But I've noticed his name pop up in interesting ways recently. I don't know much about Vivek Ramaswamy, and the media is as useless here as you can imagine. Right now the media is already running with the "Trump v. Biden 2024" narrative that it so desperately craves.
Despite the catastrophic failure of 2016, when Trump was supposed to destroy the GOP once and for all, the press wants to do it again. Destroy Trump with a never ending barrage of accusations, litigations, felony charges, whatever, and then make darn sure he gets the nomination. Similar to 2016, but with more baggage. Or so the media assumes.
I personally believe if they could find anyone beyond Biden they would take it. Everyone knows Biden is in about as much control as the Sultan was in Disney's Aladdin. But who do they have? Vice President Harris? That's rich. At this point the press simply ignores anything negative to do with the White House. Therefore the degree to which it ignores Harris shows how negative the press believes she must be.
So they appear stuck with Biden, and therefore their only hope is Trump. To that end the press will do what it did in 2016 and shut out anyone else. At least give nobody else the same level of coverage. I remember in 2016. I first heard Rick Santorum was in the race when the press reported that he was dropping out of the race. Even as a Buckeye, we had a hard time finding info about John Kasich, and he had been our governor and hometown boy. The press wanted Trump in 2016, as it does today and that is its focus.
Therefore, learning about anyone like Ramaswamy is going to be like finding Big Foot. From what I have seen, he seems prepared to say unpopular things in ways typically not acceptable to the modern Left establishment. Like this. To actually come out and call out the LGTBQ narratives and point out some obvious truths about the whole farse. Takes guts. More to the point, he did it in a way that was respectful and courtly, if I may use that term. It seems to have disarmed a 'pansexual' activist, and that's no easy accomplishment.
We'll see. Again, I found some basic bio info, but that doesn't help much. I'll keep an eye on him. Everyone here knows I'm not fan of Trump. Never have been. As I've pissed off more than one leftist by pointing out, I didn't like Trump back when liberal Democrats and Hollywood celebrities loved the guy. I was ahead of the curve you might say. Still, you never know. As they say, anything can happen in Texas.
UPDATE: To add interest, he has released a 'Ten Commandments' for his 2024 campaign. If nothing else, he's making himself clear about these issues. All too often politicians, especially Republicans, tend to him-haw and dance around hot button issues and liberal sacred cows. Apparently he isn't. Still learning about him and this is not an endorsement. It is interesting how a politician speaking openly and honestly in a civil manner is newsworthy.
(Tom New Poster)
ReplyDeleteI refer to Trump and Biden as Tomato-Head and Potato-Head. The first is seedy, thin-skinned, always red in the face and ready to splatter himself against anything. The second is completely thick, completely blank on the inside, but if you prepare him right, he goes with anything.
Yet I thank Trump for three things:
1. He kept Hillary Clinton from becoming our first fascist president (and yes, I know what the word really means).
2. He supported SCOTUS appointments that ended Roe, affirmative action, and assaults on the Bill of Rights (and can you image the result if the person named above had made those appointments?)
3. The flourishing economy (in which he had some role, although less than he claims) let me retire a year earlier than I would have otherwise.
Yet he is a baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad man. Why? He tweets mean things. He puts liberal dems in their place. He calls them names. He threatens to overturn everything the liberals have put in place to benefit themselves at the expense of the American people. He followed the law when he took an oath to protect and secure the border as much as he could while fighting those who would destroy it. He saved us from going to war, stopped policing the world and all but destroyed Isis. Refused to kowtow to China, Iraq, Russia. Drew lines in the sand that no foreign leader dared to cross. He is hated. He has been attacked since he announced his run for presidency in 2015 and it continues to this day while the Clintons, Obamas and Bidens run around free. I will support him again.
DeleteI really appreciated his efforts to fight human trafficking.
DeleteHe may not be a saint but I didn't vote for a saint but a leader of my country. Biden? He's a baptized Catholic. How is that going for all the Catholics and clergy who voted for him because Trump wasn't a christian model? Tell me. How much of a Catholic model is Biden? He supports transgenderism, abortion, euthanasia, homosexual 'marriages' and officiated at one, assisted suicide. Now there's a role model of christian morality.
