Twelve reasons why Trump endorsed Dr. Oz: He had good reasons to put his marker down on Mehmet Oz.

American Thinker ^ | 05/16/2022 | Lynne Lechter

[SeekAndFind]

In February 2022, the Pennsylvania Republican State Committee convened to interview, vet, and nominate candidates for the open positions of governor, lieutenant governor, and U.S. Senate. While exigent circumstances prevented endorsement (on the Democrat side as well) of the thirty-some candidates, contenders emerged, and a true star stood out.

However, one candidate stood out. He personally texted and followed up via text, then called and communicated multiple times. He asked questions and listened, and texted some more. He remembered the name of each individual with whom he interacted, crisscrossed the state, sometimes in a single day, and kept every speaking engagement to which he had committed -- arriving always on time and enthusiastically.

He arrived at Republican events without a retinue, typically accompanied only by his wife, Lisa.

So, before President Trump even endorsed Dr. Mehmet Oz for U.S. Senate, Dr. Oz had already garnered a wide and widely diverse Republican following (In Pennsylvania, primary voters can only vote for the candidates from the party in which they are enrolled.)

Many of us had never seen a Dr. Oz television show. Our introduction to Oz, therefore, was not one of starry-eyed fans groveling, nor was it groups of “wannabes” looking for a gateway to fame and fortune. Rather, our first and subsequent meeting were of equals -- professional politicos looking for a winning candidate.

[rlmorel]

"...One thing is certain, the RINO/GLOBALISTS want to take down Trump in PA...

I agree. From what I have heard, the Republican king-makers are enraged that the choice is potentially being taken out of their hands, and that the voters might actually decide instead.

I wouldn't vote for Oz. He has all the hallmarks (and few indications to the contrary) that he will be a media-darling RINO.

McCormick's ties to the Bush Administration (backed Jeb Bush) and he has been "quoted bashing populism, celebrating skilled immigration and even warning about the potential drawbacks of an “America First” mindset. A former hedge fund CEO, he’s overseen more than $1 billion in investments in China". (Politico, for what it is worth)

I just don't like him as a candidate for the US Senate.

Which leaves Barnette. She doesn't have the money or connections, and she does have the disquieting endorsement of the Club For Growth, but don't regard her "lack of experience or money" as a handicap. I have positively come to loath "political experience" in a candidate.

Honestly, I didn't even realize she was black until a week or two ago, and I find it irritating to see mentions of a "black" candidate in every writeup.

I know it is the media thing, but it irritates me to see it.

We care if she has conservative values, not the melanin content of her skin.

[Srednik]

1. He is not a Pennsylvanian
2. He is a dual Turkish US citizen
3. He pals with Erodogan
4. Trump appears to have not vetted him properly
5. Mehmet = Mohammed
6. He is on record making progressive (lib) statements
7. Bloomberg
8. Romney
9. Bush the elder
10. Bush the younger
11. Will never get security clearance
12. Possible Trojan horse

[poconopundit]

Hey rlmorel.  A nice analysis.  You must have quite a dog!  What breed is he anyway? :-)

The point you make is a good one.  Don't generalize -- tell me what he specifically promises to do.  And tell me what he's actually DONE that validates who the person is.

For me, if Trump is pushing one candidate and the GOPe (Cruz, Jeb, W, Romney, Christie ) are pushing somebody else, my guard is up.

And yet, passing landmark legislation requires compromise.  Trump showed his cards to GOPe forces early-on in his term as President when the issue of tax reform came up.

If you remember back, Trump sent his wolves out to endorse the Judge in Alabama who promised to give Mitch McConnell holy hell in the Senate.

Well pretty soon thereafter, a compromise was reached, so Trump called off this wolves, Bannon was forced into exile in Europe, and McConnell and Ryan passed the tax bill.

The same goes for picking Pence as Vice President.  As we now know, Pence is a MAGA traitor, but Trump understood the long arithmetic of getting legislation passed, so his GOPe pick for Vice President was approved.

Similar positioning is taking place right now.  And you never quite know the details of hidden handshakes and deals.

The only thing we know is Trump has an uncanny ability to get RESULTS, and that's what we love about the guy and why we are eager to vote for the candidates he endorses.

The grander strategy was revealed in Trump's first best seller, the Art of the Deal.  Get LEVERAGE!

[Hostage]

Sounds good but there’s an exposé of Oz talking about children having transgender surgery, his pro-LBGTQ views, occult practices:

https://www.lucianne.com/2021/12/05/republican_senate_candidate_dr_oz_supports_transgender_surgeries_for_kids_occult_practices_74355.html

And Lucianne is not known by me to be a BS carrier.

Whereas, Barnett explains all mid/disinfo about here on her website and she appears solidly conservative on Bannon’s War Room.

Could it be that Trump is trying to get the PA GOP behind him? They appear to love Oz, detest and lie about Barnett. Trump did endorse Mastriano for PA Governor and that’s a solid conservative choice. But Mastriano is a powerful PA State Senator so he knows the GOP insiders there. Whereas Barnett has not yet met her a$$ kiss quota.

WHat’s missing here?

[Wuli]

All 12 reasons have never been any top 12 reasons I would vote for someone. Those 12 “reasons” say he is a nice person but reveal nothing about his political principles or philosophy. And if it even just meant “loyalty to Trump” that alone is not a sufficient reason.

