sturg33
I
sorry I audibly laughed when you defended Trump's trashing of GOP success stories and then claim Ron DeSantis a cult leader
2024 Field
- Thread starter Jaw
- Start date
sorry I audibly laughed when you defended Trump's trashing of GOP success stories and then claim Ron DeSantis a cult leader
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
it is an amazing thang...both Lake and very poorly chosen one telegraphed their "stolen election" strategies before the elections were even held...heads i win tails you lose...quite a racket
and now she is doing it again...why hold elections if you know ahead of time that the only way you can lose is if the other side steals it from you
btw see the aftermath of Iowa 2016 and very poorly chosen one's complaints about Ted Cruz stealing the Iowa caucus for a dress rehearsal of all that has since befallen this country
Last edited:
57Brave
Well-known member
57Brave
Well-known member
By Trying To 'Move On,' DeSantis Admits His Fight With Disney Was a Political Stunt All Along
It was never a principled fight against special privileges granted to a private company.
ERIC BOEHM
The fact that Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is now trying to back away from his fight with the Walt Disney Company should confirm at least one thing about the whole ugly mess.
It was never a principled fight against special privileges granted to a private company. It was a political stunt meant to raise DeSantis' profile on the national stage.
That mission having been accomplished—and with the prospects of a legal battle against Disney looming—DeSantis told CNBC on Monday that he has "moved on" from the issue. He also encouraged Disney to "drop the lawsuit" that it filed in April against his administration.
In that lawsuit, Disney claimed that DeSantis led a "targeted campaign of government retaliation" after the company's then-CEO, Bob Chapek, had spoken out against DeSantis' decision to sign a bill limiting the discussion of gender and sexuality in grade school classrooms. (The ban was later expanded to include nearly all public school classrooms in the state.) DeSantis responded to that criticism by launching a crusade against Disney's special self-governing district, the Reedy Creek Improvement District, culminating in the passage of a state law that gave the governor the authority to appoint a new board to run the zone.
DeSantis and his allies have framed that maneuver as a strike against corporate special interests, but Disney's lawsuit makes a compelling case that the governor specifically targeted Disney to punish the company for Chapek's comments. The complaint draws from numerous public statements and from remarks made within DeSantis' recently published book to argue that DeSantis sought to punish Disney for constitutionally protected speech.
It makes a lot of sense for DeSantis to try to walk away from this fight, in no small part because getting his butt kicked in federal court over a fairly fundamental constitutional issue wouldn't be a good look for a guy who is hoping to become president. Even if he doesn't lose, the lawsuit will be an ongoing source of bad news for DeSantis and will give reporters the opportunity to ask questions he'd rather not have to deal with—like the newly uncovered ethical issues surrounding one of the people DeSantis appointed to the Reedy Creek board. Ending the fight would also save taxpayers from having to foot the legal bills for DeSantis' defense, which is nice.
Still, getting out of this mess is probably not as simple as asking Disney to drop the lawsuit and move on. Does DeSantis intend to ask the state Legislature to undo the governor's control over the Reedy Creek board? If not, then why should Disney back down?
Short of that, it would be useful for reporters to ask DeSantis whether he would take similar actions against other businesses whose executives criticize his policies. Disney obviously has the power to fight back, but others might not be able to do so. Is DeSantis willing to admit he was wrong to retaliate against Disney? The answer would be instructive for voters weighing his candidacy for higher office.
Ultimately, though, DeSantis' attempt to "move on" from the fight with Disney reveals how unserious the whole thing was. If this were a principled stand against corporatism, as DeSantis has claimed, it would be worth seeing the fight through to the finish. That was never the case, however, and it looks like DeSantis simply wants to end this political stunt before it blows up in his face.
It was never a principled fight against special privileges granted to a private company.
ERIC BOEHM
The fact that Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is now trying to back away from his fight with the Walt Disney Company should confirm at least one thing about the whole ugly mess.
It was never a principled fight against special privileges granted to a private company. It was a political stunt meant to raise DeSantis' profile on the national stage.
That mission having been accomplished—and with the prospects of a legal battle against Disney looming—DeSantis told CNBC on Monday that he has "moved on" from the issue. He also encouraged Disney to "drop the lawsuit" that it filed in April against his administration.
