Beautiful summary of the future prospects. With the House and Senate to boot, there's a real chance to kill the entrenched federal bureaucratic state. Full speed ahead!
Such fantasies were delusional but understandable eight years ago - they are clown show demented now that we know who Trump is and what he stands for (cronyism and kakistocracy).
You might be right but it won't be as bad as the last 4 years and what it would have been under the Kackler. We are going to need serious fiscal reforms, under Kamala it is likely to have been taken out of the hide of people like me. Instead we may get many of the cuts coming out of the ridiculous programs that have given so much money to the corrupt Dems.
Anyway we should be celebrating that at least we have a chance of reform now. It may or may not work out but it wouldn't have if the D's had won.
Exactly. Literally almost anything would have been better than the current regime getting another 4 years of uncontrolled immigration, gender and racial woo.
Perhaps the lesson George and Alex Soros have learned from the 2024 election is to manipulate the early prediction markets during the 2026 and 2028 elections in order to establish their dream of an identity based, Communist utopia.
MAGA may have long coat tails, as witness LA DA George Gascon being defeated and Calif. Prop. 36 being approved. The sun came out for the whole nation yesterday, to quote one William Markley.
Even on the Young Turks on election night, amidst all their sweet sweet sadness/anger about Trump, Anna K. (LA resident) was dancing with joy at Gascon's loss because he's so pro-crime. Granted, she's slowly moving center-left as she ages to either secure a cable news gig or otherwise to make sure her middle aged less-radical-than-in-their-youth audience stays with her, but still TYT being happy about the firing of a lax DA who let crime slide is something to behold.
Yes, Ana Kasparian in the last couple years has been on a journey toward the center, spurred mostly by rejection of the left's enthusiasm for the homeless/crazy and crime-friendly policies as well as refusal to surrender to the trans mania ("I will not be referred to as a 'birthing person'".) She's encountered enormous abuse from her former left allies for these handful of deviations from good-think, which has only made her more wary of her own side and more curious about finding some small measure of common-cause with the right.
I read it within the last two weeks. I forget the source, I am afraid. Seventy-six is a pretty old age to be working even if his law clerks do most of his work. When Alito leaves the Court, he will be missed. He is a pillar of conservative judicial thinking.
Trump will probably make the decision the same way all Republicans have made similar decisions in recent memory, by outsourcing it to the Federalist Society.
Indeed. Which is why I am NOT confident that the replacement for Alito will be n upgrade. Gorsucks is bad on Trump's supposedly core issue (the Invasion) and it was downhill from there. Trump's choices were good if the only thing you cared about was abortion, but that is NOT why I preferred him to Clinton. So Leaberry's "I can see Trump appointing a replacement for Samuel Alito" doesn't strikes me as necessarily the pleasing prospect he seems to imagine it is.
The Federalists are the best we got. Trump picking a judge would either be wormtongued by a neocon or else pick some nonentity who's only ability is sucking up.
Picking Josh Hawley or Ted Cruz might be the only Trumpian personal picks I might go along with.
Trump can choose a lot better sources of advice than the Federalist types, who are pure worthless legacy GOP, and I hope he will.. But unlike, apparently, you I do not look forward to his replacing Alito.
Alito probably has a better idea as to who ought to replace him than the recently twice-failed Federalists and, even if he wants to retire, then the PATRIOTIC thing for Alito to do is NOT retire unless unless he gets told who will be nominated to replace him and, if that choice is as unsatisfactory as I fear it will be, he gets the kind of input into the decision that Kennedy had into the (poor) choice of Kavanaugh.
Unironically Trump's best outsourcing. Not perfect by far, but the Federalists have had a long decent track record of litmus testing the judiciary. It takes a lot to fight the communist hordes in the courts so mistakes are often made (e.g. Traitor John Roberts).
Not being pedantic, but honest question: what evidence is there that Alito wants to retire?
Most SC justices hold on literally for dear life (e.g. Ginsburg, Scalia, Oliver Wendell Holmes) unless something major happens in their personal life. For example, O'Connor retired because her husband got dementia and she wanted to care for him. And Holmes eventually retired because in his mid-90s he was sleeping through most oral arguments, and the other justices kindly lobbied him as a group so it wasn't seen as a political ousting.
Steve, I'd be interested in your thoughts on the Sailer strategy in the wake of Trump.
