Hi everyone.
Welcome to this week’s Daly Weekly, where I answer whatever questions you throw my way.
Before we get started this week, I’d like to invite you all to Reagan Caucus Action’s new Substack. I co-host their weekly podcast, on which we feature a different guest every week to discuss numerous issues from a Reaganite perspective.
It’s totally free, and you can sign up here (I hope you do):
Now, let’s get to your questions…
This $5000 “carrot” that Trump floated comes off to me as nothing more than a grandiose, BS, campaign promise like every other politician. And no, I don’t like it. The other thing is, how is this any different than Biden promising to pay off student loan debt.
To me, they are both “vote buying”. And again, I despise it. As always, I could be wrong. But I’m independent, so objectively, that’s my take on it. Every White House lies. And Politicians, especially in an election year, are prone to say anything. I rely on John and Bernie to sort things out. So I always appreciate that!!!! — Rob O.
Hi Rob. As I’ve argued, I do think it’s very similar to Biden’s student-debt forgiveness efforts — just more brazen in the rhetoric, because Trump is making it purely conditional on Republicans maintaining congressional majorities. But I’ve also argued that it’s assuredly not going to happen. Aside from this being at least the fourth time Trump has promised “stimulus” or “dividend” checks to Americans in his second term alone, the condition he laid out this time — of the Republicans maintaining the House — has virtually no chance of being met.
Of note, Bill O’Reilly said [Trump’s $5,000 promise] is not a bribe because the recipients don’t have to do anything, i.e. there’s no quid pro quo. REALLY? Does Mr. O’Reilly think his base viewers are that stupid? Or maybe he thinks they’ll want to believe his remark so much that they’ll accept it without question? Or maybe Mr. O’Reilly is willfully dense when it comes to his old buddy Donald Trump.
He promised that at the so-called Mid-Term Convention when he was urging the audience - those in attendance especially but also viewers and those getting their info from right-wing screechers - to not only vote Republican but to canvass for Republicans and, yes, to vote more than once. Although on this last statement, his hardcore supporters will say “he was only joking.” But he’s the President of the United States delivering a primetime speech!
Although those included in his bribe were those not voting Republican, obviously for the Republicans to win the mid-terms there’d have to be collective and feverous activity.
If the bigwigs in the Democratic Party leap tall buildings to deliver the mid-terms to the Republicans, will President Trump’s hardcore supporters say “He was only joking” when he reneges on his promise? — Bob H.
This generic, widely-accepted definition of the word “bribe” is:
a payment or reward offered to influence a person's behavior or decision.
Personally, I think that applies very well to this situation (as it did to Biden’s student-loan forgiveness efforts). Trump is offering a direct payment to voters, contingent on Republicans holding congressional majorities, to influence those voters to vote for Republicans in the midterms. If someone would rather not use the word “bribe” to describe such a thing, I guess I don’t care much… as long as they’re politically consistent with it.
As for what would happen if Republicans held both a House and Senate majority (the odds of that are almost nothing), and Trump didn’t deliver on his promise, I think his hardcore supporters would just shrug it off, and carry on like he never said it in the first place. Trump has reneged on all kinds of promises, and his supporters never seem to mind.
Sir John, according to this video, two U.S. teens in Alamo, Texas were on their way to enlist in the U. S. Marine Corps; they even had their papers with them. Allegedly they began recording an ICE encounter with someone else. ICE agents eventually caught up to them and brutally assaulted and detained them while blatantly ignoring their proof that they were on their way to enlist in the USMC. After this encounter, the teens are now understandably reconsidering their plans to enlist. The usual suspects in the media (specifically Telemundo & The New Republic) are of course painting this as another example ICE “Gestapo” promoting the white supremacy of the Trump Administration. On the one hand, if this reporting is totally accurate, then the rogue ICE agents must face justice for this abuse! On the other hand, stories such as this (like that hoax about the old man getting picked up by ICE and being deported to El Salvador while he attempted to renew his green card) seem tailor made for leftist media. Do you know anything about this story? Can you share some light on it? —“Dishonorable Intentions In Texas” Regards from The Emperor
Emperor, whenever you begin a question with “according to this video,” a little bit of me dies inside. Lol.
No, I don’t know anything about the story. But I do know that random people can and do post misleading or unsubstantiated takes on YouTube, and make money off the attention they receive. Thus, I don’t use YouTube as a reliable news source.
Some say Bill O'Reilly makes efforts on his NSN to humanize Pres. Trump much more than Trump deserves; one example being he states our president doesn't want to send ground troops in Iran because he doesn't want to kill Iranians. In your opinion, are some attempting to "humanize" Trump far beyond reality? ICE has been accused of human rights violations and he, Trump, has no problem with ICE tactics or abuses. He won't mandate body cams- that speaks volumes. — Sharon H.
Broadly speaking, Sharon, pro-Trump commentators have been doing this type of thing, on a routine basis, for the last ten years. Few want to acknowledge to their pro-Trump audience that our president’s decisions are largely based on self-interest and often even whims, because that would be an admission that he’s a shallow figure, and poor leader, who almost always puts himself before the country. And that would hurt the MAGA mythology.
Thus, the inclination has been to twist and bend Trump’s decisions into artificial alignment with some ideological or moral framework, to make them appear noble and provident (when they’re often not).
In regard to this specific issue, I don’t think Trump’s reluctance to use ground troops in Iran has anything to do with the sanctity of life. Like you, I haven’t seen much evidence of him being a humanitarian. I think he just wants this conflict to be over, because it’s making him look bad, and sending in ground troops would be a significant escalation of the conflict. Trump has made very clear (in his own words) that he believed the military operation in Iran would go down similarly to how the one in Venezuela did: a quick removal of the top leadership, and the rest of the regime just kind of falling in line to play nice with the United States. But that was never going to happen, unfortunately, and so tougher decisions have been called for.
How am I not supposed to laugh at commenters who claim you’re not a conservative, while they simultaneously defend Trump’s leftist income-redistribution ideas, trade wars, and other socialist policies? — Ben G.
Feel free to laugh, Ben. It really is absurd. But I find it more sad that funny. It’s clear such people have no idea what conservatism and socialism even are.
Did you ever think you’d hear an FBI Director advocating for the right of a human “victim” of bestiality to become an FBI agent? Lol — Alex D.
No, but it sadly didn’t feel out of place in today’s politics.
Thanks everyone! You can send me questions for next week by leaving a comment in the comment section.