Vivek: On the evolution of “woke” from CRT
- Thread starter grandhavendiddy
- Start date
You are using a few people on here to base your decision on this? While I would agree that many conservatives may feel this way.....I do not. Not Hindu. Muslims are a different story to me.......that is NOT a peaceful religion.
It is an interesting question.
I do believe that Russell, Ghost and others represent a decent segment of the Conservative/MAGA base. Is it 10%, 100%, I do not know.
On religions, I look at what the governing body does with a certain religion. Hindu governments or empires do not go to war (except with Muslims) over religion. Muslim's do. At an individual level (versus governing) Muslims are good people, peaceful, etc.
In the Western World, plenty of wars have been fought over religion, especially Catholic versus Protestant. You of course have the crusades.
Back to Vivek, I have no concerns that we would go into a war over his Hindu religion, as say, concerns that people had with Kennedy and his Catholicism back in the late 1950s.
Besides religion, there are many more reasons to not vote for Vivek. But as a centrist, I don’t expect things like ties to Soros, big pharma, paying to have his history scrubbed, and flip flopping to be of concern to you.
I mean, the centrist are the same ones that gave us Romney, Mccain, and a host of other Rinos that have done A ton of damage.
As for your other point, Evangelicals make up alot more than 10 percent of the party. Not just MAGA. That part of the party relies on God, their pastors, and other spiritual outlets for decision making. I can promise that if he were to gain momentum that was credible, his religion will be a big deal to that faction.
Even if it were only 10 percent (it will be higher) that’s enough to make him unelectable. Add that on top pf the MAGA base…..and he is a non starter.
Speaking of Romney, how did he get past the religious zealots with his magic underwear, and the like. If I was to make up a religion, it would be just like Joseph Smith did with Mormon take a whole bunch of hot girls move across the country. Have one guy for a for a bunch of hot girls. And do your thing and part of the world where no one's paying attention. That is a winning recipe ...
Lets look at the number one factor when choosing a candidate for evangelicals.
Here’s your sign….
Here’s your sign….
I grew up as a doctor’s kid and many of his coworkers were Hindu.
Peaceful and kind are the two best words I can use to describe everyone I knew as a kid. It’s a great culture.
Oh and hot, I had a crush on one of their daughters for a few of my formative years. She was a smokeshow…still is actually.
Utah is a mormon state. A Mormon winning a mormon state shocks you? Yikes.
Remind me again how his term as President went?
Thx for helping me prove the point
You don’t have to take my word for it. A simple google search will tell you what evangelicals do. Hell, Evangelicals is literally what Bush targeted. Want to lose this election? Dismiss the importance of why evangelicals choose a candidate.
Adjustment made. Was sitting in traffic, and was like WTF? But it really did help. 😉
My apologies sir.
The more I hear him speak, the more I like him. Do not think 2024 is his time, but definitely see him in political office the future.
Unless of course, he would try to change this into a Hindu Country. Like I can't stand any of the Muslim politicians in Minnesota who were pushing the use of Shira law. That is not this Country.
There is zero evidence that he would take that tact ...
My issue, is there is lots of evidence that he is a good talker, but flip flops and is paying to have his history scrubbed. Why?
Lots of smoke with his past that he isn’t who he says he is.. So at this point there is zero evidence he would do that, but zero evidence he wouldn’t.
The reason there is zero evidence at all? That’s a great question. If only he weren’t paying people to remove his history.
I could blow this thread up with all the stuff he hasn’t been able to delete yet, but at some point….folks gotta research on their own instead of just listening to politicians.
I may have a difference with you on the relevancy of his Hindu religion, but EVERYONE should do their own research.
I do want to be clear, that his, a historically diverse voice for the Republican party, doing well on a number of news outlets supporting the MAGA agenda should be taken positively from the right.
Does that mean it is a sustained, authentic voice? Good question. Ask the tough questions, do the research and test. That is core to our american system of government and free speech.