The increasing racial-socieconomic polarization electorally seems to have continued, with Trump losing ground among college-educated whites this election while gaining among Latinos. Even the Israel-Palestine conflict didn't make a difference among the most highly educated white group, Jewish Americans, who voted consistently with their historical average of 75%+ Dem, while Arabs in places like Michigan swung towards Trump.
Paradoxically, Trump, who'd seem ideal to implement the Sailer strategy, benefited from significant Latino gains while declining with key white segments like college educated whites.
Do you think this will just be unique to Trump, and that the GOP will have to revert to the Sailer strategy post-Trump? Or that Trump may have ironically put the GOP on the path to becoming a Latin American style right-populist party with an increasingly downscale Latino base led by charismatic strongman types and business oligarchs? It seems likely that GOP strategists will take Trump's victory as vindication for their push for more appeals to Latinos and non-white voters.
Steve Sailer should, here in post-election late 2024, write a full account of the Sailer Strategy:
What the Sailer Strategy was/is, how he came to see it back in the early 2000s and propose it, how the Sailer Strategy could/should work in practice, how the semi- or quasi-implementations of the Sailer Strategy have fared, and -- the matter of the hour -- how (if) the Sailer Strategy explains the implausible Trump victories. In short, a reflection on the Sailer Strategy at about its 25-year mark.
What might an adapted/evolving Sailer Strategy mean for the increasingly precarious position of White-Western people in North America for the next 25 years and more.
The Democrats perception that white women cling tenaciously to abortion on demand is ripe for comedy and should be darkly satirized by inventing the myriad types of abortion trims that help women differentiate between abortion models since not all women want the same abortion features.
I would also add that Trump's likely successors may continue a drift away from the Sailer strategy.
With Florida's importance electorally, and DeSantis and Rubio among Trump's likely successors, the GOP may try to double down on Latino outreach and try to expand the Florida model nationally.
Other successors like Vance, Haley, and Ramaswamy have ties to Indians and to the pro-Trump Silicon Valley tech circles who seem to be China hawks but very pro-India and supportive of Indian immigration for the tech sector.
The other white male successors such as Tom Cotton and Josh Hawley are more traditional natsec neocon types and don't seem too interested in picking up the Sailer strategy mantle.
Steve has written about the Dems being the "black party" vs. the GOP as the "white party", but we may end up with the Dems being the black party plus college educated whites vs the GOP as the brown party plus working class whites.
Just smiling. Here in the most conservative Congressional district in the country we knew who was winning, here. I was a bit shocked at the real results, the peeps have had enough. Now, the transition, that could be interesting and fraught with danger but I think we might have just dodged a bullet and be ok for a bit. Republicans need to build on this but also look to the sane democrats, that voted out the prosecutor but voted in Adam Schiff?? He just might be fun to watch in the Senate, Cruz and Kennedy should have a blast. So, here we go on a Musk rocket ride. I'll be 82 when it's over, hope some of those young conservatives can move us along.
By the time they finally get around to moving earth, will the govt have enough money to spend on beautiful buildings?
It's surprising that selling western federal lands hasn't yet come up in an election, but selling ex-military bases was probably a net loss to the Treasury due to the necessary cleanup.
Somehow, NC went from an even Cong. delegation to 11-3 Repub while choosing Trump, a Dem governor, and losing the Repub super majority in one chamber. After every census, we have years of lawsuits about the gerrymander, so I'll probably be in my 4th different district in a row for 2026.
Mark Robinson was probably the worst gubernatorial candidate in modern American history. Josh Stein didn't need to articulate a single position for the most part; he just let Robinson implode.
Tucker had a show about the problems with Ozempic--aside from the expense, a large chunk of people quit from digestive side effects. Instapundit recently posted about barley flour containing similar proteins that curb appetite, so I just bought some to experiment.
The diet drugs or 'injections': Unknown side-effects and spillover effects, a quite-bad idea for a lot of reasons. Whereas a pro-Western, nationalistic-oriented government could instead ban addictive chemical-poisons and take other measures to get a large part of the way there.
The drugs would be worth the risk for someone likely to lose a foot or worse, but many people are taking it solely for cosmetic reasons. I knew someone who bled to death a few days after bariatric surgery.
For me the best way to curb hunger is to abstain from snacking. For some reason I find that the more often I eat the more often I get hungry. Seems counterintuitive but it works.
Yes. After my father died in February at 96, the urge to snack disappeared without effort for 2 months, and I lost a few pounds sticking to 3 meals and getting off the sofa. If I can just regain that without bumping off another relative.
