Liz Cheney

cawacko

cawacko

Well-known member
I still don't understand the strategy with her. Anyone who knows who she is likely follows politics pretty closely. And if you follow politics closely you likely have made up your mind about Trump one way or the other. I know the argument will be she is trying to pick off Republicans (or right-leaning independents) like myself who won't vote for Trump but how many people like me were undecideds?

And since time is a limited resource (especially in Harris' case having to run such a truncated campaign) it's an opportunity cost as to how she spends it. Liz Cheney was highly unlikely to bring in working class voters or those who only vote occasionally. I know some Democrats love the idea of a (former?) Republican speaking out against Trump but does it really motivate much of the base?

From a strategy perspective I don't get it.
 
cawacko said:
I still don't understand the strategy with her. Anyone who knows who she is likely follows politics pretty closely. And if you follow politics closely you likely have made up your mind about Trump one way or the other. I know the argument will be she is trying to pick off Republicans (or right-leaning independents) like myself who won't vote for Trump but how many people like me were undecideds?

And since time is a limited resource (especially in Harris' case having to run such a truncated campaign) it's an opportunity cost as to how she spends it. Liz Cheney was highly unlikely to bring in working class voters or those who only vote occasionally. I know some Democrats love the idea of a (former?) Republican speaking out against Trump but does it really motivate much of the base?

From a strategy perspective I don't get it.
Click to expand...
Anyone who does not understand the Cheney family agenda is a moron.
 
I don't think it was "strategy." She's a good American and has a conscience. She saw Trump as a threat to democracy - and people can debate whether she's right about that - but she felt a duty to step up and do what she could to try to keep him from getting re-elected.
 
cawacko said:
I still don't understand the strategy with her. Anyone who knows who she is likely follows politics pretty closely. And if you follow politics closely you likely have made up your mind about Trump one way or the other. I know the argument will be she is trying to pick off Republicans (or right-leaning independents) like myself who won't vote for Trump but how many people like me were undecideds?

And since time is a limited resource (especially in Harris' case having to run such a truncated campaign) it's an opportunity cost as to how she spends it. Liz Cheney was highly unlikely to bring in working class voters or those who only vote occasionally. I know some Democrats love the idea of a (former?) Republican speaking out against Trump but does it really motivate much of the base?

From a strategy perspective I don't get it.
Click to expand...
You are still politically naive. They weren't trying to get working class people. The Cheney's despise them. They are RINOs. They were trying to get YOUR vote. They were trying to get women to vote with their vagina. You were the demographic.

Squishy republicans in name only.

The RINOs and Never Trumpers have been vanquished
 
BartenderElite said:
I don't think it was "strategy." She's a good American and has a conscience. She saw Trump as a threat to democracy - and people can debate whether she's right about that - but she felt a duty to step up and do what she could to try to keep him from getting re-elected.
Click to expand...

That's the way I see/saw it.
 
Teflon Don said:
You are still politically naive. They weren't trying to get working class people. The Cheney's despise them. They are RINOs. They were trying to get YOUR vote. They were trying to get women to vote with their vagina. You were the demographic.

Squishy republicans in name only.

The RINOs and Never Trumpers have been vanquished
Click to expand...
I said Cheney was NOT going to win Harris working class votes. I said she was going after people who very likely already had their mind made up one way or the other, thus the opportunity cost (upside) of Harris spending time with her seemed very low.

And you are correct, those who support free trade and free markets on are on the decline. It didn't matter who won the election in that regard. Liberals were only against tariffs as long as it was Trump doing it. They went radio silent once Biden got in office and kept them in place and even added new ones and are now complaining about them again since Trump won (Harris didn't run on a platform of repealing tariffs, she was going to leave them there and liberals didn't complain about that).

And people on the right have chosen to disregard basic economics in support of tariffs. If tariffs are your thing, you're very happy right now.
 
cawacko said:
I still don't understand the strategy with her. Anyone who knows who she is likely follows politics pretty closely. And if you follow politics closely you likely have made up your mind about Trump one way or the other. I know the argument will be she is trying to pick off Republicans (or right-leaning independents) like myself who won't vote for Trump but how many people like me were undecideds?

And since time is a limited resource (especially in Harris' case having to run such a truncated campaign) it's an opportunity cost as to how she spends it. Liz Cheney was highly unlikely to bring in working class voters or those who only vote occasionally. I know some Democrats love the idea of a (former?) Republican speaking out against Trump but does it really motivate much of the base?

From a strategy perspective I don't get it.
Click to expand...
Harris was stupid enough to believe her advisors........
 
cawacko said:
I said Cheney was NOT going to win Harris working class votes. I said she was going after people who very likely already had their mind made up one way or the other, thus the opportunity cost (upside) of Harris spending time with her seemed very low.