My only point in the thread is that he has emerged as a powerful and clear voice on important political topics of the day.
Evangelicals have a very important voice in the party. No question. Hate Pence if one wishes, but he was put on the ticket in 2016 for a reason.You don’t have to take my word for it. A simple google search will tell you what evangelicals do. Hell, Evangelicals is literally what Bush targeted. Want to lose this election? Dismiss the importance of why evangelicals choose a candidate.
Working backwards, Captain was questioning why I should be making a "decision" from a few voices (yours and Ghosts). I said that you represented the view of some segment of the party, ranging from 10 to possibly 100%.
On where I lean politically, Ghost made an exceptionally perceptive comment once noting that I was actually a "Jack Kemp" republican (I was young when he was in politics) who believes in strong borders, strong military, targeted immigration, free markets, is suspicious of monopolies and oligopolies (including governments) but want to be inclusive and diverse (in how Kemp would think about it, not in the current DEI construct, per se). Take our number one disagreement point - abortion. While I gave a personal hypothetical, my real position there is that I do not want the government in our business. It applies in many spheres including gun laws. Nothing made me more pro-2nd amendment than the social unrest and defund the police movement in 2020. I actually went to a gun shop in the western slop of Colorado to ask about acquiring an AR-15.
Let's hit your questions. They are fair.
On Vivek, support of Soros is a massive red-flag. Soros and his DA's have done exceptional damage to inner cities. Big Pharma is similar. Why do they have massive profits, by the way? Government given patent protection. The government has given them a monopoly. (by the way - this should be an easy bi-partisan issue with people like AOC and Matt Gaetz) Scrubbing history is a problem. If his views have evolved, as Trump's has, then that is to be understood and should be the outcome of a well functioning democracy and free speech and ideas. It can help people evolve from a prior position to a new one. If Vivek's have evolved to the right, the right should celebrate that and again, call that as a positive proof point.
Don’t disagree, I just know there are factions that are on the “right” (supposedly) that will do anything to rid the party of Trump. Hell, we see that on here.
As such, I don’t put it past the powers that be, to insert candidates to run on MAGA policies, and then subvert them once in office. I remember all too well what the right did to get rid of the tea party. And many of those players are still around.
Bill Maher said it best though. Why go see the tribute band while the original band is still playing? The admission price is the same, and the left will use the same tactics on whoever is next, unless we show them it doesn’t work.
Fair points.
As I noted earlier, and to your thought above, any talk of Vivek in 2024 in a moot point. Trump will be the nominee. DeSantis should refocus to 2028 and Vivek should be an outside-in voice espousing america-first principles.
Other nominees: Tim Scott, Nikki Haley, etc. should be doing a debate for VP. I have no idea what Chris C. is doing other than giving himself more reasons to be on CNN and earn a salary in broadcasting.
Serious question. One that folks elsewhere always avoid. We know at this point that the left has targeted removing trump from the equation using any means necessary, including things I consider treason (coordination with foreign actors to create fake dossiers, modifying laws, etc) for 7 years. It’s indisputable at this point that they are willing to use any means necessary.
Do you think the right caving into that pressure and saying…let’s nominate someone else, stops that behavior? They surely won’t do this to Trump light, will they? 🙄
At some point, the onus is on We The People, to put a stop to the tomfoolery.
I just know you don’t stop something, by enabling it. And I see it as….there’s a guy who literally didn’t need this shit in his life, and he continues to fight. Despite there being nothing to gain for him personally. And we are going to tell that guy, thanks, but the left says we should move on. So that’s what we’re doing. Hey dems, Your ploys worked, but we trust you will leave the next guy alone.
We will never fix this country like that, and I believe we are at/past the rubicon. Theres one guy, that I know will blow up the establishment after how he has been treated. The others? I have doubts.
Last edited:
The other side of that debate..."only Trump will do" is just as nutty as never Trump imho.