This aesthetic-oriented analysis on reasons for Trump 2025-29 cheerfulness, by this Sailer Insider, is 'fun' but a little shallow on many of his points. (Granted, it's the post-election euphoria. Still less than 24 hours after the victory speech.)
What about the "brass tacks" issue of the full-White share-of-births in the USA, which sinks ever-steadily? What of the "stock" of Holy Migrants, instead of just "flow"? I was a little disheartened to hear the word 'deportation' didn't find its way into the 30-minute Trump victory speech in the 2am hour of election night.
The version sent me by email reads: "[Sailer:] Sounds like a good way for Trump to gracefully bow out of the spotlight, putting on a big patriotic show with himself as the star, while hopefully letting the next generation worry about the campaign." in place of "Trump can put on a big patriotic show, while hopefully letting the next generation worry about the midterm campaign.".
So, you want Trump to resign in favor of Vance early in his term? Were you one of the ones whining about the coup on Biden?
Obviously, I'm a big JD Vance fan, so the idea of an 80 year old Trump retiring after hosting the 2026 World Cup and the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence sounds pretty appealing to me. Trump deserves a fun 2026.
Politicians rarely go out on top, but 2026 gives Trump a chance.
Excellent idea really, for him to bow out on a high note. Unfortunately, barring some overriding health issue, I think Trump's ego rules that out. But a great idea, for his own legacy and to shore up Vance for a strong 2028 run.
Looking at the inverse of Trump's age and long dominance, I wonder how much Clinton's and BO's youth in '92 and '08 cleared out the Democrats' bench, leaving them with national geriatrics like Pelosi and Biden. It may have been just their widely unpopular policies cutting off their coattails. TR's youth and ego landed us with Wilson and bad Amendments soon after his accidental presidency.
JD has been in his first (and legislative) political office less than two years--maybe he should let tested, competent, and boring DeSantis take the helm and serve as Ohio's governor for a while. I'm hoping they'll be too busy getting things done--and not dealing with fake, Trumped-up scandals--for JD to need to run as an incumbent prez. At any rate, success worked for GHWB in '88, despite losing the Senate in '86, the '87 WS Correction, and the overblown Iran-Contra.
"maybe he should let tested, competent, and boring DeSantis take the helm"
How, exactly, is that supposed to happen? Trump can't designate his successor. Hmmm... well, somehow Ford replaced Askew, but hasn't a succession Amendment that governs this been passed between now and then?
As I already pointed out, Sailer and others, probably even me (I'm not a Trump fan except as a lesser evil) may prefer Vance, but no one voted to make Vance President any more than they voted to make Kamela the Democrat nominee.
So you are changing the subject of the conversation (Sailer's proposalfor Vance to become president in '26) without mentioning that you are doing so and proposing that Vance defer to DeSantis in '28. That's a proposal that I think can be deferred to '28 or so. DeSqantis is a good governor but I was unimpressed with his solidity on other issues.
Beautiful summary of the future prospects. With the House and Senate to boot, there's a real chance to kill the entrenched federal bureaucratic state. Full speed ahead!
I think priority one should be election reform. With control of the Senate it can be done.
Such fantasies were delusional but understandable eight years ago - they are clown show demented now that we know who Trump is and what he stands for (cronyism and kakistocracy).
You might be right but it won't be as bad as the last 4 years and what it would have been under the Kackler. We are going to need serious fiscal reforms, under Kamala it is likely to have been taken out of the hide of people like me. Instead we may get many of the cuts coming out of the ridiculous programs that have given so much money to the corrupt Dems.
Anyway we should be celebrating that at least we have a chance of reform now. It may or may not work out but it wouldn't have if the D's had won.
Exactly. Literally almost anything would have been better than the current regime getting another 4 years of uncontrolled immigration, gender and racial woo.
Perhaps the lesson George and Alex Soros have learned from the 2024 election is to manipulate the early prediction markets during the 2026 and 2028 elections in order to establish their dream of an identity based, Communist utopia.
MAGA may have long coat tails, as witness LA DA George Gascon being defeated and Calif. Prop. 36 being approved. The sun came out for the whole nation yesterday, to quote one William Markley.
Crime is against the law in LA!
Lack of enthusiasm for not prosecuting criminals and not requiring inmates to work is not an attitude limited to MAGA and never was.
They got rid of him? How wonderful!
Even on the Young Turks on election night, amidst all their sweet sweet sadness/anger about Trump, Anna K. (LA resident) was dancing with joy at Gascon's loss because he's so pro-crime. Granted, she's slowly moving center-left as she ages to either secure a cable news gig or otherwise to make sure her middle aged less-radical-than-in-their-youth audience stays with her, but still TYT being happy about the firing of a lax DA who let crime slide is something to behold.
Yes, Ana Kasparian in the last couple years has been on a journey toward the center, spurred mostly by rejection of the left's enthusiasm for the homeless/crazy and crime-friendly policies as well as refusal to surrender to the trans mania ("I will not be referred to as a 'birthing person'".) She's encountered enormous abuse from her former left allies for these handful of deviations from good-think, which has only made her more wary of her own side and more curious about finding some small measure of common-cause with the right.
I can see Trump appointing a replacement for Samuel Alito when he retires this summer.
But are you confident that that replacement will not be a downgrade? I'm not, given his record.
Alito is a fine justice. But he is 76 and wants to retire.
What Alito wants or needs to do is irrelevant to my comment.
I read it within the last two weeks. I forget the source, I am afraid. Seventy-six is a pretty old age to be working even if his law clerks do most of his work. When Alito leaves the Court, he will be missed. He is a pillar of conservative judicial thinking.
Trump will probably make the decision the same way all Republicans have made similar decisions in recent memory, by outsourcing it to the Federalist Society.
Indeed. Which is why I am NOT confident that the replacement for Alito will be n upgrade. Gorsucks is bad on Trump's supposedly core issue (the Invasion) and it was downhill from there. Trump's choices were good if the only thing you cared about was abortion, but that is NOT why I preferred him to Clinton. So Leaberry's "I can see Trump appointing a replacement for Samuel Alito" doesn't strikes me as necessarily the pleasing prospect he seems to imagine it is.
The Federalists are the best we got. Trump picking a judge would either be wormtongued by a neocon or else pick some nonentity who's only ability is sucking up.
Picking Josh Hawley or Ted Cruz might be the only Trumpian personal picks I might go along with.
Trump can choose a lot better sources of advice than the Federalist types, who are pure worthless legacy GOP, and I hope he will.. But unlike, apparently, you I do not look forward to his replacing Alito.
Alito probably has a better idea as to who ought to replace him than the recently twice-failed Federalists and, even if he wants to retire, then the PATRIOTIC thing for Alito to do is NOT retire unless unless he gets told who will be nominated to replace him and, if that choice is as unsatisfactory as I fear it will be, he gets the kind of input into the decision that Kennedy had into the (poor) choice of Kavanaugh.
Unironically Trump's best outsourcing. Not perfect by far, but the Federalists have had a long decent track record of litmus testing the judiciary. It takes a lot to fight the communist hordes in the courts so mistakes are often made (e.g. Traitor John Roberts).
But will we eve find a Thomas again?
Not if we don't look hard for one.
Not being pedantic, but honest question: what evidence is there that Alito wants to retire?
Most SC justices hold on literally for dear life (e.g. Ginsburg, Scalia, Oliver Wendell Holmes) unless something major happens in their personal life. For example, O'Connor retired because her husband got dementia and she wanted to care for him. And Holmes eventually retired because in his mid-90s he was sleeping through most oral arguments, and the other justices kindly lobbied him as a group so it wasn't seen as a political ousting.
Steve, I'd be interested in your thoughts on the Sailer strategy in the wake of Trump.
The increasing racial-socieconomic polarization electorally seems to have continued, with Trump losing ground among college-educated whites this election while gaining among Latinos. Even the Israel-Palestine conflict didn't make a difference among the most highly educated white group, Jewish Americans, who voted consistently with their historical average of 75%+ Dem, while Arabs in places like Michigan swung towards Trump.
Paradoxically, Trump, who'd seem ideal to implement the Sailer strategy, benefited from significant Latino gains while declining with key white segments like college educated whites.
Do you think this will just be unique to Trump, and that the GOP will have to revert to the Sailer strategy post-Trump? Or that Trump may have ironically put the GOP on the path to becoming a Latin American style right-populist party with an increasingly downscale Latino base led by charismatic strongman types and business oligarchs? It seems likely that GOP strategists will take Trump's victory as vindication for their push for more appeals to Latinos and non-white voters.
Steve Sailer should, here in post-election late 2024, write a full account of the Sailer Strategy:
What the Sailer Strategy was/is, how he came to see it back in the early 2000s and propose it, how the Sailer Strategy could/should work in practice, how the semi- or quasi-implementations of the Sailer Strategy have fared, and -- the matter of the hour -- how (if) the Sailer Strategy explains the implausible Trump victories. In short, a reflection on the Sailer Strategy at about its 25-year mark.
What might an adapted/evolving Sailer Strategy mean for the increasingly precarious position of White-Western people in North America for the next 25 years and more.
Mr. S owes it to the world to do this.
Trump's 2024 victory wasn't "implausible". The only question was how much election "fortification" the (D)s could get away with.
The Democrats perception that white women cling tenaciously to abortion on demand is ripe for comedy and should be darkly satirized by inventing the myriad types of abortion trims that help women differentiate between abortion models since not all women want the same abortion features.
I would also add that Trump's likely successors may continue a drift away from the Sailer strategy.
With Florida's importance electorally, and DeSantis and Rubio among Trump's likely successors, the GOP may try to double down on Latino outreach and try to expand the Florida model nationally.
Other successors like Vance, Haley, and Ramaswamy have ties to Indians and to the pro-Trump Silicon Valley tech circles who seem to be China hawks but very pro-India and supportive of Indian immigration for the tech sector.
The other white male successors such as Tom Cotton and Josh Hawley are more traditional natsec neocon types and don't seem too interested in picking up the Sailer strategy mantle.
Steve has written about the Dems being the "black party" vs. the GOP as the "white party", but we may end up with the Dems being the black party plus college educated whites vs the GOP as the brown party plus working class whites.
"we may end up with the Dems being the black party plus college educated whites vs the GOP as the brown party plus working class whites."
Great insight. It may wind up being our best hope, such as it is.
Just smiling. Here in the most conservative Congressional district in the country we knew who was winning, here. I was a bit shocked at the real results, the peeps have had enough. Now, the transition, that could be interesting and fraught with danger but I think we might have just dodged a bullet and be ok for a bit. Republicans need to build on this but also look to the sane democrats, that voted out the prosecutor but voted in Adam Schiff?? He just might be fun to watch in the Senate, Cruz and Kennedy should have a blast. So, here we go on a Musk rocket ride. I'll be 82 when it's over, hope some of those young conservatives can move us along.
The San Francisco clique has finally been stopped. As a Pacific Northwesterner with some roots in northern CA, I couldn't be more relieved about that.
Nancy Pelosi: retired
Dianne Feinstein: deceased
Willie Brown: in dotage
Barbara Boxer: retired
Gavin Newsom: sequestered
Kamala Harris: defeated
Honorable mention
Harvey Milk, George Moscone, Jim Jones: all deceased
California's model as America's future has finally been broken.
Milk, Moscone and Jones are all ancient history, their deaths being almost 50 years ago.
And Newsom "sequestered"? How?
Also, "dotage /dō′tĭj/
noun
1. A deterioration of mental faculties associated with aging.
2. Feebleness or imbecility of understanding or mind, particularly in old age; the childishness of old age; senility."
As far as I can see Brown is about as much in his dotage as was, say, Henry Kissinger. I,.e., not.
By the time they finally get around to moving earth, will the govt have enough money to spend on beautiful buildings?
It's surprising that selling western federal lands hasn't yet come up in an election, but selling ex-military bases was probably a net loss to the Treasury due to the necessary cleanup.
Somehow, NC went from an even Cong. delegation to 11-3 Repub while choosing Trump, a Dem governor, and losing the Repub super majority in one chamber. After every census, we have years of lawsuits about the gerrymander, so I'll probably be in my 4th different district in a row for 2026.
Not being from NC, or having kept up with recent developments there, I was surprised to learn, in 2016, that NC had become a swing state.
BO won it twice with blacks and liberal yankee migrants. We've become a victim of our success and lower taxes.
Mark Robinson was probably the worst gubernatorial candidate in modern American history. Josh Stein didn't need to articulate a single position for the most part; he just let Robinson implode.
"Universal Ozempic?"
Tucker had a show about the problems with Ozempic--aside from the expense, a large chunk of people quit from digestive side effects. Instapundit recently posted about barley flour containing similar proteins that curb appetite, so I just bought some to experiment.
The diet drugs or 'injections': Unknown side-effects and spillover effects, a quite-bad idea for a lot of reasons. Whereas a pro-Western, nationalistic-oriented government could instead ban addictive chemical-poisons and take other measures to get a large part of the way there.
