Posted on 04/17/2022 4:17:32 AM PDT by cotton1706
On its face, Donald Trump's endorsement of author J.D. Vance in the Republican Senate primary in Ohio doesn't make a ton of sense.
Vance's campaign hasn't exactly taken off, and there's that pesky issue of him running down Trump (and Trump voters) in the past.
And yet ...
"It is time for the entire MAGA movement, the greatest in the history of our Country, to unite behind J.D.'s campaign because, unlike so many other pretenders and wannabes, he will put America First," Trump said in a statement Friday announcing the endorsement. "In other words, J.D. Vance has my Complete and Total Endorsement. He will not let you down. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"
What gives?
I can explain it all in a single word. Ready?
"Celebrity."
Trump is drawn to other famous people. He thinks famous people have an "it" factor that distinguishes them from the normals. It doesn't hurt, of course, that Trump views himself first and foremost as a celebrity. He likes people who are in the club with him. It's that simple.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Because all we seem to get is the same old politicians who move laterally into other positions or up into other positions or sons or brothers or wives of these same politicians (Hillary, Jeb, Mitt, Lisa Murkowski, Liz Cheney, Scott Brown's wife, ect. ad nauseum).
THESE people are "celebrities" in Chris Cillizza's world.
But the point is that legislatures across the country will be repopulated with DIFFERENT people. The codgers like Chuck Grassley and Dianne Feinstein will remain, but not for long, and they won't be replaced by the same types.
And THAT is Cillizza's worry.
Is it Chris Cillizza or Kevin James? You decide.
JD was a GREAT pick!
Who is Scott Brown’s wife??
“Who is Scott Brown’s wife??”
Gail Huff Brown. She was a reporter here in MA and is now running for Congress in NH.
Her qualification. She was a senator’s wife.
Chris the lizard has no relevance to me. Nor does CNN.
Laying on one’s back now qualifies one for Congress…wonderful.
Perhaps he endorsed Vance because Vance was the one to ask for and accept his endorsement. In some places Trump is not a “plus.”
Indeed. JD Vance is not a celebrity. What percent of America has even heard of him before his run?
He is someone who achieved success in a field other than politics. That is what Trump wants. Talented people who are not lifetime politicians.
Gail Huff Brown. She was a reporter here in MA and is now running for Congress in NH.
Her qualification. She was a senator’s wife.
When Killary ran for Senate in NY, her only qualification was having been a president's wife.
Those of us who actually live in Ohio know better. Granted, he's a great TV performer, but he's a San Francisco venture capitalist carpetbagger who will be hugely beholden to Peter Theil, and not to the citizens of Ohio, if he gets elected. He fooled Trump, but he doesn't fool us.
Umm… Trump is right. Name recognition is everything in politics.
That’s why incumbents have such an advantage over newcomers. People have heard of them.
This writer is trying to suggest that Trump’s awareness of a well-known political reality is some sort of defect - it’s not.
President Trump should try and pick winners - that’s the name of the game when it comes to political endorsements.
As Trump himself keeps saying when asked about his endorsements: “It’s all about winning!”.
“think Cillizza is missing the undercurrent of some of Trump’s endorsement. That is, to get people into government who wouldn’t otherwise be in government. To get it shaken up”
Yup real world people who have achieved real world results,
What a principled stance...
“What a principled stance...”
You are right - “It’s all about winning” is not a principled stance.
But it’s the reason President Trump won in 2016 (and 2020) - because every other word out of his mouth was “winning”. He sold himself as a winner.
Then, after he won - he went on to govern as one of the most principled Presidents in history. THAT is the time to be principled - after you win.
I’m from PA, and as I’ve said a hundred times, there’s no way Oz is getting my vote in the primary. I’m voting for Kathy Barnett.
But in Presidential politics, endorsing winners is the only way to cobble together 51%, in nation where the lying Leftists have a complete media monopoly.
Too many voters are hopelessly brainwashed - they see politics as a kind of sport. They jump on bandwagons - they want their team to win.
For you and me, governance is about principles - but what percentage of the voters would you say share our principles? 10%? 15%? Enough to win anything?
No, you need to build up a perception of winning to get over the hump.
Then AFTER we win - we can hope our candidate shares our principles and will fight for them.
And in this case, with President Trump, we can almost guarantee that he will - because we have already seen it.
But first we have to let him win.
I understand your position, but I do not trust Oz to be helpful in any way if he wins. Another Romney/Ryan backstabbing RINO. I hope I am incorrect.
I do agree that most voters are not principled, and many will just vote name recognition. I do understand why Trump endorsed him, I just don’t like it.
That’s the way I feel too. Oz is a RINO in the making - for sure.
My son in Ohio is the biggest Josh Mandel fan on the planet. That said, he reports that the interviews, ads, media hits have been so brash in many ways, that he can see Mandel being a turnoff to voters.
Trouble with celebrities is, they’re also part of a good old boys club.
Oz won’t want to give up his standing in Hollywood, which means he’s got to tow the line, which is communist/democrat.
He’s certainly no Clint Eastwood, or Tom Selleck.
I agree with your assessment.
If Oz wins, he will be useless to the conservative cause.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.