He's just a man. The anti-Trump sentiments are nuts as are the people who espouse them. However, respectfully speaking, the "only Trumpers" are also outside of their heads imo. It's bordering on golden calf at this point for some people.
He's just a man. I like his fight and I think he loves this country...but he's just a man.
Ok, but that’s a different argument.
There are others that could do what Trump is doing, but none of them are, or have. That’s why HE is the one being attacked the way he is.
And people seem to still struggle with what MAGA is. MAGA isn’t Trump, it’s you and I. They are trying to tear apart MAGA. You.
Unfortunately, there are no other MAGA candidates. Rons done, he made his bed. Even Vivek, try as he might, isn’t MAGA. One only need to look wayyyyy back to 2022, to see he isn’t what he is trying to portray.
Not even going to dignify the Golden Calf comment. Interesting timing.
Edit: it still doesn’t take away from the original point. That allowing yourself to be influenced away from voting for Trump based on Democrat lies, persecutions and propaganda…..enables their behavior. There is no “other side” of that.
So if we are in agreement that Trumps policies worked, and you are looking for a Trump Tribute Band…..
Then what are we even talking about here? Seems to me, the propaganda worked.
The enemy of my enemies is who I am voting for.
Last edited:
The propaganda worked because I would consider other worthy candidates?
This is why I mentioned the golden calf. ^^That's^^ not a reasonable take.
If I had to pick a candidate today, I'd pick Trump. But I'm not closed-minded to the idea of a more complete candidate. IMHO, some of you are. He's just a man. He's also the best one for the job today...but still just a man.
Fair question, deserves a serious answer. Here goes from someone who tries to see things from multiple angles.
There is no question that the left targeted Trump from day one.
"Illegitimate president, impeach, etc." - it was completely un-american. Caving and giving up only emboldens the other side. As Nick Saban said in a completely different context: "Culture is set by the worst behavior that leadership permits."
Of the reasons to move on, the SECOND TO LAST reason is because the left wants it. (the first is Xi or Putin or some other foreign powers)
So, to be clear, I agree with you.
Trump will be neck and neck with Biden regardless. Like 2020, this will come down to 40,000 to 80,000 votes in a handful of states and swing counties. That's it.
At some point, Trump needs to be able to get that swing vote.
How that happens should be a separate post and discussion.
Bama - here is what I think is implied in this comment. Few on the right would object to a second Trump term.
What many are frustrated by, because they will cost them votes of independents, are the (seemingly) unending points of unforced errors including, but not limited to:
1. "s....e countries"
2. "Rapists and Murderers"
3. "Kung Flu"
4. Not calling off the rioters and showing true moral leadership on 1/6
5. injecting bleach
6. Asking Brad R. for 13,000 votes
7. etc. etc.
These items, so small, often just one phrase, seek to make him egotistical, petty or worse.
He is (and was) also surrounded by people, who gave exceptionally poor advice including John Eastman, Dominion Lady, Giuliani, etc. He is ultimately accountable, but that is not in his immediate control.
I think people on the right, so desperately wanting for him to be successful, given, understandably, the seemingly existential inflection point we are in, give him an unending pass on the above or actually defend it, obscure it, etc.
Trump, at his best, and I have said this many times, was the February 2020 SOTU Trump. Even Van Jones recognized that it was a masterpiece in oratory, energy and positive vision for the country. It was inclusive and powerful.
That Trump wins easily in 2024.
4 and 5 are just blatant, provable lies. He never suggested that people could or should inject bleach and he did specifically tell people to go home peacefully on 1/06.
1. Unpresidential...but I don't necessarily disagree
2. He wasn't calling all illegal immigrants rapists and murderers. But clearly some of them are...because some of them rape and murder. Hence why we should control who enters our borders.
3. In context, I appreciated him calling it Kung Flu. It was childish but it was also in direct conflict with Chinese apologists who were attempting to muddy the water on how we got to where we were.
6. Making that call was a bad idea, because of who and what the people on the other end of the line were all about, but only crazy people and never Trumpers believe that Trump was telling Raffensperger to create those 13k votes out of whole cloth.
I would prefer to nominate someone else....IF that someone else can and will fight what Trump is fighting against. I wouldn't be willing to "settle" for something lesser simply because their name isn't Trump but if we could have someone not named Trump on the ticket that would do Trump ish, that would be better.
Why do I feel this way? Because I fear Trump won't win the general...whether that's a legitimate outcome or not. I fear that because Trump evokes so much passion from both sides. Also I think Trump makes it more likely, and probably easier, for the left to steal the election if they must.
As it stands today, I don't see anyone who can fill his shoes and almost certainly no one will be able to...so the Trump replacement is just all talk. And here we are.
2. Not Sure about Mexico or any of the South and Central American countries where these "immigrants" were coming from, specifically sent them, BUT, a majority of MS13 gang members crossed the border illegally. And NEVER FORGET HISTORY, Cuba most definitely emptied out their prisons and sent them here.
To quote:
“Why do I feel this way? Because I fear Trump won't win the general...whether that's a legitimate outcome or not. I fear that because Trump evokes so much passion from both sides. Also I think Trump makes it more likely, and probably easier, for the left to steal the election if they must.”
Somehow that seed got planted. The take is now reasonable. Is it correct? I don’t know, only you can know that answer, but the take is reasonable. Many others have fallen for the BS, that’s unquestionable. But the Fact you FEAR he would be the candidate they would go against the hardest, is exactly why we SHOULD vote for him.
I am old enough to remember some on this site wanting to “move on” before he even had any opposition, so it wasn’t just about “looking around” for them.
Why would Trump running make it easier to steal than others? See, that’s the point. The guy is leading in most of the major polls, yet you FEAR he will lose. That is exactly what Rush was talking about.
There are 365 versus of fear not in the bible. One for every day.
Lastly, as stated earlier, not going to dignify the golden calf comment. It’s silly. Just like “you’re in a cult”.
Last edited:
There's more than one definition of the word fear my friend. In this case...the likelihood of something unwelcome happening.
Fear means that I'm very concerned that he may lose the general. Anxiety would be another descriptor if you prefer.
I used fear because I wouldn't want him to lose. That would be bad for me. If it was something that I wanted, I would replace the word fear with hope.
It's not about being afraid. It's about concern that the outcome won't be what we need it to be. If you're telling me that you aren't also concerned, I don't believe you.
And what seed got planted? That I'm concerned that he may not win the general? Do you think some unforeseen malevolent force had to plant that seed?
Listen, you've read what I've had to say about Trump dozens and dozens of times. Clearly the propaganda hasn't worked on me. If that was the case I'd be telling you that this....
...was all true. And that isn't what I've said. I've laughed at the propaganda and I've gone through the trouble to call it BS repeatedly.
Finally, and as I've said I have zero faith in polls, anyone's polls...I believe that the best chance that we have is a repeat of the 2016 election. What I mean by this is that enough people are tired of this current clown show that they will vote for Trump or not vote at all.
I'm hopeful that, as in 2016, enough people are "ashamed" to admit publicly that they're going to vote for Trump but they damn sure aren't voting for more of this clown show. I think that this is a real possibility. I hope that is the case. I fear that it isn't but I'm hopeful that it is.
Fear make sense now?
I actually disagree here. And to prove my point...name ANY other candidate that the left (AND right) has gone after to make sure they never get elected? It has ZERO to do with he is "Donald Trump" It has EVERYTHING to do with he does what HE wants to do...and not what THEY WANT for him to do because they paid millions to his campaign. THAT separates him. Believe it or not...Sanders is the lefts version of that same situation, and they stole 2 nominations from him that he would have won
I understand the word fear very well. Wasn’t thinking you meant scared like you saw a ghost.
Fear can also mean reverence for example.
In the context you used, I assumed you meant concern ( which you confirmed).
Which means, the point I was making does not change.
Last edited:
