1. @Elizabeth Stanley look, his main talking point was. Our national identity. That is not a party identity or state identity. We’re talking NATIONAL. Its been established since the second W.W. him and his party is trying to change that. It hasn’t and will not win VOTES.

      Now, wether you agree or not, doesn’t matter. The majority of voters NOW still remember our global position and who & why we side the way we do.

  1. Multinational corporations are not interested in being “Pro American”. Earnings per share is then only things they care about. China provided cheap labor and no worry about environmental impact, so manufacturing was moved overseas. Apple will just move its factories to VietNam or India as the need arises due to China’s internal political struggles.

  2. I’m sorry… asking a single question and letting the politician ramble on with a political speech counts as pressing? Standards have sure fallen. But, if she had actually pressed him, he would have got offended and stormed off.

    1. @jeffr p  their audience knows what they are getting, they are not sending crazy texts unlike fox host, lying to their audience, 🤣🤣🤣

  3. The GOP did what Trump did: branding. Come up with something simple and easy to remember, use it to refer to the idea of a thing your base doesn’t like. Take your opponents, give them nicknames. Take ideologies, give them nicknames. Talk over anyone who thinks critically. Branding branding branding. Something easy enough for any fool to latch on to and tell them they should hate it. That’s how you get your base to vote for the face eating leopard party. Done and done. It’s how a New York con man convinced conservative America he was their champion. Brand brand brand.

    1. I saw Majory Tailor Greene do just that when discussing the voting process in a comitee: define your own talking point, talk louder, don’t let anyone utter a reasonable factual argument, leave before you can be proven incorrect/full of BS.
      The anti intelectualism of not having a dialogue for fact finding and learning is mind numbingly stupid, you cannot argue with these people because they build up a defense against facts and logic.

    2. Pretty much yes. Those who talks a lot but actually says little are what gets a good portion of the American constituency these days.

    1. … It aint presidential politicin’ unless you insult someone’s spouse or shame their junk. just saying

    2. Yeah, he knows he won’t win. Wants the world to know his name. Maybe he’ll publish that 3rd book he says he wrote, but didn’t publish?

    3. He spews a torrent of checklist issues that are vague enough that people will find themselves able to project what they want unto what they “thought” he said. Seriously, I thought people would be wiser to (or at least tired of) these kind of rhetoric.

  4. Vivek Ramaswamy spoke at CPAC last week and received 1 percent (1%) support in the straw poll of potential 2024 Republican primary contenders.

  5. Amazing he successfully defines what woke is and then turns around and creates an alternative definition to straw man in the next breath.

    1. @Chris Albert It’s only petty to those that don’t understand the full implications of it. This isn’t the same ol same ol Left vs Right of the past.

    2. @CaliTXman It’s petty. Perhaps not the underlying issues themselves, but certainly the way you go about fighting it. Other civilized nations, even when cultural issues involving values and practices are made part of the discourse, it doesn’t generally create the political and social schism found in America.
      The whole “woke war” in America is more nonsense than substance, and is an engineered problem designed by political forces that can’t find themselves getting the support they need unless they push the emotional hot buttons of their critical thinking challenged constituency.

  6. Kaitlyn’s face said it all. Her head was clearly hurting from the minute this bloke first opened his mouth.

  7. To make a long story short, this interview boils down to:
    “I want to have all of the money, and things like justice and environmental laws stop me from having all the money. It is anti-American to put up roadblocks to me (personally) having all of the money.”

    1. @Mit Seraffej he can always do Pharma commercials after he loses all that money and the election

  8. Politicians gave corporations the right to speak out politically, when they gave the “personhood” as it relates to how they can make political campaign contributions.

  9. “Unleash the American economy” means giving huge tax breaks to corporations so those companies will then take that money and hire workers they don’t need out of the goodness of their hearts. They definitely will not just put the money in their pockets through stalk buybacks. 😂

    1. @Construimus Batuimus look up the hoover presidency. Hoover was an advocate of laissez-faire economics. He believed an economy based on capitalism would self-correct. He felt that economic assistance would make people stop working. He believed business prosperity would trickle down to the average person. This philosophy was not effective against the Depression. His failure to end it led to his defeat in the 1932 presidential election against Franklin D. Roosevelt and his New Deal.

    2. @Rory Fleming I don’t have to look anything up, it’s already in memory from recent study. He *_advocated_* laissez faire economics, but the economy he inherited was not *_pure,_* but was almost as close to pure laissez faire that the United States ever was. The whole Gilded Age which overlapped the Robber Barons and segued into the Progressive Era started out closer to laissez faire, but by the time Hoover came along there was antitrust laws on the books, poorly and inconsistently enforced, so certainly not pure laissez faire.

      That’s the whole point of talking about this kind of history today. From around 1870 to the crash in 1929 was *_thee_* closest to a pure laissez faire economy under which we operated. And it was the worst, cruelest, most exploitative, and monopolistic economic system in the history of the United States — and the wild stock market speculation that led to the Great Depression was the direct result of letting business run amok with no regulation, and a government without the power to do anything about it.

      And that what this current batch of dumbass tax cutting, deregulating, government shrinkers think they want back. The Republican Party has morphed over the last four decades into a monster that does not give a damn about ordinary working men and women. They are living in a fantasy world where they believe *_they_* will be the new “Robber Barons.” No thank you. I would rather study the history of fascism and oligarchy, I do not need to live it.

  10. He was intending on maximizing his ability presented by being on TV so he spoke a lot of words…some coherent to the questions and others not so much.

  11. Dude gives a fair description of the correct meaning of woke but prefaces it by saying he’s against it

    1. Actually the first time I’ve even heard of a definition. Ask most republicans and they give you a blank stare but are totally against it….whatever it means.!

  12. No one on the woke side said we are “nothing more than our physical characteristics”. Where is he coming up with that??

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.