And you are correct, those who support free trade and free markets on are on the decline. It didn't matter who won the election in that regard. Liberals were only against tariffs as long as it was Trump doing it. They went radio silent once Biden got in office and kept them in place and even added new ones and are now complaining about them again since Trump won (Harris didn't run on a platform of repealing tariffs, she was going to leave them there and liberals didn't complain about that).

And people on the right have chosen to disregard basic economics in support of tariffs. If tariffs are your thing, you're very happy right now.
Click to expand...
Tariffs are good economics. I see you are still a brainwashed little (r) who sides with the Chamber of Commerce. Now, I am not against free trade. But what the uniparty that you are a part of has allowed is a hollowing out of our middle class and sent good paying jobs oversees.

President Trump is going to put a stop to that.
 
Teflon Don said:
Tariffs are good economics. I see you are still a brainwashed little (r) who sides with the Chamber of Commerce. Now, I am not against free trade. But what the uniparty that you are a part of has allowed is a hollowing out of our middle class and sent good paying jobs oversees.

President Trump is going to put a stop to that.
Click to expand...
Chamber of Commerce? Free trade has been celebrated from Adam Smith to Milton Friedman. Tariffs are taxes. Not going into the weeds but they raise the cost of goods and retard growth at their core.

People choose to want to believe, against economic evidence, that somehow tariffs are going to bring (manufacturing) jobs back to America. That's not the case.
 
cawacko said:
Chamber of Commerce? Free trade has been celebrated from Adam Smith to Milton Friedman. Tariffs are taxes. Not going into the weeds but they raise the cost of goods and retard growth at their core.

People choose to want to believe, against economic evidence, that somehow tariffs are going to bring (manufacturing) jobs back to America. That's not the case.
Click to expand...
It isn't the case? Can you prove that?

Well, we don't have to argue about it. We will have a case study right in front of us. I know you won't believe it because you are a chamber of commerce RINO.

Good day sir
 
BartenderElite said:
I don't think it was "strategy." She's a good American and has a conscience. She saw Trump as a threat to democracy - and people can debate whether she's right about that - but she felt a duty to step up and do what she could to try to keep him from getting re-elected.
Click to expand...
She's free to do as she chooses, I'm not speaking to that. The Harris campaign choose to have her as a surrogate (there was talk she could be in a Harris administration) and they were on stage together at at least one event.

That's the "strategy" I'm talking about from the Harris campaign. Hindsight is 20/20 but I heard Democrats during the campaign saying why is Harris spending time with her (instead of going after more working class votes).
 
cawacko said:
She's free to do as she chooses, I'm not speaking to that. The Harris campaign choose to have her as a surrogate (there was talk she could be in a Harris administration) and they were on stage together at at least one event.

That's the "strategy" I'm talking about from the Harris campaign. Hindsight is 20/20 but I heard Democrats during the campaign saying why is Harris spending time with her (instead of going after more working class votes).
Click to expand...

It's easy in hindsight to say she should have gone after working class voters, but she focused more on Trump's threat to democracy. Which was the 2nd biggest issue for Americans, according to exit polls.

And I think a legit strategy. Trump has telegraphed for a year+ now what his plans are, and how he plans to be as President. I'm hoping it's just his usual bluster, which a lot of it probably is - but if not, future historians will scratch their heads.
 
Teflon Don said:
It isn't the case? Can you prove that?

Well, we don't have to argue about it. We will have a case study right in front of us. I know you won't believe it because you are a chamber of commerce RINO.

Good day sir
Click to expand...
I missed you ILA. I've been called a Trumptard numerous times on this board by liberals. I would just laugh and say where's ILA to let them know Reagan Republicans are now RINO's.
 
cawacko said:
I still don't understand the strategy with her. Anyone who knows who she is likely follows politics pretty closely. And if you follow politics closely you likely have made up your mind about Trump one way or the other. I know the argument will be she is trying to pick off Republicans (or right-leaning independents) like myself who won't vote for Trump but how many people like me were undecideds?

And since time is a limited resource (especially in Harris' case having to run such a truncated campaign) it's an opportunity cost as to how she spends it. Liz Cheney was highly unlikely to bring in working class voters or those who only vote occasionally. I know some Democrats love the idea of a (former?) Republican speaking out against Trump but does it really motivate much of the base?

From a strategy perspective I don't get it.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, after experiencing 1/6, unlike the majority of Republicans, she saw Trump as a danger to the country’s future and out of patriotism was willing to sacrifice her own ambitions to do what she could to deny his election

Not that complicated, politically it is often referred to as a “profile in courage”
 
cawacko said:
I'm speaking/asking about the Harris campaign strategy in using her as a surrogate (and Harris appearing with her). Not about what Cheney wanted.
Click to expand...
Harris was looking for the Cheney family name amongst Reagan Republicans to possibly gain some traditional conservative Republicans’ and Haley supporters’ vote. Keep in mind, with a predicted close race any vote was important
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top