DeleteBobB, my problem with Trump is 1) I have never seen a person in leadership who engendered less loyalty from those in his inner circle and 2) he has made it clear that if you so much as deviate from his wishes on a single issue, you are now his enemy and he will attack as Trump attacks until you get in line (think of his going after people questioning the vaccines that he personally gave to the world).
DeleteI would never say Trump did no good. In fact, just the opposite. Heck, I remember in 2016 when Rick Steves (of European travelogue fame) went to bat for Obama and declared that ISIS and Islamic terror attacks were just the new normal. He was just echoing what the press/Obama admin were saying. Suddenly, no ISIS on that level. Same with the economy. Same with China. Trump did many great things, but he was also erratic, at times playing into the stereotypes of the Left, and frequently saying things that were simply false. I have no problem with someone playing hardball in our day and age. I do have a problem with someone who calls squares round, and then attacks anyone - including his supporters - when they disagree.
DeleteI've been seeing him give a lot of interviews. Liked what I've seen so far of Vivek. This is the next one I want to watch. I don't know if he's quite 100% ready for the big chair, but I would love to see him serve a term as VP, get that experience, and then become president.
ReplyDeleteThat's what I mean. He seems to speak to the issues more plainly and more directly than most of the candidates, and that includes Trump (when you can figure what he's saying at all).
DeleteI think that Vivek would be a good candidate in a fair debate where we vote based on each candidate's plans and ideals. But the current election process is about as far away from that as you can get.
ReplyDeleteMy law/politics son said that the primary system has gone off the rails and is now almost antithetical to the country getting the choice of the best candidates. Watching the last couple decades of presidential campaigns, I'm inclined to agree.
DeleteNothing I've seen would make me hesitate to vote for Mr. Ramaswamy, as I did for Trump the first time (see http://arkanabar.blogspot.com/2016/11/you-know-you-could-do-worse.html ). Between him, RFK Jr., and Trump, we might have as many as three peacenik candidates for President.
ReplyDeleteAnd Nate, thanks for the link. I liked what Mr. Ramaswamy and Dr. Peterson had to say.
I didn't vote for Trump the first time, held my nose the second time, and won't do it again. I doubt Mr. Ramaswamy will make it since, again, the press is already framing it as Trump v. Biden. My guess is that they imagine the only one who couldn't beat Biden is Trump, given the country seeing past the media's cheerleading. But if I had the chance, I would have no problem voting for Ramaswamy, at least based on what I have seen so far.
DeleteHe's running for Vice President, not President. He's a cynical phony who will say anything, but clearly has given no meaningful thought to policy. There are several far better candidates, including those who have actually furthered legislation that beats back the left. https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/08/vivek-ramaswamys-cynical-crusade/
ReplyDeleteWell, I read that. To my eyes it was written by someone who dislikes Trump, feels Ramaswamy doesn't dislike Trump enough, and therefore dislikes Ramaswamy. I don't know. I saw in that piece some of what I saw in the one I linked to above. That is, lots of 'technically nothing wrong with this, but here is what's wrong with this' wrangling. Such as when he was asked about the 9/11 commission, he said he didn't accept it. Then the piece says there is nothing wrong with not accepting the 9/11 commission (as apparently another NR contributor has done). But then it says it was still wrong when Ramaswamy did it because he didn't immediately clarify in the proper fashion. To my way of thinking, that's someone trying to find fault, not simply finding it. I'm not saying the guy isn't a dud or worse. I don't know enough yet to make a call. I am saying much of what I'm reading so far is variations on 'nothing technically wrong, but...', or 'he answered right, be we know what he really thinks', or 'he says he cares, but we know his real motives' and on and on. When I see more 'here is exactly what he said and why it's bad', or 'here's what he actually did and why it's bad', I'll be more inclined to take it seriously. The part at the end of the piece about his statement regarding agents on the 9/11 planes was the closet I got to this in the whole editorial. But by then, I had already learned to be skeptical of the editorial and its contributor.
Delete