (you attack the "America First" concept). 
               
               But, like Valeant, you did not list any countries you feel should be at the top of our priorities - does that mean that you, too, put America first?

               replyreport
               1. 78

                  Credence2posted 23 months agoin reply to this

                  No one should be at the top, all nations who consider their interests as "first" need to realize that we all cannot sit on the same throne. Of course, living in America, American interests are going to take precedence. But that will clash with the interests of China and Russia who despite the propaganda do not always see us as the "good guys"
                  
                  America, as a world power, has a responsibility for a broader and more intelligent stance on things. For intance, if we complain about the Ukraine and Taiwan, what were we doing in Iraq? If America first means American hegemony, that is dead on arrival.
                  
                  There was nothing unreasonable about getting NATO to pay its fair share, that is not "America First", but insisting on the terms of an agreement made by all parties that contribute to a common defense.
                  
                  Cooperation is necessary, if you want to survive any further within this century.

                  replyreport
                  1. 95

                     wildernessposted 23 months agoin reply to this

                     Cooperation is indeed necessary.  It is our best interests to cooperate.
                     
                     But, just as you said, "Of course, living in America, American interests are going to take precedence.".  America First.
                     
                     So why the attack on that concept?  Just because it was Trump that said it?

                     replyreport
                     1. 78

                        Credence2posted 23 months agoin reply to this

                        I attack it because it is selfish, shortsighted and consequently unrealistic in the world that we live in today. That is always true, regardless of who says it.

                        replyreport
         3. 83

            Sharlee01posted 23 months agoin reply to this

            None --- We need to fix America first before concerning ourselves with other countries. The country is a pure mess, on so many levels.

            replyreport
            1. 84

               gmwilliamsposted 23 months agoin reply to this

               THANK YOU.

               replyreport
            2. 86

               Valeantposted 23 months agoin reply to this

               And yet when we focused only on America, we ended up giving America all the problems we are experiencing today.  When the Trump Administration ignored those warnings about the Wuhan Lab we have all heard so much about, instead of stopping a global pandemic that wreaked havoc on supply chains (which has caused inflation and a shortage of goods), our failed leadership let millions die and cost our country trillions of dollars.
               
               I agree the country has issues, but we disagree about the origins of those issues and which party causes them and which one gets elected to fix them.

               replyreport
               1. 83

                  Sharlee01posted 23 months agoin reply to this

                  I will agree to disagree. As you well know I have offered WHO as well as the White House COVID timelines. And compare Trump's very speedy actions to any available information that he was made aware of. In my view, these timelines although tedious to peruse through give a good honest picture of what Trump did and when he did it.  His words or opinion at times did not agree with some of his advisories, but he followed his advisors in regard to setting forth plans, policies, and actions.
                  
                  The timelines are available, and are truely the best research one can do on what was done and when, putting all his words aside, his deeds were very possitive.

                  replyreport