In that lawsuit, Disney claimed that DeSantis led a "targeted campaign of government retaliation" after the company's then-CEO, Bob Chapek, had spoken out against DeSantis' decision to sign a bill limiting the discussion of gender and sexuality in grade school classrooms. (The ban was later expanded to include nearly all public school classrooms in the state.) DeSantis responded to that criticism by launching a crusade against Disney's special self-governing district, the Reedy Creek Improvement District, culminating in the passage of a state law that gave the governor the authority to appoint a new board to run the zone.
DeSantis and his allies have framed that maneuver as a strike against corporate special interests, but Disney's lawsuit makes a compelling case that the governor specifically targeted Disney to punish the company for Chapek's comments. The complaint draws from numerous public statements and from remarks made within DeSantis' recently published book to argue that DeSantis sought to punish Disney for constitutionally protected speech.
It makes a lot of sense for DeSantis to try to walk away from this fight, in no small part because getting his butt kicked in federal court over a fairly fundamental constitutional issue wouldn't be a good look for a guy who is hoping to become president. Even if he doesn't lose, the lawsuit will be an ongoing source of bad news for DeSantis and will give reporters the opportunity to ask questions he'd rather not have to deal with—like the newly uncovered ethical issues surrounding one of the people DeSantis appointed to the Reedy Creek board. Ending the fight would also save taxpayers from having to foot the legal bills for DeSantis' defense, which is nice.
Still, getting out of this mess is probably not as simple as asking Disney to drop the lawsuit and move on. Does DeSantis intend to ask the state Legislature to undo the governor's control over the Reedy Creek board? If not, then why should Disney back down?
Short of that, it would be useful for reporters to ask DeSantis whether he would take similar actions against other businesses whose executives criticize his policies. Disney obviously has the power to fight back, but others might not be able to do so. Is DeSantis willing to admit he was wrong to retaliate against Disney? The answer would be instructive for voters weighing his candidacy for higher office.
Ultimately, though, DeSantis' attempt to "move on" from the fight with Disney reveals how unserious the whole thing was. If this were a principled stand against corporatism, as DeSantis has claimed, it would be worth seeing the fight through to the finish. That was never the case, however, and it looks like DeSantis simply wants to end this political stunt before it blows up in his face.
chop2chip
Well-known member
I’ll credit her for taking a page out of Robespierre’s playbook
sturg33
I
Disney drop the lawsuit yet ?
I mean, they were "urged"
Remember when Occupy Democrats was anti-corporation movement?
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Ron DeSantis needs “to take a sledgehammer” to Vivek Ramaswamy, the political newcomer who is rising in the polls. He should “defend Donald Trump” when Chris Christie inevitably attacks the former president. And he needs to “attack Joe Biden and the media” no less than three to five times.
A firm associated with the super PAC that has effectively taken over Mr. DeSantis’s presidential campaign posted online hundreds of pages of blunt advice, research memos and internal polling in early nominating states to guide the Florida governor ahead of the high-stakes Republican presidential debate next Wednesday in Milwaukee.
The trove of documents provides an extraordinary glimpse into the thinking of the DeSantis operation about a debate the candidate’s advisers see as crucial.
“There are four basic must-dos,” one of the memos urges Mr. DeSantis, whom the document refers to as “GRD.”
“1. Attack Joe Biden and the media 3-5 times. 2. State GRD’s positive vision 2-3 times. 3. Hammer Vivek Ramaswamy in a response. 4. Defend Donald Trump in absentia in response to a Chris Christie attack.”
The documents were posted this week on the website of Axiom Strategies, the company owned by Jeff Roe, the chief strategist of Mr. DeSantis’s super PAC, Never Back Down.
The New York Times was alerted to the existence of the documents by a person not connected to the DeSantis campaign or the super PAC. After The Times reached out to Never Back Down for comment on Thursday, the group removed from the website a key memo summarizing the suggested strategy for the debate.
Super PACs are barred by law from strategizing in private with political campaigns. To avoid running afoul of those rules, it is not unusual for the outside groups to post polling documents in the open, albeit in an obscure corner of the internet where insiders know to look.
Posting such documents online is risky — the news media or rivals can discover them, and the advice can prove embarrassing. But super PACs often decide the risk is justified to convey what they consider crucial nonpublic information to the candidate without violating the law.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/17/...uQijkPoafC3NDkhkWORaXkhgYAReSU&smid=url-share
The part about attacking Vivek is interesting. He does seem to be gaining some traction.