The drugs would be worth the risk for someone likely to lose a foot or worse, but many people are taking it solely for cosmetic reasons. I knew someone who bled to death a few days after bariatric surgery.
A revitalization of physical education programs like they had in the 60’s perhaps?
For me the best way to curb hunger is to abstain from snacking. For some reason I find that the more often I eat the more often I get hungry. Seems counterintuitive but it works.
Yes. After my father died in February at 96, the urge to snack disappeared without effort for 2 months, and I lost a few pounds sticking to 3 meals and getting off the sofa. If I can just regain that without bumping off another relative.
Try cutting out one of the meals. It isn't as hard as it sounds.
Some commentary on the election and the Sailer Strategy in the election-thread at PEAK STUPIDITY, especially in the comments:
https://peakstupidity.com/index.php?post=3131
(read comments from bottom up, for chronological order).
See also:
Peak Stupidity, "Unburdened by what might have been," Nov. 7, 2024:
https://peakstupidity.com/index.php?post=3132
This aesthetic-oriented analysis on reasons for Trump 2025-29 cheerfulness, by this Sailer Insider, is 'fun' but a little shallow on many of his points. (Granted, it's the post-election euphoria. Still less than 24 hours after the victory speech.)
What about the "brass tacks" issue of the full-White share-of-births in the USA, which sinks ever-steadily? What of the "stock" of Holy Migrants, instead of just "flow"? I was a little disheartened to hear the word 'deportation' didn't find its way into the 30-minute Trump victory speech in the 2am hour of election night.
The version sent me by email reads: "[Sailer:] Sounds like a good way for Trump to gracefully bow out of the spotlight, putting on a big patriotic show with himself as the star, while hopefully letting the next generation worry about the campaign." in place of "Trump can put on a big patriotic show, while hopefully letting the next generation worry about the midterm campaign.".
So, you want Trump to resign in favor of Vance early in his term? Were you one of the ones whining about the coup on Biden?
Obviously, I'm a big JD Vance fan, so the idea of an 80 year old Trump retiring after hosting the 2026 World Cup and the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence sounds pretty appealing to me. Trump deserves a fun 2026.
Politicians rarely go out on top, but 2026 gives Trump a chance.
Excellent idea really, for him to bow out on a high note. Unfortunately, barring some overriding health issue, I think Trump's ego rules that out. But a great idea, for his own legacy and to shore up Vance for a strong 2028 run.
Looking at the inverse of Trump's age and long dominance, I wonder how much Clinton's and BO's youth in '92 and '08 cleared out the Democrats' bench, leaving them with national geriatrics like Pelosi and Biden. It may have been just their widely unpopular policies cutting off their coattails. TR's youth and ego landed us with Wilson and bad Amendments soon after his accidental presidency.
JD has been in his first (and legislative) political office less than two years--maybe he should let tested, competent, and boring DeSantis take the helm and serve as Ohio's governor for a while. I'm hoping they'll be too busy getting things done--and not dealing with fake, Trumped-up scandals--for JD to need to run as an incumbent prez. At any rate, success worked for GHWB in '88, despite losing the Senate in '86, the '87 WS Correction, and the overblown Iran-Contra.
"maybe he should let tested, competent, and boring DeSantis take the helm"
How, exactly, is that supposed to happen? Trump can't designate his successor. Hmmm... well, somehow Ford replaced Askew, but hasn't a succession Amendment that governs this been passed between now and then?
As I already pointed out, Sailer and others, probably even me (I'm not a Trump fan except as a lesser evil) may prefer Vance, but no one voted to make Vance President any more than they voted to make Kamela the Democrat nominee.
Reread my comment. Vance doesn't have to run for prez in 2028, he's young enough to wait 8 or even 16 years, and the seasoning would be good for him.
So you are changing the subject of the conversation (Sailer's proposalfor Vance to become president in '26) without mentioning that you are doing so and proposing that Vance defer to DeSantis in '28. That's a proposal that I think can be deferred to '28 or so. DeSqantis is a good governor but I was unimpressed with his solidity on other issues.
Ian Dury and The Blockheads – Reasons To Be Cheerful, Pt. 3 (Official HD Video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIMNXogXnvE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasons_to_Be_Cheerful,_Part_3
Indeed, that's the reference.
Wow, that's a bad excuse for music.
Universal Ozempic sounds like the exact opposite of what to expect from RFK Jr and the people I expect to see him get involved.
Has anyone else noticed how much litter Harris' fans left on the Howard University grounds after their victory party dispersed?