[PermaRag]

“Her background and prior experience are so limited that they are almost embarrassing for someone who is running for a U.S. Senate seat without ever having won an election before in her life.”

If this is some sort of hard and fast rule that must be obeyed in order to run for U.S. Senate — I couldn’t find it in the Constitution but maybe I missed it — then nearly 20% of the current Senators would be ineligible including some of the better ones like Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Ron Johnson and Mike Lee.

Add in a few others who only held some minor office (Chris Coons comes to mind) and we’re probably over 25% of the current Senate.

Nice try though.

[Keen-Minded]

The last reason and my prediction is... if Oz wins the democrats absolutely win the senate seat in November. The feelings against Qz are so over whelming. I live in PA and know many people will not vote in November.

[yelostar]

There have been a number of comments on FR recently about Kathy Barnette's "Amish endorsement," but after searching the web, there is NO evidence she has been endorsed by "the Amish," whatever "the Amish" is intended to mean. It looks like she spoke in front of an Amish group back in January. There is an Amish PAC - amishpac.com... but on that website there is no indication of an endorsement.

I would go with my gut feeling, anyone that the Amish has endorsed
4 posted on 5/16/2022, 10:25:04 AM by rovenstinez

I trust the Amish to be good judges of character thanx
69 posted on 5/16/2022, 11:13:10 AM by thinden

If by "endorsement" someone is trying to sell the fact that Barnett spoke in front of a small group of Amish people - maybe a few dozen - and then received their endorsement, well that's just silly.

[TornadoAlley3]

I understand every President makes bad hires and turnover happens. Trump may have learned from his mistakes but I’m not confident.

[dfwgator]

It’s like baseball, even the best hitters get out 70% of the time.

It’s always going to be a crapshoot, and frankly, sometimes there just isn’t a real good person to choose from, but you still have to choose somebody.

[Alberta's Child]

I wasn't referring to political experience in particular, but just overall experience in a field of work that demonstrates competence and responsibility of ANY kind. I think people who enter politics at very high levels with no political experience can be exceptional leaders. I'd cite Rand Paul and Ben Carson as two great examples of this. Donald Trump is the best example of all.

My concern is that Kathy Barnette has a resume that I'd expect to see from someone who has worked in a low-level managerial role ... and that's if I'm generous and assume that every job she's held has been in a responsible professional/managerial capacity. I suspect that's not the case -- and the evidence for it is that she's 50+ years old and does not seem to have worked anywhere for at least the last six years (in her LinkedIn profile she describes herself as "Self Employed" since 2016, with nothing before that).

[Taxman]

Isn’t she a Democrat?

[Lockbox]

Yea but there had to be some good days and a few great days in between....

[thinden]

If by “endorsement” someone is trying to sell the fact that Barnett spoke in front of a small group of Amish people - maybe a few dozen - and then received their endorsement, well that's just silly.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

right. about as silly as a dozen people sitting inside hula hoops for a biden rally translating into 81 million votes

[Fury]

Dr. Oz won’t renounce his Turkish citizenship unless and until he is elected.

To me, that’s an issue. We’ll see if it is to voters.

[roving]

Trump will find out he is supporting a man who will make it harder for Trump to make America great again.

[yelostar]

I have issues with anyone with dual citizenship

There are currently a number of dual citizens inhabiting the United States Congress. In 2018 there were 13 dual citizens in the Senate, and 27 in the House. Historically, a number of presidential appointees and very high level government personnel have been dual citizens. Justice Kagan is also listed as a dual citizen when she was US Solicitor General (2009-2010).

It happens in both parties.

[roving]

Ignore Oz past statements he has said all you want. He is going to be a thorn in Trump’s side

[rlmorel]

"...For me, if Trump is pushing one candidate and the GOPe (Cruz, Jeb, W, Romney, Christie ) are pushing somebody else, my guard is up..."

I have to admit, part of my calculus HAS to be who supports/who opposes a candidate.

I have to do some research tonight for all candidates in my federal, state, district, and town elections. We need to provide delegates with information. I admit, in my state, this is really worthless for the most part, but if we don't do this, well...it will never even have a chance to make a difference. So we try.

That said, it is damn near impossible. What do you use? What they put on their FaceBook page? What their policy paper says (where is it, and is it really worth anything?) What others (who?) say about them? "The Leftist "League of Women Voters?" No thank you. (but there are a HUGE number of people who vote SOLELY on that recommendation! And of course, in my Leftist state, that is sent out to all voters as "nonpartisan". So much for that.) And so on.

I am finding that I lean more and more on this "who is for/against them, which is no way to choose, honestly. But in a time of limited time...how do we navigate this minefield?

And I am someone who cares. It takes a huge amount of time, work, and discernment to wade through these things and arrive at a relatively good personalized decision.

And all the work I do for my personal choice researching candidates and such can be counteracted by a completely uncaring, unintelligent, undiscriminating voter whose vote may be different from my own.

And that is just in my own party.

[rlmorel]

I am not sure either. Maybe that is his blind spot.

But even with that blind spot, he is still leagues better than any other candidate who announced in the last election cycle.

Some problems are made to be solved. Some are made to be worked around. And some are made to be borne.

This may be a problem to be borne, but...It is hard to see that he would not have learned regarding his inner circle of advisers (as opposed to political entities in his party)