A firm associated with the super PAC that has effectively taken over Mr. DeSantis’s presidential campaign posted online hundreds of pages of blunt advice, research memos and internal polling in early nominating states to guide the Florida governor ahead of the high-stakes Republican presidential debate next Wednesday in Milwaukee.
The trove of documents provides an extraordinary glimpse into the thinking of the DeSantis operation about a debate the candidate’s advisers see as crucial.
“There are four basic must-dos,” one of the memos urges Mr. DeSantis, whom the document refers to as “GRD.”
“1. Attack Joe Biden and the media 3-5 times. 2. State GRD’s positive vision 2-3 times. 3. Hammer Vivek Ramaswamy in a response. 4. Defend Donald Trump in absentia in response to a Chris Christie attack.”
The documents were posted this week on the website of Axiom Strategies, the company owned by Jeff Roe, the chief strategist of Mr. DeSantis’s super PAC, Never Back Down.
The New York Times was alerted to the existence of the documents by a person not connected to the DeSantis campaign or the super PAC. After The Times reached out to Never Back Down for comment on Thursday, the group removed from the website a key memo summarizing the suggested strategy for the debate.
Super PACs are barred by law from strategizing in private with political campaigns. To avoid running afoul of those rules, it is not unusual for the outside groups to post polling documents in the open, albeit in an obscure corner of the internet where insiders know to look.
Posting such documents online is risky — the news media or rivals can discover them, and the advice can prove embarrassing. But super PACs often decide the risk is justified to convey what they consider crucial nonpublic information to the candidate without violating the law.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/17/...uQijkPoafC3NDkhkWORaXkhgYAReSU&smid=url-share
The part about attacking Vivek is interesting. He does seem to be gaining some traction.
Tapate50
Well-known member
[tw]1692187526524502271[/tw]
Would be interesting to see how this develops and if its more fake news that spreads on people like Desantis but it would speak to the fact that people like Desantis (Career politicians with no independent wealth) will always be ran by their donors.
Lets remember that Griffin is hte one that gave 500M to Harvard and is the most outspoken against Trump (because of his positions against China economically).
Would be interesting to see how this develops and if its more fake news that spreads on people like Desantis but it would speak to the fact that people like Desantis (Career politicians with no independent wealth) will always be ran by their donors.
Lets remember that Griffin is hte one that gave 500M to Harvard and is the most outspoken against Trump (because of his positions against China economically).
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
If only you showed similar concern about money from the Saudis and other wealthy Gulf states flowing to trump-adjacent folk and to the great man himself via large blocks of reservations at his hotels and other properties at above-market rates.
sturg33
I
Or Ken Griffin who also donated to Trump
Trump gets unlimited grace and forgiveness... RDS gets unlimited scorn
it's hilarious
sturg33
I
I'm no poll expert but Vivek seems to do much better on online polls than phone polls.
It seems so obvious to me he is just a Trump surrogate. I've not seen or met anyone who supports him for president over Trump. If Trump dropped out, it would make a lot more sense to me
Or you could care about the fact that the CCP is the #1 enemy to freedom globally and the saudis were actually helpful in expanding peace in the Middle East.
What’s hilarious is how you don’t understand how much more important the money donated is to Desantis (who is solely reliant on big donors) as opposed to trump who gets small dollar donations.
Ukraine and now China policy being shaped by globalists. This is the man you support. Well done!
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
It seems to me Vivek is positioning himself to be the main fallback option for the maga base if very poorly chosen can't continue as a candidate.
Eh - his background is sketchy to be fully embraced by the working class.
I'd say RFK Jr. is just as likely to get that support as Vivek would.
In reality Youngkin will more likely enter the race after his elections and will be the substitute for RDS's failing campaign.
BTW - Did Florida ever have that panel on the vaccines?
Kind of a serious question because I haven't heard much about it from the campaign surrogates but was a big topic 6 months ago.
https://www.flgov.com/2022/12/13/go...ion-of-the-public-health-integrity-committee/
Kind of a serious question because I haven't heard much about it from the campaign surrogates but was a big topic 6 months ago.
https://www.flgov.com/2022/12/13/go...ion-of-the-public-health-integrity-committee/
Last edited:
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Vivek, Kari Lake and Marjorie Taylor Greene are all openly fantasizing about getting a tap on the shoulder should the worst befall great leader. Of course that makes great leader suspicious, as he should be. It is all rather Shakespearean. Combining elements of comedy and tragedy.
Last edited: