╌>

A historic Victory

  

Category:  Op/Ed

By:  vic-eldred  •  2 months ago  •  346 comments

A historic Victory
“You can’t sit home,” Trump said. “If you’re sick as a dog, you say ‘Darling, I got to make it.’ Even if you vote and then pass away, it’s worth it.”

News from the great heartland of the United States. Last night for the first time in the history of the Iowa Caucus a candidate has won by a margin of 29.8 percentage points—surpassing the 12.8-percentage-point margin Sen. Bob Dole scored over his nearest rival in 1988, setting a record for a competitive year. With 99% of the votes counted, Trump had 51%, DeSantis had 21.3% and Haley 19.1%, according to the Associated Press. NBC News would report late Monday night that Ramaswamy was withdrawing from the race.

Iowa Republicans braved subzero temperatures to go out and vote and I believe they did it because of all that has been done to Donald Trump. Election interference by our current dictator will not stop the American people.
At stake were Iowa’s 40 delegates to the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee this summer and it is now clear that the former President will have the wind at his back.


“I really think this is time now for everybody, our country to come together,” Trump said during a victory celebration in Des Moines. He said his two closest competitors did well, before outlining his agenda and nodding to the general election. “The big night is going to be in November when we take back our country.”

Donald Trump Routs Rivals in Iowa Caucuses (msn.com)



Here is the former President calling for the country to come together:


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  author  Vic Eldred    2 months ago

Despite every effort to destroy Trump the people had their say.

Last night the people said he will be our candidate.



In that spirit, here is the one breakfast food I never eat:

OIP.5htKwd_rIsnAtkcNu0GbdQHaJP?w=192&h=240&c=7&r=0&o=5&pid=1.7

Good morning America.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
1.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 months ago

Aww, you KNOW I like to discuss our breakfasts, but I can't open that image link.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.1.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1    2 months ago

It's a Wheaties Box. "Breakfast of Champions" with a baseball player on it.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1    2 months ago

It is the original Wheaties "Breakfast of Champions" box.

You know, from when you and I were playing in the sandlots.


I just can't eat cereal. It always leaves me hungry.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
1.1.3  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.1    2 months ago

Thanks, JJ.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
1.1.4  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.2    2 months ago

I don't think I ever ate Wheaties, but I know that when I was a kid I would sometimes eat Corn Flakes, but my favourite of that kind of breakfast was Rice Crispies.  Didn't they used to pop?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.1.5  Right Down the Center  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1.4    2 months ago
Didn't they used to pop?

Snap crackle and pop.  But they are best in Rice Krispie treats.

 
 
 
shona1
PhD Quiet
1.1.6  shona1  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1.4    2 months ago

Morning Buzz...Rice Krispies??

You mean Rice Bubbles..

Geez can't you mob get anything right..

256

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
1.1.7  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  shona1 @1.1.6    2 months ago

Never tried those.  I meant these (I hadn't remembered the spelling of Krispies correctly, but it was a long LONG time ago).

12df75db-e563-43f3-b368-b011f216c451.b8916633890e023da856180fd9fd6d7c.jpeg

 
 
 
shona1
PhD Quiet
1.1.8  shona1  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1.7    2 months ago

They are exactly the same thing but Kellogg's called them rice bubbles here for some reason...

Probably because you mob can't spell crispy and we would know..🤣

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
1.1.9  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  shona1 @1.1.8    2 months ago

Touché.  LOL

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Expert
1.1.10  Krishna  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1    one month ago
Aww, you KNOW I like to discuss our breakfasts, but I can't open that image link.

It's a picture of a Wheaties cereal box....that has "Breakfast of Champions" on it.

(Did they have Wheaties cereal in Canada?)

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Expert
1.1.11  Krishna  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.2    one month ago
I just can't eat cereal. It always leaves me hungry.

Is it colder in the Winter...or the Mountains?

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
1.1.12  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Krishna @1.1.10    one month ago

Although I don't remember, they were probably there, if not called Wheaties, then by some other name.  For example, M&Ms are called Smarties in Canada. 

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
1.1.13  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1.12    one month ago

Now Smarties here in the states is a hard compressed candy similar to a pez candy of old, like a mini Necco waffer.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.1.14  Right Down the Center  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1.12    one month ago

Interesting.  In the states smarties are called smarties 

256

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
1.1.15  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @1.1.13    one month ago

Filled with chocolate, exactly like M&Ms.

OIP-C.tlVaS6Z5yvtZqCtJEXehAQHaFu?rs=1&pid=ImgDetMain

 
 
 
shona1
PhD Quiet
1.1.16  shona1  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1.15    one month ago

Smarties and M&Ms are two separate lollies here...

320 320

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
1.1.17  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  shona1 @1.1.16    one month ago

I guess they're identical to M&Ms only in Canada. 

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
1.2  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 months ago

Somebody once said one victory does not a war win. Still a ways to go and nothing is written in stone.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 months ago
Despite every effort to destroy Trump the people had their say.

And you are happy about this??

You want Trump to be the GOP nominee versus DeSantis or Haley??

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
1.3.1  Ronin2  replied to  TᵢG @1.3    one month ago

Some of us don't care who the Republican nominee is. They will get our vote.

Anything but Brandon and the Democrats after what they have put this country through for the last 8 years and counting.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.2  TᵢG  replied to  Ronin2 @1.3.1    one month ago
Some of us don't care who the Republican nominee is.

Obviously given you (in the large) are actually voting for Trump — a traitor; the only PotUS in the history of our nation who attempted to steal a presidential election through fraud, coercion, lying and incitement and, in doing so, violated his oath of office by attempting to circumvent the CotUS and attack the foundation of democracy — the vote of the electorate.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.3  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.2    one month ago

they are all voting for Trump, on the wafer thin theory that he is "the lesser evil". 

He is evil, but there is nothing lesser about it. 

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.3.4  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.3    one month ago
He is evil, but there is nothing lesser about it. 

That would be up to each individual voter to determine for themselves.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.5  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.3    one month ago
they are all voting for Trump, on the wafer thin theory that he is "the lesser evil". 

If so, that is delusion.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.3.6  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.5    one month ago

About as delusional as voting for somebody because they aren't Trump.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.7  Texan1211  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.3.6    one month ago
About as delusional as voting for somebody because they aren't Trump.

I always wonder what kind of politicians we would have in office if people voted for someone instead of merely voting against someone.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.8  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.3.6    one month ago

Interesting that you think ...

NOT voting for a traitor; the only PotUS in the history of our nation who attempted to steal a presidential election through fraud, coercion, lying and incitement and, in doing so, violated his oath of office by attempting to circumvent the CotUS and attack the foundation of democracy — the vote of the electorate

... is delusional.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.9  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.7    one month ago
I always wonder what kind of politicians we would have in office if people voted for someone instead of merely voting against someone.

In 2024, if most do not vote against Trump, he will be elected and you will see what kind of politician is in office.

This is obvious, right?   Not something to wonder about.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.10  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.9    one month ago
This is obvious, right?   Not something to wonder about.

Well, I do recognize you missed my point entirely.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.3.11  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.8    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.12  Texan1211  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.3.11    one month ago

For some, I guess voting for Traitor Joe is preferable to them than voting for Traitor Trump, eh?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.3.13  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.7    one month ago

We wouldn't have Traitor Joe.  Hillary would be exactly where she is - a worn out shrieking harpy and a lot more that we could go on and on about for days.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.3.14  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.12    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.15  Texan1211  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.3.14    one month ago

Traitor Joe's Presidency is the direct result of too many non-thinking voters more interested in keeping someone out of office rather than supporting someone competent to run the country.

Seems like something a patriot really wouldn't do.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.16  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.15    one month ago
Seems like something a patriot really wouldn't do.

Is it patriotic to vote for the only PotUS in the history of our nation who attempted to steal a presidential election through fraud, coercion, lying and incitement and, in doing so, violated his oath of office by attempting to circumvent the CotUS and attack the foundation of democracy — the vote of the electorate?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.17  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.16    one month ago

Your reply indicates you still haven't gotten my point yet.

I choose to think that a real patriot wants what is best for the country.

Traitor Joe Biden isn't the best for the country.

By any stretch of the imagination.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.18  Texan1211  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.3.14    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
1.3.19  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.3.6    one month ago

One person's delusion is another person's reality. /s

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.3.20  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.15    one month ago
Traitor Joe's Presidency is the direct result of too many non-thinking voters more interested in keeping someone out of office rather than supporting someone competent to run the country.

And look what happened. 

Traitor Joe went after US Oil allowing Russia to raise their oil prices and fund their attack on Ukraine.  This also caused fuel prices to skyrocket globally.  

Hamas attacked Israel with backing from Iran.  Safe to venture that the money from that came from Traitor Joe's "nuclear deal" money.

Traitor Joe showed his ass with his deadly retreat out of Afghanistan and Yemen has attacked several ships (including some from the US). So now we have the US military directly and indirectly involved in 3 different conflicts.

Record high inflation.  This causing high prices on virtually everything and despite what Traitor Joe and that idiot Press Secretary say, Bidenomics is an utter failure.

US Deficit is constantly increasing with every dollar that is sent overseas with zero accountability. Can't leave out military readiness declines with every shipment of weapons and equipment as well.

And we can't forget Democrats censorship of US Citizens on issues like Covid, Hunter's laptop and anything else they didn't like.

We have millions crossing the border illegally all the while Traitor Joe and his band of misfit idiots lying to the public that "the border is secure".

But let's keep this shit head in office because...."Orange man bad".

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.21  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.17    one month ago
Joe Biden isn't the best for the country.

Of course not, but we are facing the likelihood of either Biden or Trump.   That is it.   That is reality.

You have claimed that you are not going to vote for either.   So you are going to let others decide.   Don't lecture us on patriotism when you refuse to act to prevent ...

... the only PotUS in the history of our nation who attempted to steal a presidential election through fraud, coercion, lying and incitement and, in doing so, violated his oath of office by attempting to circumvent the CotUS and attack the foundation of democracy — the vote of the electorate ...

... from being reelected.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.22  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.17    one month ago

What is "best for the country" is a "policy" matter. What someone thinks is best someone else might think is terrible. Some people think it is good that Trump nominated three right wing justices to the Supreme court, other people think that was a disaster. 

But fitness for office should not be a "policy" matter.  

On the day Trump announced for office in 2015 he was a known pathological liar who had been the king birther in 2011, was being sued for perpetrating a fraud through his "Trump University" ( a fraud which he paid 25 million dollars to settle), and had bankrupted companies six times, and other bad habits too numerous to mention, and it all went downhill from there. 

Why didnt Trump voters ever care about his character?  I know the answer, do you?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.23  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.21    one month ago
You have claimed that you are not going to vote for either.  

I don't know how to make that point any clearer for you, nor did I know it was in dispute.

So you are going to let others decide.  

Yes, I will always support people's right to vote as they see fit.  It's called tolerance, btw.

 Don't lecture us on patriotism when you refuse to act to prevent ...

I am allowed to voice my opinion, and your choices are to read it or not. It doesn't matter in the least to me which you choose, but know it was not a lecture.

I hope at some point in time you will understand my point.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.24  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.22    one month ago

Sorry, just can't get into another long discussion of "Orange Man Bad" again with you today.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.25  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.24    one month ago

Of course. You have nothing of substance to offer. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
1.3.26  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.22    one month ago
Why didnt Trump voters ever care about his character?  I know the answer, do you?

You know your answer but I doubt you will recognize the other side of the story.

A lot of his voters knew about his character in 2016 but were sick and tired of the permanent political class that have been elected to Washington year after year which has only gotten us to the place we were at in 2016. Trump was an outsider not beholding to the political machinery and was rich enough that I believe a lot of people hoped he would upset the apple cart so to speak. 

The permanent political class of leaders we have are not representing the people but rather their political parties. The are two sides of the same coin, spending our money as they desire to further their gains while leaving the people behind. So a lot of people voted for him hoping that there would be a change in how Washington represents us. Can't say why so many people are behind him today when he didn't really make those changes the last time, but I don't speak for all other people. But I think it's important to recognize all the pieces that put him where he is today, not just the bad side.

You want to change hearts and minds you have to work with the full picture. Just shouting he's the most unfit ever doesn't do that.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.27  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.25    one month ago
Of course. You have nothing of substance to offer

Just not worth my time to argue and listen to rambling on and on and on about "Orange Man Bad" bullshit which I can read any day of the week here.

Take that and imagine whatever you wish, it matters not to me.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.28  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.23    one month ago
Yes, I will always support people's right to vote as they see fit. 

You have no choice but to let other's vote as they see fit.   The only choice you have is how you vote and you have stated that you are not going to vote for either Trump or Biden.   Since one of those will almost certainly be elected president, you have stated that you are going to let other's decide ... that you are not going to use your vote to help determine which of those two is elected.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.29  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @1.3.26    one month ago

I could fill a very long post here with the reasons Trump should never have been the nominee in 2016, but then again when he seemed to be a "serious" candidate I started reading up on him.  For example, the man who was the ghost writer for Trump's famous "Art Of The Deal" book  , and had spent dozens of hours listening to Trump in interviews to use for the book , said in 2016 that Trump was in his opinion totally unfit to be president of the United States. This was someone, not a "leftist" , who was trying to warn the country what we were getting in for. 

The support for Trump has always been premised on the idea that "only he can do this" , which is absurd. 

Trump got nominated in 2016, not in spite of being the king birther, but because he was the king birther, and thus someone willing to attack , usually baselessly, people that "MAGA" didnt like. Someone else with the same policies as Trump proposed , but not willing to smear and lie about the "other side" , just wouldnt do. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.30  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.29    one month ago
I could fill a very long post here with the reasons Trump should never have been the nominee in 2016, ...

Trying to steal the 2020 election is more than sufficient reason to never vote for Trump.   Those who ignore that will not even read your list.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.31  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.30    one month ago

No doubt, but he has never been fit for office. Some of his fans delusionally believe that he has always been what the country needed. I am 74 years old and I have read and listened to a lot of US history, and there has never been anything like what we have seen in "trumpism" over the past 8 1/2 years and counting. 

I have no doubt the founding fathers would be horrified, as are most professional historians.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.32  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.28    one month ago
You have no choice but to let other's vote as they see fit.

No, I could be like some here and criticize anyone who won't vote as I wish, so I DO have a choice.

The only choice you have is how you vote and you have stated that you are not going to vote for either Trump or Biden.

It is pointless to keep pointing out facts clearly not in dispute--unless you are disputing what is plain?

Let's establish this once and for all.

I will not vote for Biden or Trump ever, PERIOD.

Now there is never a need to bring it up again.

Since one of those will almost certainly be elected president, you have stated that you are going to let other's decide 

Yes, I will let others vote as they wish, without criticizing their choice. As explained earlier, that is called tolerance.

I don't need your approval of it or agreement with it.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.33  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.32    one month ago
so I DO have a choice.

No you do not have any choice over how someone else votes.

Let's establish this once and for all. I will not vote for Biden or Trump ever, PERIOD.

You did not read this?:   "you have stated that you are not going to vote for either Trump or Biden.@1.3.28

You just affirmed what I had just clearly stated ... pretending that I did not state it.   

Yes, I will let others vote as they wish, ... 

You have no choice about how others vote.  

... without criticizing their choice. 

Good grief, do you not even recognize what you write?:  

Texan @1.3.7I always wonder what kind of politicians we would have in office if people voted for someone instead of merely voting against someone.

Texan @1.3.12For some, I guess voting for Traitor Joe is preferable to them than voting for Traitor Trump, eh?

Texan @1.3.15 ☞ Traitor Joe's Presidency is the direct result of too many non-thinking voters more interested in keeping someone out of office rather than supporting someone competent to run the country.   Seems like something a patriot really wouldn't do.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.34  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.33    one month ago

based on what we see here every day , they are all going to vote for trump, and i dont care what they say today. people who actually intended to "never" vote for trump would not spend so much time here defending him and excusing what he does. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.3.35  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.22    one month ago
What is "best for the country" is a "policy" matter.

And the policy we've seen from the current administration isn't the "best for the country".  It may be best for politicians, but not the country.

But fitness for office should not be a "policy" matter.

Now when you are comparing Traitor Joe to the former POTUS, there is only one of them not fit for office.  That would be the current POTUS who gets behind a microphone mumbles something incoherent, looks for people who aren't there, lies to everybody then turns into a Roomba and wanders around aimlessly.

Why didnt Trump voters ever care about his character?  

Because when you look at the character of the opposition and the character of Trump a choice was made.  Now just because YOU don't like it doesn't make the choice made the wrong one.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.36  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.34    one month ago

Yeah, I agree.   

Someone who spends their time on a news forum defending Trump at every turn and attacking Biden at every turn is logically likely to vote for Trump if it comes down to Biden v Trump.   

One who is likely to not vote for either would be at least as critical of Trump (given what he has done) as they are of Biden.

Those, especially, who refuse to acknowledge reality such as the fact that Trump is the only PotUS in the history of our nation who attempted to steal a presidential election through fraud, coercion, lying and incitement and, in doing so, violated his oath of office by attempting to circumvent the CotUS and attack the foundation of democracy — the vote of the electorate are likely to vote for Trump.

IMO

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.37  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.33    one month ago
No you do not have any choice over how someone else votes.

I have the freedom to choose to be tolerant or to criticize anyone daring to think differently than I do.

I never stated I had power over how anyone votes.

You did not read this?:   "you have stated that you are not going to vote for either Trump or Biden. "  @1.3.28

I did read it, and my response should have been THE clue that I did. You keep repeating yourself, saying things I have made clear to you on more than one occasion. Unless you are disputing my words, then there is absolutely no point in rehashing things not in dispute.  It just takes up bandwidth for no purpose.

You have no choice about how others vote.

And now you are repeating yourself in the same post!

Good grief, do you not even recognize what you write?:

I know exactly what I write.

Your posts give no indication that you have recognized my points, but I don't really care anymore.

I have rehashed enough tired points today.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.38  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.37    one month ago

I acknowledged your position explicitly to make my point.

Had I not acknowledged your position, you would have complained that you already told me your position.

Yet even when I acknowledge it, you complain that you already told me.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
1.3.39  afrayedknot  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.33    one month ago

“Good grief, do you not even recognize what you write?: “

Just a small sample size is all it takes to reach the conclusion that the subject at hand would rather talk out of both sides of their mouth than acknowledge the hypocrisy that is so obvious…and thusly so easily dismissed.

Thanks for continually calling it out. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.40  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.36    one month ago
Now when you are comparing Traitor Joe to the former POTUS, there is only one of them not fit for office. 

exhibit A

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.41  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.38    one month ago
I acknowledge your position explicitly to make my point.

I know what MY position is, and I neither seek nor need your approval or permission.

I will vote FOR someone is MY POINT.

Had I not acknowledged your position, you would have complained that you already told me your position.

Speculation and projection.

Yet even when I acknowledge it, you complain that you already told me.

[Deleted]

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Participates
1.3.42  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.29    one month ago

John - you "could" fill out????

No John, you DO fill out your reasons - over and over and over again.

Your point has been made abundantly clear - you don't like Trump - period - and we all know it.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.43  JohnRussell  replied to  1stwarrior @1.3.42    one month ago

and you like him. that is your problem, not mine. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.44  Texan1211  replied to  afrayedknot @1.3.39    one month ago

Balderdash!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.45  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @1.3.4    one month ago
That would be up to each individual voter to determine for themselves.

Everyone here isn't that tolerant.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.3.46  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.43    one month ago

Actually it seems more your problem that he doesn't think it is a problem at all.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.47  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @1.3.46    one month ago

Exactly.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
1.3.48  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  1stwarrior @1.3.42    one month ago

Bingo!

 
 
 
goose is back
Sophomore Silent
1.3.49  goose is back  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.8    one month ago
NOT voting for a traitor; the only PotUS in the history of our nation who attempted to steal a presidential election through fraud

You might as well stop posting that, no one is listening to you.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.50  JohnRussell  replied to  goose is back @1.3.49    one month ago

_v=63f541705258373

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.51  TᵢG  replied to  goose is back @1.3.49    one month ago

I do not post this in an attempt to influence the unreasonable.

I post it to illustrate the irrational, irresponsible and unpatriotic thinking of those who would vote for Trump.

So, gird your loins, it will continue.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.52  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.50    one month ago

Exactly!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.53  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.50    one month ago

The epitome of the save democracy crowd.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3.54  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.51    one month ago
it will continue.

The great thing about the internet is that people get to bash Trump 24/7 without having to worry about people coming at them carrying straightjackets.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.55  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.54    one month ago

There would be far less Trump bashing if people did not promote and defend him.   Or if his outrageous behavior and abysmal character was not ignored.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.3.56  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.55    one month ago

Kind of like wack a mole?

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
1.3.57  afrayedknot  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.55    one month ago

“Or if his outrageous behavior and abysmal character was not ignored.”

This aberration cannot be put away into the dustbin of history soon enough. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.58  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.55    one month ago

many people have been falsely accused of defending Trump.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.3.59  Right Down the Center  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.45    one month ago

My guess is that is because they believe they are right and there is no other position possible unless the person is somehow damaged.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.60  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @1.3.59    one month ago

My guess is that partisan blinders take away common sense and reason with all things Trump.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.61  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.51    one month ago
So, gird your loins, it will continue.

Of course it will, people will be attacking Trump every day between now and November, and justifiably so. His candidacy is an abomination. 

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.3.62  Right Down the Center  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.51    one month ago
I post it to illustrate the irrational, irresponsible and unpatriotic thinking of those who would vote for Trump.

Thanks for the clarification, I would not have come to that conclusion at all.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.63  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.61    one month ago
Of course it will, people will be attacking Trump every day between now and November, and justifiably so. His candidacy is an abomination

Ah, so an endless loop replay of the last 7 years.

Yippee!

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.3.64  Right Down the Center  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.55    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.65  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @1.3.64    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.3.66  Right Down the Center  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.58    one month ago

It is a shitload of people when you play fast and loose with the definition of defend.  Almost seems some folks feel if they throw an accusation out there (any accusation will do) you will either cave or at least be put on the defensive for awhile.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.3.67  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.61    one month ago
Of course it will, people will be attacking Trump every day between now and November, and justifiably so.

Goes good with my toast and eggs for breakfast but I hardly think it will end in November.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.3.68  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Right Down the Center @1.3.67    one month ago
Goes good with my toast and eggs for breakfast but I hardly think it will end in November.

With my disposition, I like them sunny side up, others here like them scrambled.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.69  JohnRussell  replied to  Right Down the Center @1.3.66    one month ago
It is a shitload of people when you play fast and loose with the definition of defend.  Almost seems some folks feel if they throw an accusation out there (any accusation will do) you will either cave or at least be put on the defensive for awhile.

There is a "shitload" of evidence against Trump.  Trumpsters denying that fact don't cut no mustard. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.70  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @1.3.66    one month ago
It is a shitload of people when you play fast and loose with the definition of defend.  Almost seems some folks feel if they throw an accusation out there (any accusation will do) you will either cave or at least be put on the defensive for awhile.

That post will be considered a defense of Trump in some way.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.3.71  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.69    one month ago
Trumpsters denying that fact don't cut no mustard. 

Why would they want to cut mustard?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.3.72  Right Down the Center  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.70    one month ago
That post will be considered a defense of Trump in some way.

Probably.  Want to know how much I care?

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
1.3.73  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.23    one month ago

"It's called tolerance, btw."

Something certain members on NT lack in significant amounts.

P.S. My comment in no way applies to TiG.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.74  JohnRussell  replied to  Right Down the Center @1.3.71    one month ago

anything to avoid the facts

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.3.75  Right Down the Center  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.74    one month ago

Opinions are not facts.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.3.76  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.69    one month ago
Trumpsters denying that fact don't cut no mustard. 

I don’t understand, I enjoy many different mustards but don’t cut any, I spread them.  What kind of mustard are you using?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.3.77  Right Down the Center  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.3.76    one month ago

256

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.3.78  CB  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.5    one month ago

The "lesser evil" mantra is a justification/propaganda tool used by MAGAs who want to run this country in order to force liberals and secularists into mental oppression indefinitely.

The agenda is to take over government (by defaming It as nonfunctioning for the people on a daily basis) and once the nation buys into the forced-fed propaganda that "only" republicans can fix what is wrong with government-to resume running our country as it was before liberals and progressives made big sweeping changes which better address the needs of everybody in the country. The aforementioned is the single-minded ideology that is at work in the GOP-MAGA party. And yes, that leads to MAGAs becoming a delusional bunch of people/voters. 

It reminds me of a past period in the U.S. when White Southerners and the nation-at-large deluded themselves/itself into thinking that Blacks and Others—especially blacks were beasts, savages, unintelligent, of low-intelligence, and. . .get this one: able to tolerate more pain that White Anglo-Saxons. It was delusional back then:It will be delusional if/when such or a similar ideology among MAGAs returns.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.3.79  CB  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.21    one month ago

The hard-cold fact is since the Tea-partiers, now MAGAs are continuing to own and copyright the word, "Patriot" to mean someone who is dedicated to the idea of the United States, but not dedicated to its, all its, people.

Last evening I watched, "Mississippi Burning" (1998) and it was striking that White Southerner Klansmen actually deluded (that word again) themselves into believing the South belongs to its states and. . .states rights for which they (klans men and women) needed to protect this country from Blacks and Others, signifying their "Patriotism."  TiG, actually Southern Whites-at-Large of the 60's believed this and it was their justification for obstructing, blocking, 'handicapping,' and regularly and with deliberation, murdering marginalized peoples in  this country. Today, MAGAs see themselves protecting the country from liberals and secularists and the presence of "Mongrels" in the democratic Party.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
1.3.80  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.22    one month ago

"Why didn't Trump voters ever care about his character?"

The same can most certainly be asked about Biden voters. Personally I don't think either one has much of any character, if at all. I do not like either one but I like Biden a lot less.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.3.81  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.69    one month ago
Trumpsters denying that fact don't cut no mustard.

Double negative. So they do cut the mustard then in your opinion. Kudos on your insight.

 
 
 
goose is back
Sophomore Silent
1.3.82  goose is back  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.51    one month ago
I post it to illustrate the irrational, irresponsible and unpatriotic thinking 

Then why don't you post how the Democrats and MSM lied to all Americans about Russian collusion or why they lied about Hunter's laptop being Russian disinformation or how a Covid Vaccine isn't really a vaccine because you can contract the virus and you can spread the virus after receiving it.  

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Participates
1.3.83  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.43    one month ago

He is not in my head 24/7/365 as he is in yours.  I can breath and exhale without saying "Trump" all day long - you can't.

So it's your problem.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Participates
1.3.84  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.69    one month ago

Yeah - right - all that "shitload" of evidence and NOT A SINGLE DAMN CONVICTION.

What's that say?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.86  Texan1211  replied to  goose is back @1.3.82    one month ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.87  TᵢG  replied to  goose is back @1.3.82    one month ago
Then why don't you post ...

None of us post about everything that happens.    You seem to conveniently forget that I also did not dwell on policy related factors while Trump was PotUS.   Seems to me your position is based primarily on presumption rather than fact.

Further, not all of us buy into the bullshit that you seem to think is fact.   For example, the COVID vaccine is indeed a vaccine.   The fact that some can still contract the virus and spread it does not mean it is not a vaccine.   Vaccines are not 100% effective; never have been, likely never will be.   Vaccines work by strengthening the immune system.   Since each human being has a unique immune system, the efficacy of a vaccine will vary.   Further, individuals are exposed to different concentrations of a virus.   They have different levels of health (which affects the immune system).   On and on.   The fact that you expect ANY vaccine to be 100% effective shows that you do not understand vaccines.

Instead of engaging in feeble gotcha attempts, do some research and get informed.   That way you will not be shown to be wrong and then attempt to "get revenge" with more feeble gotcha attempts.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.88  JohnRussell  replied to  1stwarrior @1.3.83    one month ago

We are not going let the traitor Trump back in power. Like it or lump it. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.3.90  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.87    one month ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.91  TᵢG  replied to  1stwarrior @1.3.84    one month ago
What's that say?

That one must wait for a trial to complete before expecting a conviction.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.92  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.91    one month ago
That one must wait for a trial to complete before expecting a conviction.

Wow, one might not ever know that from reading the posts here!

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.93  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.92    one month ago

If someone states that Trump has been found guilty of a crime prior to a verdict then they are wrong.

People can opine about whether they think Trump engaged in some wrongdoing.   And when they do so, if you think they are being unfair then challenge them to deliver evidence and supporting reasoning.   Engage in thoughtful debate.

Bottom line:  criminal guilt is determined by a court of law; in contrast, claims of wrongdoing require no trial but do bear the burden of proof.

For example, Trump is the only PotUS in the history of our nation who attempted to steal a presidential election through fraud, coercion, lying and incitement and, in doing so, violated his oath of office by attempting to circumvent the CotUS and attack the foundation of democracy — the vote of the electorate.

The above is not stating as a fact that Trump is guilty of a crime.   It is a claim of wrongdoing.   And that claim has been and can easily be backed up with evidence and reason.   There is, in this case, overwhelming evidence in the public domain.

The above does, however, correlate with 91 felony counts raised against Trump.   When the respective trials conclude, then and only then can we speak factually about whether Trump was found guilty of a crime.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1.3.94  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.88    one month ago
We are not going let the traitor Trump back in power.

Well "we" may not have a choice depending on the results of the election........unless you have nefarious intentions.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.95  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.93    one month ago
If someone states that Trump has been found guilty of a crime prior to a verdict then they are wrong.

You got my point, good!

The amount of 'wrong' posts on here would fill VOLUMES then.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.96  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.95    one month ago

You need to read these volumes of posts objectively.   If the author does not state that Trump was found guilty then they are stating an opinion, not a fact.

And on the opinion, if you disagree then challenge them.   Engage in thoughtful debate rather than complain in general after the fact.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.97  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.96    one month ago
You need to read these volumes of posts objectively.

You seem big on telling me what I should do. 

Thanks for the special attention!

If the author does not state that Trump was found guilty then they are stating an opinion, not a fact.

I know what I read, and will NOT quibble over words with you.

Engage in thoughtful debate rather than complain in general after the fact.

Wow, more unsolicited advice!

Unsolicited Advice: Definition, Types, and Ways to Respond (verywellmind.com)

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
1.3.98  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  1stwarrior @1.3.84    one month ago

Kangaroo court of public opinion means more than the real thing to some and it is so much easier.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.99  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.97    one month ago

Do you have volumes of comments where people have claimed that Trump has been found guilty of a crime?

I doubt it, since I have not seen these volumes of posts.   Thus, I suspect you are not reading objectively.

Since your response is to merely complain that I made suggestions rather than give evidence of these volumes of posts, you simply reinforce my hypothesis.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.100  TᵢG  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.3.98    one month ago

Opinion is what people do on a news/discussion site like this.   One person opines and if someone disagrees they challenge the opinion.   If two adults are engaged, then they will have a thoughtful debate.   Unfortunately, what normally happens in response to a challenge is deflection, snark, lying, strawman arguments, etc.

This is not a court of law so clearly we cannot deal with criminal guilt here.   We necessarily are within the realm of opinion.   But that opinion does bear the burden of proof which means calling for evidence and reason to justify the opinion is entirely fair game.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.101  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.99    one month ago
Do you have volumes of comments where people have claimed that Trump has been found guilty of a crime?

I just got through telling you I wasn't going to quibble over words.

I doubt it, since I have not seen these volumes of posts.   Thus, I suspect you are not reading objectively.

Whatever you doubt and suspect is your problem, not mine. I read the posts here, I know what I read.

Since your response is to merely complain that I made suggestions rather than give evidence of these volumes of posts, you simply reinforce my hypothesis

Unsolicited advice is still unsolicited.

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Quiet
1.3.102  Jasper2529  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.3.98    one month ago
Kangaroo court of public opinion means more than the real thing to some and it is so much easier.

We've seen these media and social media "kangaroo courts" for over a decade - the cases of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Nick Sandmann, Kyle Rittenhouse, and now on the line is Daniel Penny - just to name a few.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.103  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.100    one month ago

I remember a couple years ago, when the boiler plate defense of Trump was that he had never been indicted. Now after the indictments it has shifted to "he has never been convicted". Soon it will be " the cases are still being appealed". 

What none of these defenses addresses is simple right and wrong. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.104  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.103    one month ago
What none of these defenses addresses is simple right and wrong. 

Correct.   The typical response deflects.   But when a rebuttal is made, it is frequently along the lines you suggest.   Trump supporters ignore wrongdoing and pretend that the only way Trump has done anything wrong is if the judicial process is involved.

And then, as you suggest, the Trump supporters will just kick the can.

  1. Where is the indictment?
  2. Innocent until proven guilty!!
  3. Bogus trial is being appealed!
  4. And finally it will be:  the judicial system has been rigged by Joe Biden.

Confirmation bias.

Of course some have already skipped all of this and have categorically deemed all indictments to be bogus.   So they have proclaimed ahead of time exactly what they will claim if Trump is convicted.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.106  TᵢG  replied to  goose is back @1.3.105    one month ago

I think you need to first make a point.   

If your point is still that the COVID vaccine is not 100% effective then I will again tell you that an expectation of 100% for any vaccine is ridiculous and naïve.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
1.3.107  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.88    one month ago

Just who is this "We" that you speak of? Do you presume to speak for the entire voting population in this country? Not everybody shares your political ideology. Deal with it.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.108  TᵢG  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.3.107    one month ago

You are correct that not everyone agrees with JR's political ideology.

But you agree with him that Trump should never be PotUS ... or have I misunderstood your collective posts?    My understanding is that you will never vote for Trump — for cause.   Same here.   Have I missed something?

 
 
 
goose is back
Sophomore Silent
1.3.109  goose is back  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.106    one month ago
COVID vaccine is 100%

Never made the claim or would I. The so-called vaccine cost people their jobs and may have done more harm than good. Our own government may have had a hand in creating it by providing funding.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.110  JohnRussell  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.3.107    one month ago
"We" that you speak of?

"We" are all the people who will make sure Trump never becomes president again because he is a traitor. That includes Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, neither of which I think I have much in common with on policy. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.111  TᵢG  replied to  goose is back @1.3.109    one month ago

Then what, specifically, are you trying to claim?

You label it a "so-called vaccine" as if it was not actually a vaccine.   You claim the vaccine may have done more harm than good yet offer nothing in support of that claim.    And the vaccine did not cost anyone their jobs.   That comes from employers requiring vaccination to help protect their workforce (and customers).   The vaccine is a biological tool, not policy.

You sure as hell seem to be claiming that the COVID vaccine is not really a vaccine.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.112  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.110    one month ago

I am then part of the "we" because I will do my part to help stop a Trump presidency.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
1.3.113  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.108    one month ago

No you have not missed anything. I agree that Trump in no way deserves a second term in office, for cause. That being said, and as I have said previously, neither does Biden. Big difference with me and some others here is that I respect others rights to their beliefs whether I agree with them or not while others are incapable of reciprocating in kind.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.3.114  JohnRussell  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1.3.113    one month ago
Big difference with me and some others here is that I respect others rights to their beliefs

People have a right to their belief, and me and others have the right to not respect that belief. 

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
1.3.115  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.114    one month ago

Did I claim otherwise? Either way, thank you for proving my point. Have a good evening.

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Expert
1.3.116  Krishna  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.58    one month ago
many people have been falsely accused of defending Trump.

OMG-- that's terrible! jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Expert
1.3.117  Krishna  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.3.68    one month ago
With my disposition, I like them sunny side up, others here like them scrambled.

Do you walk to school . . .or carry your lunch?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.118  Texan1211  replied to  Krishna @1.3.116    one month ago

It is indeed terrible when people think a lie is a cogent argument.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
1.3.119  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.114    one month ago

Having beliefs ,political religious or personal is much like a penis, a fine thing to have if one does,but others may not want another's beliefs waved or shoved in their face.

And one has the right to disregard another's beliefs as they wish and see fit.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.3.120  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Krishna @1.3.117    one month ago

I slug to work.

 
 
 
goose is back
Sophomore Silent
1.3.121  goose is back  replied to  TᵢG @1.3.111    one month ago
 You claim the vaccine may have done more harm than good yet offer nothing in support of that claim. 

I will provide this to you again

: Innate immune suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes, and MicroRNAs - PMC (nih.gov)

From the paper: Over the 31-year history of VAERS, up to February 3, 2022, there were a total of 10,321 deaths reported as a “symptom” in association with any vaccine, and 8,241 (80%) of those deaths were linked to COVID-19 vaccines. Importantly, only 14% of COVID-19 VAERS-reported deaths as of June 2021 could have vaccination ruled out as a cause ( McLachlan et al., 2021 ). This strongly suggests that these unprecedented vaccines exhibit unusual mechanisms of toxicity that go well beyond what is seen with more traditional vaccines.

The total number of adverse event reports for COVID-19 injections is far greater than the cumulative number of annual vaccine adverse event reports combined in all prior years, as shown by  Rose (2021)

There has been an unwavering message about the safety and efficacy of mRNA vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 from the public health apparatus in the US and around the globe. The efficacy is increasingly in doubt, as shown in a recent letter to the Lancet Regional Health by Günter  Kampf (2021b) . Kampf provided data showing that the vaccinated are now as likely as the unvaccinated to spread disease. He concluded: “It appears to be grossly negligent to ignore the vaccinated population as a possible and relevant source of transmission when deciding about public health control measures.” Moreover, the inadequacy of phase I, II, and III trials to evaluate mid-term and long-term side effects from mRNA genetic vaccines may have been misleading on their suppressive impact on the innate immunity of the vaccinees.

In this paper, we call attention to three very important aspects of the safety profile of these vaccinations. First is the extensively documented subversion of innate immunity, primarily via suppression of IFN-α and its associated signaling cascade. This suppression will have a wide range of consequences, not the least of which include the reactivation of latent viral infections and the reduced ability to effectively combat future infections. Second is the dysregulation of the system for both preventing and detecting genetically driven malignant transformation within cells and the consequent potential for vaccination to promote those transformations. Third, mRNA vaccination potentially disrupts intracellular communication carried out by exosomes, and induces cells taking up spike glycoprotein mRNA to produce high levels of spike-glycoprotein-carrying exosomes, with potentially serious inflammatory consequences. Should any of these potentials be fully realized, the impact on billions of people around the world could be enormous and could contribute to both the short-term and long-term disease burden our health care system faces.

n the end, billions of lives are potentially at risk, given the large number of individuals injected with the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines and the broad range of adverse outcomes we have described. We call on the public health institutions to demonstrate, with evidence, why the issues discussed in this paper are not relevant to public health, or to acknowledge that they are and to act accordingly. Furthermore, we encourage all individuals to make their own health care decisions with this information as a contributing factor in those decisions.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.3.122  TᵢG  replied to  goose is back @1.3.121    one month ago

And I can deliver more recent papers to the contrary from the same site.   Such as this:

Fortunately, after global vaccination, the transmission rate, disease severity, and mortality rate of COVID-19 infection have diminished significantly

The purpose of the vaccine was to mitigate the pandemic.  It was to prevent its rapid infection of humanity.   This was accomplished.

There will always be opinions that seek to criticize.  That is the nature of science (and this adversarial dynamic is good).   And no vaccine is perfect so it is rather easy to produce criticism.    

But you claimed that the vaccine may have done more harm than good .   Seems to me you ignore the fact that the pandemic was halted and reversed and want to just criticize the imperfect tools that were used to accomplish that feat.

COVID-19 killed over 3.4 million people.   Controlling the pandemic is the good that was achieved.   Where is the greater harm that surpasses that good?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.3.123  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.3.54    one month ago

It's the former 'president' and his supporters/enablers in need of straitjackets.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.3.124  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Krishna @1.3.117    one month ago

I slug to work and carry my lunch sometimes.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
1.3.125  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JohnRussell @1.3.31    one month ago

"I have no doubt the founding fathers would be horrified,...".

A lot of people think they would feel the same about Joe Biden.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
1.4  Right Down the Center  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 months ago

They might have to make a new one for 2024.

256

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.5  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 months ago

I saw the breakdown on Fox.

Something like 2% of all eligible Republican voters

showed up to vote and Trump got less than half of those votes.

That is some weak tea...

 
 
 
Gsquared
Senior Expert
1.5.1  Gsquared  replied to  Split Personality @1.5    2 months ago

Only about 110,000 out of 752,000 Iowa Republicans showed up for their caucuses last night, and Trump only got 51% of them to support him.  A historic low turnout and a very poor showing all the way around.

Meanwhile, in an Orlando, Florida special congressional election yesterday, in Trump/DeSantis territory, the Democratic candidate flipped a republican House seat continuing a trend of Democratic candidates over-performing around the country for the last 18 months since the Dobbs decision.

While the republican party degrades into a white Christian evangelical reactionary personality cult, the Democrats keep winning.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.5.2  Kavika   replied to  Gsquared @1.5.1    2 months ago
While the republican party degrades into a white Christian evangelical reactionary personality cult, the Democrats keep winning.

I think that this is beyond a cult, it is like a super cult, Rev. Moon, Jim Jones type of cult.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Senior Expert
1.5.3  Gsquared  replied to  Kavika @1.5.2    2 months ago

The cult leader is certainly encouraging that.

"You can't sit home... If you're sick as a dog... Even if you vote and then pass away, it's worth it."
 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.5.4  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @1.5    one month ago

Did you know that federal employees who hate Israel were supposed to stage an illegal walkout in less severe weather conditions and called it off?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.5.5  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Gsquared @1.5.1    one month ago

Leaving out the anti-Christian rhetoric, it is true that democrats keep winning despite all the polling and conventional wisdom going against them. I'm sure they'll find a way again.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.5.6  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Gsquared @1.5.3    one month ago

Democrats don't have such a choice. They can sit at home and still vote. As a matter of fact, as many admitted in the recent Heartland/Rasmussen Poll, they can even sit home and vote for others.

Heartland/Rasmussen Poll: One-in-Five Mail-In Voters Admit to Committing at Least One Kind of Voter Fraud During 2020 Election (yahoo.com)

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
1.5.7  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.5.4    one month ago

Guess their cause didn't mean as much to them as they want people to think.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.5.8  JohnRussell  replied to  Gsquared @1.5.1    one month ago
Only about 110,000 out of 752,000 Iowa Republicans showed up for their caucuses last night, and Trump only got 51% of them to support him. 

I dont really buy the idea that the Iowa results dont mean much. After all, we regularly hear about polls that are based on far less than the 110,000 people that voted in Iowa. What Mondays vote means is that evangelical Christians and extreme MAGA are all in for Trump and that will be enough to get him the nomination. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.5.9  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.5.4    one month ago

I'm afraid I do not see your point.

A, people are free to hate whomever they want in this country.

B, both Blinken and Johnson said they would be disciplined if not fired.

C, nothing I read indicated that the weather was a factor.

but, whatever...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.5.10  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @1.5.9    one month ago
I'm afraid I do not see your point.

I know it.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.5.11  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.5.6    one month ago
Democrats don't have such a choice. They can sit at home and still vote. As a matter of fact, as many admitted in the recent Heartland/Rasmussen Poll, they can even sit home and vote for others. They can sit at home and still vote. As a matter of fact, as many admitted in the recent Heartland/Rasmussen Poll, they can even sit home and vote for others.

Did you even read the link?  It wasn't just Democrats.

Any state that allows mail in voting, makes it available to all.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.5.12  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.5.10    one month ago
I know it.

I doubt it. You and others here continuously conflate criticism of Israel's "military

polices" with antisemitism, and try to shame those who disagree with that label,

despite the fact that technically 90% of the people in the Middle East,

regardless of religion are Semites. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.5.13  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @1.5.11    one month ago

Who changed the voting rules in 2020?

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.5.14  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Split Personality @1.5.12    one month ago

An outdated term, Semitic-speaking peoples do not share any traits aside from language traits.

In modern usage, anti-Semitism is used to describe hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious or ethnic group.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.5.15  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @1.5.12    one month ago

Do you care to expand of the "criticism of Israeli's military?"

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.5.16  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.5.13    one month ago

The "voting rules" were changed because of the pandemic. Mail in voting became a widespread thing BECAUSE of the pandemic. It just turned out that more Democrats than Republicans cared about the guidance and instructions from the medical community, where many Republicans didnt like to even socially distance. When the election took place, there were NO vaccines, they were not initially approved until a month after the election. 

Keep drinking that kool aid though. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.5.17  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.5.16    one month ago
The "voting rules" were changed because of the pandemic.

No, they got changed because a democrat lawyer went around state legislatures to change them. The pandemic was the excuse, but clearly those rule changes stayed in effect after the pandemic was gone. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.5.18  Split Personality  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.5.14    one month ago

Is Anti Zionism outdated also?

In modern usage, anti-Semitism is used to describe hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious or ethnic group.

Modern usage being since the late 60s?

Or are we just playing games with semantics/s

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.5.19  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.5.17    one month ago
The pandemic was the excuse, but clearly those rule changes stayed in effect after the pandemic was gone. 

Why wouldn't they?  We had mail in and drive through voting in Texas and Trump still won.

What's the panic?  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.5.20  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @1.5.19    one month ago
What's the panic?

It is in the same link that you asked if I read. The conclusion cited there was that there was probably widespread fraud in the 2020 election. 

Long ago Jimmy Carter was part of a study that warned about mail-in-voting being wide open to fraud.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.5.21  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Split Personality @1.5.18    one month ago
Is Anti Zionism outdated also?

I don’t think so.  

Modern usage being since the late 60’s?

It’s a 19th century that is so broad it would be like using the term English speaking to cover Jamaicans, Canadians, Americans, English, Irish etc.

Or are we just playing games with semantics?


I can play either way.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.5.22  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.5.20    one month ago
The conclusion cited there was that there was probably widespread fraud in the 2020 election. 

Do you believe that Biden did not legitimately win the 2020 election?

If so I would ask for your persuasive evidence, but I know that you have nothing.   Nobody has such evidence.   The reason is because their beliefs are simply incorrect.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.5.23  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Split Personality @1.5    one month ago

Exactly, and the Iowa Dems didn’t show up at all, their Party wasn’t interested in what their white crackers thought.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.5.24  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.5.17    one month ago

Vic, THERE WAS NO VACCINE prior to election day.  You may have wanted everyone to put their health at risk by going in person to the polls, but cooler heads prevailed. 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
1.5.25  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JohnRussell @1.5.24    one month ago

I was immune system compromised in Nov 2020 and voted by mail for the first time.  VA seemed to have a good system.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.5.26  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.5.20    one month ago
The conclusion cited there was that there was probably widespread fraud in the 2020 election

Only if you conclude that Democrat, Republican and Independent spouses filling out or helping each other navigate some onerous BS to correctly get a valid mail-in vote counted violates the letter of the law and constitutes fraud.

There are about 9 different ways a Texas mail in ballot can be voided by not following the instructions.  

It went from being easy to now being such a PITA that it's easier to go in person.

The legislature here even made it illegal to drop the finished mail-in ballot off at the County Board of Elections, they must be mailed in.  They can help you fill out the required fields and see that it is sealed correctly but they aren't allowed to accept them.

And they removed their drop boxes and external mail box.

All in the interest of increasing participation, /S

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Quiet
1.5.27  Jasper2529  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.5.5    one month ago
I'm sure they'll find a way again.

There's a new strain of Covid-19 manufactured in a Chinese lab that's proven to be 100% fatal in mice. Wait for pandemic 2.0 coming soon to a place near you, replete with lockdowns, masks, "vaccines", and often unsecured but mandatory vote-by-mail like 2020.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Quiet
1.5.28  Jasper2529  replied to  JohnRussell @1.5.16    one month ago
Mail in voting became a widespread thing BECAUSE of the pandemic.

Don't twist history. It was mandatory mail-in or drop-off voting in 2020, not just what our military and college students have done for decades.

 It just turned out that more Democrats than Republicans cared about the guidance and instructions from the medical community, where many Republicans didnt like to even socially distance.

Really??? Even in late 2020 and throughout 2021-2023, medical experts stated that masks (even N-95), lock-downs, and 6 feet social distancing were useless and ineffective due to how the virus spreads and/or can be contracted.

And now, FINALLY, in 2024, Fauci has been forced to admit that he based his Covid junk science on the 1918 FLU epidemic, aka "Spanish Flu".

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Expert
1.5.29  Krishna  replied to  Gsquared @1.5.1    one month ago
Meanwhile, in an Orlando, Florida special congressional election yesterday, in Trump/DeSantis territory, the Democratic candidate flipped a republican House

Most of the discussion re: DeSanctimonious has been about his chances to win the Republican nomination for President. But now that that's over, I wonder if his popularity in Florida has increased? Or decreased? Will more Respublican candidates in Florida seek his endorsement now-- or avoid it?

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
1.5.30  Split Personality  replied to  Jasper2529 @1.5.28    one month ago
Don't twist history. It was mandatory mail-in or drop-off voting in 2020,

Maybe where you live, but 17% of Texas voters voted in person in 2020, while Abott went to court time after time to limit drive through voting and how many ballot drop off boxes there could be, eventually curtailing the number of boxes to one per county at the County Elections office. The traffic jambs that created were ridiculous.

So, no, it wasn't mandatory.

It is only mandatory in Hawaii and Utah.

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Expert
1.5.31  Krishna  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.5.4    one month ago

Did you know that federal employees who hate Israel were supposed to stage an illegal walkout in less severe weather conditions and called it off?

Why did they call it off?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.5.32  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Krishna @1.5.31    one month ago

Evidently, they don't like winter weather.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2  Ronin2    2 months ago

Looks like Trump vs Brandon part two.

What a country we live in./S

The admitted shyster/con artist with insider information on how the system works. That the Establishment (Democrats and a few TDS Republicans) want to get rid of by any means necessary. VS the senile demented traitor hoping to stay in office to protect himself and his family from criminal prosecution and bilk millions more from China, Ukraine, and others at the expense of US taxpayers.

Make sure to break out the hip waders and buy spares- the amount of BS that both sides are going to spew is going to flood the country- and turn the snow and ice dark brown.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
2.1  MrFrost  replied to  Ronin2 @2    2 months ago
Looks like Trump vs Brandon part two.

And Brandon beat the shit out of Drumpf last time. 

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.1.1  Ronin2  replied to  MrFrost @2.1    2 months ago

Brandon didn't have a record last time.

Some people have paid attention to his administration's multitude of failures.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
2.1.2  Greg Jones  replied to  MrFrost @2.1    2 months ago

He presented as a moderate Democrat and promised to work with the Republicans for the greater good.

But that didn't happen and now he has the lowest approval ratings in history at this point in his term.

Biden is toast.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
2.1.3  Snuffy  replied to  Greg Jones @2.1.2    2 months ago

And Manchin has said he wants to sit down with Biden and convince him to go back to a moderate?  I mean WTF? Biden's record vs his talk in the last election just won't be believed by most people.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.4  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @2.1.2    2 months ago
He presented as a moderate Democrat and promised to work with the Republicans for the greater good.

LOL. Most Republicans dont believe he won the election and have pledged fealty to an insane cult leader.  What is there to "work with" ? 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.5  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.4    2 months ago

Anything but Trump policies.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.1.6  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.4    one month ago

Most Democrats/Leftists believe the 2016 election was still stolen from Hillary; and have spent the last 8 years and counting trying to get Trump by any means necessary. 

With criminals like that what is there to work with?

 
 
 
A. Macarthur
Professor Guide
2.1.7  A. Macarthur  replied to  Ronin2 @2.1.1    one month ago

I challenge you to SPECIFICALLY LIST THOSE so-called “failures” with the details and your sources. Anyone can make a pronouncement; back it up with specifics.

For the record, Trump received 14% of the number of registered voters in Iowa! 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.8  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.4    one month ago
Most Republicans dont believe he won the election

I guess democrats shouldn't have changed voting rules and censored real news stories. Maybe people wouldn't be so suspicious.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2.1.9  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.8    one month ago

Even the guy who supposedly helped Trump win says so.................

Russian President Vladimir Putin, running for a new six-year term in an election that his opponents say is a parody of democracy, said on Tuesday that past U.S. elections had been rigged by postal voting.
"In the United States, previous elections were falsified through postal voting ... they bought ballots for $10, filled them out, and threw them into mailboxes without any supervision from observers, and that's it," Putin said, without providing evidence.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.10  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.9    one month ago

He has a point!

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.1.11  TᵢG  replied to  Ronin2 @2.1.6    one month ago
Most Democrats/Leftists believe the 2016 election was still stolen from Hillary

Such bullshit.   I have yet to see any evidence that anything more than a fringe of lunatics think the 2016 election was fraudulent — that the will of the electorate was violated — that Hillary actually won the electoral majority.

Some Hillary supporters blame dirty tricks like Comey's October surprise, but that is not "stealing" an election.

Trump, in contrast, did indeed attempt to steal the 2020 election.   Overwhelming evidence, indictments, and a likely outcome of a guilty verdict.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.12  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.11    one month ago

The Democratic National Committees computer system was hacked, by Russians, in the spring of 2016. 

What did Trump say?  He liked it and wanted more of the same. Social media posts throughout the campaign attacking Clinton and the Democrats  were found to found to have originated from Russia. Trumps good friend Roger Stone was trying to co-ordinate wiki leaks release of emails that Russia had stole from Clinton associates with the timetables of the Trump campaign. 

And yet, as you say, only a fringe number of people and a few congresspeople ever said the election had been "stolen". 

That is not even a pimple on the ass of the project Trump and MAGA have been perpetrating for the past 3 years and counting. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.13  Texan1211  replied to  MrFrost @2.1    one month ago
Drumpf

No one with that name was on the ballot.

Read more.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.14  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.13    one month ago

Neither is Brandon. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.15  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.14    one month ago
Neither is Brandon.

Thank you for that already-known fact.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.1.16  Right Down the Center  replied to  MrFrost @2.1    one month ago
And Brandon beat the shit out of Drumpf last time.

By staying in his basement.  He has been out for three years and people know how bad he is for the country

 
 
 
A. Macarthur
Professor Guide
2.1.17  A. Macarthur  replied to  Ronin2 @2.1.1    one month ago

Brandon didn't have a record last time.

Some people have paid attention to his administration's multitude of failures.

I challenged you to specify the so-called failures … but I can't find any indication you've done so. Allowing a pronouncement to stand without challenging its maker to produce specifics leads to misinformation.

So, here's a rebuttal.

For starters:

1. Passed the $ 1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure package to increase investment in the national network of bridges and roads, airports, public transport and national broadband internet, as well as waterways and energy systems. 

2. Helped get more than 500 million life-saving COVID-19 vaccinations in the arms of Americans through the American Rescue Plan. 

3. Stopped a 30-year streak of federal inaction on gun violence by signing the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act that created enhanced background checks, closed the “boyfriend” loophole, and provided funds for youth mental health. 

4. Made a $369 billion investment in climate change, the largest in American history, through the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. 

5. Ended the longest war in American history by pulling the troops out of Afghanistan.

6. Provided $10,000 to $20,000 in college debt relief to Americans with loans who make under $125,000 a year. This was struck down but the Supreme Court, however, the administration has announced a new plan to forgive billions in loans that were qualified under special programs but not done due to DOE mismanagement in previous years. Read the article above) 

7. Cut child poverty in half through the American Rescue Plan. 

8. Capped prescription drug prices at $2,000 per year for seniors on Medicare through the Inflation Reduction Act. 

9. Passed the COVID-19 relief deal that provided payments of up to $1,400 to many struggling U.S. citizens while supporting renters and increasing unemployment benefits. 

10. Achieved historically low unemployment rates after the pandemic caused them to skyrocket. 

11. Imposed a 15% minimum corporate tax on some of the largest corporations in the country, ensuring that they pay their fair share, as part of the historic Inflation Reduction Act.

12. Recommitted America to the global fight against climate change by rejoining the Paris Agreement. 

13. Strengthened the NATO alliance in support of Ukraine after the Russian invasion by endorsing the inclusion of world military powers Sweden and Finland. 

14. Authorized the assassination of the Al Qaeda terrorist Ayman al-Zawahiri, who became head of the organization after the death of Osama bin Laden. 

15. Gave Medicare the power to negotiate prescription drug prices through the Inflation Reduction Act while also reducing government health spending.

16. Held Vladimir Putin accountable for his invasion of Ukraine by imposing stiff economic sanctions. 

17. Boosted the budget of the Internal Revenue Service by nearly $80 billion to reduce tax evasion and increase revenue. 

18. Created more jobs in one year (6.6 million) than any other president in U.S. history. 

19. Reduced healthcare premiums under the Affordable Care Act by $800 a year as part of the American Rescue Plan. 

20. Signed the PACT Act to address service members’ exposure to burn pits and other toxins. 

21. Signed the CHIPS and Science Act to strengthen American manufacturing and innovation. 

22. Reauthorized the Violence Against Women Act through 2027. 

23. Halted all federal executions after the previous administration reinstated them after a 17-year freeze 

original  

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.18  Texan1211  replied to  A. Macarthur @2.1.17    one month ago
I challenged you to specify the so-called failures …

Highest ever non-pandemic deficit

A border that is chaos

Tried to make taxpayers pay off the legal debts of people who took out college loans

100s of thousands of immigrants in the country, many illegally.

Proxy wars

Highest inflation in over 40 years that is still ongoing despite claims of "temporary"

A son and brother who have sold Joe

Yep, Traitor Joe has a record to really run on now.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2.1.19  JBB  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.18    one month ago

original

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.21  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @2.1.19    one month ago

So the meme again.

I don't suppose you have any idea on earth why, in the warm glow of the successes of Bidenomics, why:

People can't pay their own loans

We ran the highest deficit in a non-pandemic year

Blue sanctuary city mayors of Chicago and New York keep crying about money to take care of aliens while Americans sleep in the streets

You might want to let those mayors know that everything's rosy and they should just shut up

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.1.22  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.18    one month ago

Who do you believe will make the better PotUS:   Biden or Trump?    Because it is near certainty that it will be one of those two.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.23  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.22    one month ago
Who do you believe will make the better PotUS:   Biden or Trump?  

Neither will be worth a damn, but I'd take Trump over Biden if he wasn't just plastered all over the news and on here.

I don't know if I could take 4 more years of that crap, although I suspect I will have to no matter who is President.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.1.24  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.23    one month ago
... but I'd take Trump over Biden ...

Explains why your criticism is focused on Biden.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.25  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.24    one month ago
Explains why your criticism is focused on Biden.

As is yours on Trump, for the same reason.

Not surprising to you, is it?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.1.26  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.25    one month ago

My criticism of Trump has been exclusively on his violation of his oath of office and the abysmal character which causes him to be unfit for office:  irresponsible, vindictive, irrational.   It is a very specific criticism and is backed with overwhelming evidence and logic.

My criticism of Biden is based on his age and his policies.

You do not criticize Trump other than a general statement of dislike.   But you go after Biden on most every dishonest, chickenshit, partisan allegation that emerges.   Criticism for cause is one thing (e.g. criticism of his loan forgiveness) but you join in on the purely partisan nonsense.  You even engage in your own nonsense of calling him 'Traitor Joe'.

You engage in slimy partisan, dishonest and nit-picky attacks on Biden yet never do that against Trump.   And there is no denying it ... we all know.

For all of his faults, Biden is an order of magnitude better human being than Trump.    There is no excuse for allowing a demagogue, tyrant, traitor like Trump access to the most powerful office on the planet.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.27  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.26    one month ago

I'm sorry, why did you ask me my opinion if all you want to do is insult me?

Consider that to be rhetorical.

My participation isn't necessary for that.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.1.28  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.27    one month ago

I stated facts that are plain as day.   You join in to criticize Biden on most every dishonest, slimy, partisan attack yet never do likewise with Trump.   There is no denying this.

I, in direct contrast, never join in on the slimy attacks against Trump.   My criticism of Trump is always based on his violation of his oath of office and his abysmal character ... both make him entirely unfit for the presidency.   And both are heavily evidenced.   In addition, I criticize Biden for cause: for age and for policy.    But, as with Trump, I do not engage in the slimy, dishonest attacks on Biden.

My claim that I do not want Biden as PotUS but will vote for him if the choice is him or Trump (given Trump has a realistic chance to win) is very credible, logical, and supported.

Your claim that you are not going to vote for either but would prefer Trump is not credible.

My participation isn't necessary for that.

True, it is not.   Your history of comments is my evidence.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.29  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.28    one month ago
My claim that I do not want Biden as PotUS but will vote for him if the choice is him or Trump (given is very credible, logical, and Trump has a realistic chance to win) supported.

That's great. You should vote for whoever you want to.

Has anyone argued otherwise?

Your claim that you are not going to vote for either but would prefer Trump is not credible.

Whether you find me credible or not has nothing to do with me. That's something for you to work out for yourself.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
2.1.30  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JBB @2.1.19    one month ago
Not reported on Fox.

But reported on where?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.31  Texan1211  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.1.30    one month ago
But reported on where?

MSNDC??

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.32  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.26    one month ago

I honestly dont think this country has ever had to confront anything like the mass delusion among the right that has been occurring for the past three years. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.1.33  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.32    one month ago

I agree.   It is something that I would have never predicted.   The family-values, religious, law-abiding, constitution-loving conservative GOP abandoning all principles to follow a demagogue, constitution-violating, traitorous asshole is a scenario I would have rejected as preposterous.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.1.34  bugsy  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.29    one month ago
Your claim that you are not going to vote for either but would prefer Trump is not credible.

Hilarious to see an anonymous    [removed]   on here calling you not credible as if their words are the words that everyone should follow.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.35  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.32    one month ago

This alleged mass delusion is equal to the delusion Democrats and liberals have been living in for the last seven years.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.36  Texan1211  replied to  bugsy @2.1.34    one month ago

Well, at least it isn't my problem.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.1.37  Right Down the Center  replied to  bugsy @2.1.34    one month ago

That is a tactic that some folks use to somehow get you to prove to them what you say is true and you have credibility.

I think that some people dont realize most people really don't care if someone finds them credible or not.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.1.38  bugsy  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.37    one month ago
people really don't care if someone finds them credible or not

I know I don't.

People's opinion of me or my comments on here by anonymous    [removed]    means nothing. 

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
2.1.39  Right Down the Center  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.36    one month ago

[Deleted

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.40  Texan1211  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.39    one month ago
Chances are people accusing others of not being credible have credibility issues of their own

Possible.

Just glad it isn't my problem.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ronin2 @2    2 months ago
Looks like Trump vs Brandon part two.

And we've seen what both have done in the WH.  One is an utter failure in everything and the other is Trump.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.2.1  CB  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2    2 months ago

Wow. The "Never Satisfied". . . still they ride. How many people in MAGA politics today would have been happy with the first president George Washington's call for unity for the sake of the country. Here we are today, in the thrall of tearing 'it' all down. Trump is no Washington that's for sure.  :)

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
2.2.2  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  CB @2.2.1    2 months ago
How many people in MAGA politics today would have been happy with the first president George Washington's call for unity for the sake of the country

I don’t think anyone living today would be happy living in 1796.

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
2.2.3  GregTx  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.2.2    2 months ago

Lol, no doubt. Could help with that overpopulation problem though....

 
 
 
MonsterMash
Sophomore Quiet
2.2.4  MonsterMash  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.2.2    2 months ago
I don’t think anyone living today would be happy living in 1796.

Not me, I wouldn't want to live in any period of time before indoor bathrooms, taking a dump in an outdoor shack doesn't appeal to me.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
2.2.5  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  MonsterMash @2.2.4    2 months ago

Pretty rough walking out there in the middle of the night in winter, rougher still the alternatives for tp.

 
 
 
shona1
PhD Quiet
2.2.6  shona1  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.2.5    2 months ago

Arvo...tougher still when we had out door dunnies (toilets) and had to contend with red back and huntsmen spiders living in there as well..and the odd snake..😬😬

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
2.2.7  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  shona1 @2.2.6    2 months ago

My wife would choose constipation before facing, it should I say, rearing those spiders.

 
 
 
shona1
PhD Quiet
2.2.8  shona1  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.2.7    2 months ago

Never had a problem with people hogging the dunny in those days. 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
2.2.9  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  shona1 @2.2.8    2 months ago
Never had a problem with people hogging the dunny in those days. 

I imagine not, you built them to strong.  Didn’t dunny come from the Celtic word that dunn meaning a small fort type of structure?

 
 
 
shona1
PhD Quiet
2.2.10  shona1  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.2.9    2 months ago

To be honest not sure where it came from..there are heaps of names for a toilet...we are very creative..

Long drop, thunder box, dunny, loo, throne etc...

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.2.11  CB  replied to  shona1 @2.2.6    2 months ago

Hi Shona, for those who still live in the 'out-back' or "country" as it is often called (here in the U.S.) using Out-houses, I wonder why they just don't buy a subscription to a rodent, spider, and possible snake service? May be have them come out quarterly?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.2.12  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  CB @2.2.1    one month ago
Trump is no Washington that's for sure. 

Where did I make such comparison to President Washington?  I compared President Trump to President Failure.

Please try to keep up if you want to be taken even remotely seriously.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.2.13  CB  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.12    one month ago

The problem for you is this: I don't have to follow your lead in discussion. I can pull in other historic figures as I see fit, where needed, and where it can hopefully do the most good to the topic. Taking me seriously is good, but if you don't want to. . . I will get over it. I have no choice!

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Expert
2.3  Krishna  replied to  Ronin2 @2    one month ago
Looks like Trump vs Brandon part two. What a country we live in./S

Are you forgetting that those two are what the people of each party chose (even though it goes against your preferences?). 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
2.4  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Ronin2 @2    one month ago

I guess if I only had a choice between voting for a buffoon or a robot I would definitely vote third party.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
3  MrFrost    2 months ago
“You can’t sit home,” Trump said. “If you’re sick as a dog, you say ‘Darling, I got to make it.’ Even if you vote and then pass away, it’s worth it.”

"I don't care if you die, vote for me.."

Yea, really sounds like a guy that cares about others. /s

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
3.1  Ronin2  replied to  MrFrost @3    2 months ago

He should have threatened to use the US military against his political opponents while bathed in a blood red light.

Then turned the FBI and DOJ loose against them.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  MrFrost @3    2 months ago
"I don't care if you die, vote for me.."

Do you think John Wayne would have stayed home because it was cold out?

 
 
 
Gsquared
Senior Expert
3.2.1  Gsquared  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.2    2 months ago

Yes, Marion would have stayed home just like he did during World War 2 when non-cowardly, actual patriotic Americans did their duty and saved the world.

Marion was a fake and a racist.  [Deleted]

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.2.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Gsquared @3.2.1    one month ago

He did do one thing that was a big positive. He created a role model character.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.2.3  Tessylo  replied to  Gsquared @3.2.1    one month ago

I also heard that he was gay, not that there's anything wrong with that.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.2.4  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @3.2.3    one month ago
I also heard that he was gay, not that there's anything wrong with that.

Then it adds nothing to bring it up.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.2.5  JohnRussell  replied to  Gsquared @3.2.1    one month ago

I think John Wayne gets a little bit of a bad rap about this. He was 34 years old when ww2 started , and that age was largely exempt . He also had four dependent children. 

America's entry into   World War II   resulted in a deluge of support for the war effort from all sectors of society, and Hollywood was no exception. Wayne was exempted from service due to his age (34 at the time of   Pearl Harbor ) and family status (classified as 3-A – family deferment). Wayne repeatedly wrote to John Ford saying he wanted to enlist, on one occasion inquiring whether he could get into Ford's military unit.   Wayne did not attempt to prevent his reclassification as 1-A (draft eligible), but   Republic Studios   was emphatically resistant to losing him, since he was their only A-list actor under contract.   Herbert J. Yates , president of Republic, threatened Wayne with a lawsuit if he walked away from his contract,   and Republic Pictures intervened in the Selective Service process, requesting Wayne's further deferment. U.S. National Archives records indicate that Wayne, in fact, did make an application   to serve in the   Office of Strategic Services   (OSS), precursor to the modern   CIA , but his bid was ultimately unsuccessful.
John Wayne - Wikiwand
 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.2.6  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @3.2.5    one month ago

I was just joking about John Wayne maybe being gay.  There were never any rumors about that.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.2.7  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @3.2.6    one month ago
I was just joking about John Wayne maybe being gay.

Do you feel gay people are a joke?

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
3.2.8  Snuffy  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.7    one month ago
I was just joking about John Wayne maybe being gay.
Do you feel gay people are a joke?

[Deleted.]

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
4  MrFrost    2 months ago

The election was obviously rigged.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
4.1  Ronin2  replied to  MrFrost @4    2 months ago

You are correct, by the Democrats- who won't let Iowa reveal the results from the Democrat caucus until after South Carolina does their primary.

Don't know why- who is Brandon's Democrat opponent again? Does Brandon even know where Iowa is? He sure as hell didn't campaign there.

Democrats, always accusing someone else what they are guilty of.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.2  Texan1211  replied to  MrFrost @4    2 months ago

Oh do you mean like the Democratic primaries, some of which aren't allowing competition and just awarding Biden????

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
4.2.1  MrFrost  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2    2 months ago

Oh do you mean like the Democratic primaries, some of which aren't allowing competition and just awarding Biden????

Um, I was talking about the GOP... Sorry, thought ya would be able to figure it out. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
4.2.2  Snuffy  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2    2 months ago
Oh do you mean like the Democratic primaries, some of which aren't allowing competition and just awarding Biden????

To be fair, that's a standard practice for both parties when the incumbent president is running for re-election. 

But you do have to "love" the optics, not holding debates and some states not holding primaries all while screaming about democracy being in peril. 

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
4.2.3  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Snuffy @4.2.2    2 months ago

I looked it up for my state last night, seems they ,the gop, instate will be caucusing in April for the presidential nominee, and holding all down ballot seat primaries in August.

What I see them effectively doing , since the caucus is only open to registered party members, is keeping cross over votes from interfering and forcing an unwanted  candidate for the party.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.2.4  Texan1211  replied to  Snuffy @4.2.2    one month ago
But you do have to "love" the optics, not holding debates and some states not holding primaries all while screaming about democracy being in peril.

The irony screams out, but amazingly enough, escapes some people's understanding.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.2.5  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2.4    one month ago
The irony screams out, but amazingly enough, escapes some people's understanding.

It pays to look at the whole picture:

Republicans to scrap primaries and caucuses as Trump challengers cry foul

More GOP challengers line up against Trump, more states cancel their primaries

It is not uncommon for some states to skip primaries for the party of the incumbent, when the challenges are none or feeble.

It makes sense too, when there is no viable opposition —no real contest to be had—, there is no point wasting resources.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.2.6  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.5    one month ago

When Republicans start screeching nonsense about how democracy is at stake, then you will have a valid point.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.2.7  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2.6    one month ago

Non sequitur.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.2.8  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.7    one month ago

Not to worry, I understood it perfectly!

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.2.9  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2.8    one month ago

non sequitur ≡ "a statement (such as a response) that does not follow logically from or is not clearly related to anything previously said"

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.2.10  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.9    one month ago
non sequitur ≡

Thanks, but you wasted time as I already know what it means and my post was a simple rejection of your claim that it is one.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
4.2.11  Snuffy  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.9    one month ago

Your posting at 4.2.5 definitely fits that bill. It does not logically follow the post you replied to but instead is a partisan reply. Had you read 4.2.2 which was the post that 4.2.4 replied to you would have seen those comments were already covered.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.2.12  TᵢG  replied to  Snuffy @4.2.11    one month ago

We agree on a point yet you still contrive an obnoxious and false comment.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.2.13  Texan1211  replied to  Snuffy @4.2.11    one month ago

Sometimes it pays to look at the whole picture.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
4.2.14  Snuffy  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.12    one month ago

Obnoxious is an opinion of yours, but mine wasn't a false comment. Had you looked at the conversation thread you would have seen it but you chose your initial posting which didn't line up with the thread. It is kind of funny that your first line in all this is 'It pays to look at the whole picture:' which is obviously not something that you did.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.2.15  TᵢG  replied to  Snuffy @4.2.14    one month ago

Good grief, do you actually believe that cries of democracy in peril come only from Ds?

Do you pay any attention to the crap that the leader of the GOP claims?:

There are always people, both D and R, who are going to make extreme statements.   In that regard, the parties are quite similar.

And they are also quite similar in the practice of not holding primaries when they have the incumbency and it has no real challenge.

These endless chickenshit allegations about 'the other side' are pathetic.   Focus on real issues rather than engage in endless petty squabbles ... criticizing for the sake of criticism while living in a house of glass.

There is no irony here, just pointless partisan allegations.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.2.16  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.15    one month ago
There is no irony here, just pointless partisan allegations.

He said, ironically.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
4.2.17  Snuffy  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.15    one month ago

Well fuck, you just cannot let go from your position. Let me repost my entire post that got you all worked up here.

Oh do you mean like the Democratic primaries, some of which aren't allowing competition and just awarding Biden????
To be fair, that's a standard practice for both parties when the incumbent president is running for re-election.  But you do have to "love" the optics, not holding debates and some states not holding primaries all while screaming about democracy being in peril. 

I was responding to Tex where he mentioned Democratic primaries, some of which are not allowing competition such as Florida who will not have a primary but instead award all their votes to the incumbent.

I responded to Tex saying that's really standard practice for BOTH FUCKING PARTIES (in case you misunderstood) when the incumbent is a member of their party and is running for re-election. Several Republican states including Arizona (which I live in) did not have a Republican primary for the 2020 election.  I clearly stated that it's actually standard practice in such a case.

And then I had to laugh at the irony of the optics of the Democratic party this time where they are not holding primary debates while one of the MAIN TALKING POINTS FOR THE DEMOCRATS THIS ELECTION is that democracy is on the ballot and is in peril if Trump should be re-elected.

So we agree in principle yet you are still arguing. Why? Do you think it's unknown by anybody that the Republicans are just as fucking stupid as the Democrats are when it comes to throwing out stupid and baseless accusations? 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.2.18  TᵢG  replied to  Snuffy @4.2.17    one month ago
Well fuck, you just cannot let go from your position.

You are the one who keeps harping on this.   I repeat my position and you keep trying to find some way to argue.    

Real simple:   

  • both parties engage in the practice of not holding primaries when their incumbent is essentially without challenge
  • both parties are whining about democracy being challenged

You agree.  Why are you trying to argue?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.2.19  Tessylo  replied to  Snuffy @4.2.14    one month ago

No, not just TiG's 'opinion'

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.2.20  Tessylo  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.15    one month ago

What the hell are the gop afraid of when it comes to the former 'president'?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.2.21  TᵢG  replied to  Tessylo @4.2.20    one month ago

GOP politicians fear that they will be targeted by Trump and fail to be reelected.  

Ultimately, it boils down to those in the electorate who support and/or defend Trump.    Most politicians today are primarily concerned about reelection.   Honesty, ethics, etc. are things to be compromised if doing so helps in the reelection effort.

More candidly, even politicians who think Trump is terrible for the nation, are capable of pretending otherwise (to the point of flat out lying) if they believe that is what their constituents demand.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
4.2.22  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.21    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.2.23  TᵢG  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @4.2.22    one month ago

No need to be insulting to Tessylo.   

Some people agree with my theory, others may not see the situation this way.   And some ask questions to see how others might respond (I do this at times ... I know the answer but am probing to see what other views are out there).

But beyond that, I also was making a point about how the GOP electorate has failed.    If the GOP electorate did not just go with Trump and supported instead a decent human being who has not violated his oath of office, etc. then it would not be faced with having Trump as its nominee.  

To wit, this was all in the hands of the people.   The GOP establishment and the GOP politicians are simply bending to the will of the electorate.  That is how democracy should work.   But in this case the GOP electorate appears to have a delusional view of Trump which excludes (or diminishes) his obvious profound constitutional wrongdoings.

When the electorate fails to be rational, democracy yields ugly results.   This will almost certainly happen with the GOP this year as they end up nominating a traitor (and possibly a convicted felon).    

Odd, right, if you and I had discussed this 10 years ago both of us would say that such an eventuality is preposterous.   Especially with the party of law-and-order, family-values, religious-morality, etc.

See, it is 'obvious' that Trump is the worst nominee for PotUS in our history ... but not everyone agrees with that.   And even when explained, they shake their heads in defiance and proclaim nuh uh.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
4.2.24  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  TᵢG @4.2.23    one month ago

I've heard a few times that the gop voters and establishment have or have had the chance to stop trump, and I agree.

I will also say the Dems have and have had the chance to lose , if polling is to be believed, the albatrosses around their parties neck.

Going to be an interesting summer.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.2.25  TᵢG  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @4.2.24    one month ago

The first opportunity for the GOP was on Jan 21, 2021.

The Ds had a clean opportunity to hold true to a one-term Biden presidency.

Going to be an interesting summer.

Yes, but the ending will suck.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
4.2.26  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  TᵢG @4.2.25    one month ago

Back in 2016, I made a prediction, that we might be due for a series of 1 term presidents, I had to clarify then that a series meant more than 2, still waiting to see if I was right.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5  JohnRussell    2 months ago
Despite every effort to destroy Trump the people had their say.

And what people they are !  Or should we say what kind of people are they ?

Exit polling in Iowa showed that over half of Republicans in Iowa think Trump won the 2020 election, and over half say he will be fit to serve as president EVEN IF he is convicted of felonies prior to the election. 

The majority of Republicans are kool aid drinking MAGA with little common sense and less scruples. Its sad to have to say it, but it is true. 

Trump winning the election in November will be a calamity never before seen for the principles of America most of us were brought up with, that honesty is the best policy, that we should live by the golden rule, and that the good guys always win. The country would never be the same again. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @5    2 months ago
Trump winning the election in November

Which will mean I'll be using your previous avatar.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.1.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1    2 months ago

We can now officially say that the Republican Party supports sedition, until proven otherwise. 

Republicans have had their chance to turn the page and walk away from the worst president in US history, and instead they have doubled down on the kool aid. 

Win or lose, supporting Trump after Jan 6 2021 is destructive to the national character of America. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.1    2 months ago
We can now officially say that the

We can now say that the democrat party is the enemy of the American people and "democracy!"

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.2    2 months ago

MSNBC host Rachel maddow says NBC and other mainstream news networks have decided not to show Trump’s victory speech.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.4  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.3    2 months ago

Joy Reid of MSNBC is complaining because there are too many white Christians in Iowa

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
5.1.5  Greg Jones  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.4    2 months ago
 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.6  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Greg Jones @5.1.5    2 months ago

Yes that's it Greg.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.1    2 months ago
We can now officially say that the Republican Party supports sedition, until proven otherwise.

Not everyone wants to be wrong, so damn sure your post is false.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1.8  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.2    2 months ago

Projection

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Quiet
5.1.9  Jasper2529  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.3    2 months ago
MSNBC host Rachel maddow says NBC and other mainstream news networks have decided not to show Trump’s victory speech.

Jake Tapper also cut off airing Trump's speech. By not allowing their viewers to watch Trump's victory speech, it certainly appears that those networks are very afraid of Trump winning in November 2024.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.10  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jasper2529 @5.1.9    2 months ago

They've been doing that right along. I think they got the idea from the old Soviet news organization Tass.

Oh yes, they are petrified of both Trump and the American people.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.11  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @5.1.8    2 months ago
Projection

Yes that is what the dems specialize in.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
5.1.12  Right Down the Center  replied to  Jasper2529 @5.1.9    2 months ago

Talk about being between a rock and a hard place.  If they air Trump their loyal viewers (all 12) will whine about them supporting Trump.  If they don't air Trump they risk a few million viewers that might tune in otherwise.  I guess their choice is to only air (ad nauseum) Trump on Trial.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.13  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @5.1.8    2 months ago

Um-hum

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
5.1.14  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Greg Jones @5.1.5    2 months ago

I watched her once and have steadfastly refused to ever watch her again. She reminds me of Sunny Hosten on the View, which I refuse to watch either.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Senior Expert
5.1.15  Gsquared  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.2    2 months ago

Comment 5.1.2 is neo-fascist propaganda.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.16  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Gsquared @5.1.15    one month ago

IT IS A FACT

Are you interested in facts?

Let us begin with the DOJ under Merrick Garland:

The evidence is ample: Biden's DOJ has taken aim at a  pro-life law  and  a redistricting plan  in Texas, as well as voter integrity laws in  Florida  and in  Georgia —three states with Republican governors. However, it  declined  to even open an investigation into the COVID-related deaths at nursing homes in New York, Pennsylvania and Michigan, where Democratic governors ordered that infected patients be admitted alongside those most vulnerable to the virus. The DOJ didn't act, even when it came to light that then-New York governor  Andrew Cuomo  actively tried to  cover up  the fact that his policies resulted in innumerable deaths. And the DOJ has announced no active investigations into redistricting plans in states led by Democratic governors and legislatures.

When states are led by Democrats, the Department of Justice under President Biden won't act.

More evidence: several months ago, my organization, America First Legal Foundation (AFL), filed a request for investigation  to the inspector general. In it, AFL outlined how key DOJ and White House officials, fearing the potential political impact of parent mobilization around school issues in the upcoming midterm elections, conspired with partisan allies to target concerned parents who attended school board meetings. In the attorney general's now-infamous  October 4 Memorandum , the Biden DOJ weaponized the  FBI  against parents exercising their constitutional rights.

Since the truth about the DOJ's collusion with Biden political operatives came to light, Attorney General Garland has offered a variety of explanations and excuses, but the American people are not fooled. In a letter to the attorney general, the Republican minority on the Senate Judiciary committee wrote, "By now involving the FBI's Counterterrorism Division in this effort, even if you personally believe that division would never cross a line into silencing criticism of local governments, you have given life to the idea that dissidents are synonymous with terrorists. This is a common tactic of third-world dictatorships, but it should never be FBI practice."

In addition to engaging in nakedly partisan lawsuits and misusing the FBI, the department is also flouting its obligations under the Freedom of Information Act by refusing to disclose information that could be politically embarrassing or harmful to Biden administration officials and allies. According to the DOJ's  own website , FOIA is "the law that keeps citizens in the know about their government." Yet it has denied AFL access to information and rights provided by the Departments of State, Homeland Security and Defense. For this reason and others, we had no choice but to sue the DOJ to require it to follow the law.

In the already long list of failures by the Biden administration, one of the most humiliating was the disastrous  withdrawal from Afghanistan . Americans absolutely deserve to be "in the know" about that presidential action, which cost the lives of American service members and was an international embarrassment. But the DOJ is stonewalling our efforts.

The Civil Rights Division appears to be using the department's resources to  chill lawful state efforts  to ensure free, fair and transparent elections. Americans deserve to be "in the know" about this matter, too, but the DOJ refuses to provide the information we requested.

The department is required by  its own regulations  to expedite release of this information, but has taken the position that these are not matters of "widespread and exceptional media interest" which "affect public confidence." In other words, the administration's position is that the Garland Memo, the Afghanistan withdrawal and the assault on election integrity are not matters of public interest. This assertion is laughable.

This is the most politicized Justice Department in American history. That means either Attorney General Garland has shattered his promise to the American people, or he has no control over the political appointees and career civil servants at the DOJ. Either way, this is just the beginning, and it's the American people who will suffer from the DOJ's radical actions.

Justice Politicized is Justice Denied | Opinion (newsweek.com)

 
 
 
Gsquared
Senior Expert
5.1.17  Gsquared  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.16    one month ago

IT IS NOT A FACT

A PROPAGANDA PIECE GENERATED BY RADICAL REACTIONARY STEPHEN MILLER'S PROPAGANDA MACHINE IS NOT "FACTS".

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.18  Texan1211  replied to  Gsquared @5.1.15    one month ago
 is neo-fascist propaganda.

Like racist, fascist has lost much meaning after constant mangling of the word, right along with reactionary.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1.19  Tessylo  replied to  Gsquared @5.1.17    one month ago

jrSmiley_93_smiley_image.jpgjrSmiley_93_smiley_image.jpgjrSmiley_93_smiley_image.jpg

jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif

I love those who tell the truth 'here'.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1.20  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.11    one month ago

That's all you have.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1.21  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.13    one month ago

Ya.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
5.1.22  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Gsquared @5.1.17    one month ago

Then you should have no problem proving it as such.  

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
5.1.23  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.1.22    one month ago

Yeah Newsweek always prints propaganda bullshit................./S

 
 
 
Gsquared
Senior Expert
5.1.24  Gsquared  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.18    one month ago

Your comment is a pretense attempting to disparage appropriate nomenclature and is meaningless drivel.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.25  Texan1211  replied to  Gsquared @5.1.24    one month ago
Your comment is a pretense attempting to disparage appropriate nomenclature and is meaningless drivel.

But it still beats hell out of some meaningless phrase like:

Comment 5.1.2 is neo-fascist propaganda.
 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
5.1.26  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.18    one month ago

Anybody who has to throw in the words racist and/or neo-fascist in to a discussion has lost any argument or legitimacy they may have had.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.27  Texan1211  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @5.1.26    one month ago
Anybody who has to throw in the words racist and/or neo-fascist in to a discussion has lost any argument or legitimacy they may have had.

True enough.

It's hard for me to take comments from people willing to use those terms to describe those who think differently serious in anything at all.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
5.1.28  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.1    one month ago
We can now officially say that the Republican Party supports sedition, until proven otherwise. 

"Today, we gather in a new year, some 246 years later, just one day before January 6th, a day forever shared in our memory because it was on that day that we nearly lost America — lost it all." 

Exactly,  That collection of misfits briefly delayed the certification of the 2020 election.  But in those four hours they come closer to accomplishing the sedition that the Confederate military failed to accomplish after 4 long years of war.

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
5.1.29  GregTx  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @5.1.26    one month ago

But.. what if they have a liberal arts degree and have been studying dictatorships their whole life?.....

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
5.1.30  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  GregTx @5.1.29    one month ago
what if they have a liberal arts degree and have been studying dictatorships their whole life?.....

Then they don’t need student loan forgiveness as they are financially set for life.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Senior Expert
5.1.31  Gsquared  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.27    one month ago
5.1.2     author    Vic Eldred
We can now say that the democrat party is the enemy of the American people and "democracy!"

That comment is without question neo-fascist propaganda and your ignorant comment doesn't mean anything.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Senior Expert
5.1.32  Gsquared  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.25    one month ago

Comment 5.1.25 is another example of a pathetically ignorant comment.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.33  Texan1211  replied to  Gsquared @5.1.31    one month ago

You keep plugging away!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.34  Texan1211  replied to  Gsquared @5.1.31    one month ago

not really sure why you quote someone else to me, but read my comment!

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
5.1.35  charger 383  replied to  Gsquared @5.1.31    one month ago

5.1.31 stays as it was responded to by the member addressed.

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Expert
5.1.36  Krishna  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.3    one month ago
MSNBC host Rachel maddow says NBC and other mainstream news networks have decided not to show Trump’s victory speech.

Of course Fox News would never do that with any Democrat's speech ..  . . (or would they? jrSmiley_26_smiley_image.gif ) . 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.37  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Krishna @5.1.36    one month ago

No, Fox does not censor. Are you also in the "all things are equal club?"

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1.38  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.2    one month ago

You can say anything you want but that doesn't mean it's true.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
5.2  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @5    one month ago
And what people they are !  Or should we say what kind of people are they ?

US citizens who can legally vote for the candidate they want to. No matter how badly Democrat/Leftist fascists want to restrict that right.

Exit polling in Iowa showed that over half of Republicans in Iowa think Trump won the 2020 election, and over half say he will be fit to serve as president EVEN IF he is convicted of felonies prior to the election. 

How many Democrats/Leftists still think that Russia stole the 2016 election from Hillary? That Trump is an illegitimate President? As for criminals- take care of the criminals in the Brandon administration- starting with Brandon himself before you point the finger at anyone else.

The majority of Republicans are kool aid drinking MAGA with little common sense and less scruples. Its sad to have to say it, but it is true. 

Coming from someone that supports Democrats abusing the AG/DOJ/FBI and state AG/DA power to go after their main political opponent is laughable. The majority of Democrats/Leftists drinking the fascist cool aid have no respect for the Constitution or laws. Nothing sad about it, and it is definitely true.

Trump winning the election in November will be a calamity never before seen for the principles of America most of us were brought up with, that honesty is the best policy, that we should live by the golden rule, and that the good guys always win. The country would never be the same again. 

Brandon winning the election in November will be a victory for China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and a loss for the US on the world stage. Europe/NATO will be overjoyed that their tail can continue to wag the US dog. The real losers will be the US taxpayer; as the criminal in the White House will continue to cash in for his crime family syndicate.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
5.2.1  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ronin2 @5.2    one month ago
No matter how badly Democrat/Leftist fascists want to restrict that right.

And they seem to be working pretty hard at that.

How many Democrats/Leftists still think that Russia stole the 2016 election from Hillary? That Trump is an illegitimate President?

Enough to launch an investigation that come up empty handed as there were no charges filed for ANYTHING they were supposed to be investigating.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
6  author  Vic Eldred    2 months ago

Before he suspended his campaign Vivek Ramaswamy told a reporter that President Trump pushed the log and we saw what crawled out from under it. That was probably the most important thing Vivek ever said.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @6    2 months ago

Projection

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Junior Guide
6.1.1  Right Down the Center  replied to  Tessylo @6.1    2 months ago

Denying the undeniable.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
6.2  MrFrost  replied to  Vic Eldred @6    2 months ago

Swamy never said anything important. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7  author  Vic Eldred    2 months ago

They stole his presidency.
They harassed his children.
They falsely accused him of an insurrection.
They indicted him with 91 fake charges.
They lied about his polling.

Matt Wallace (@MattWallace888) / X (twitter.com)

And yet

He took Iowa by storm:

GD75m1jWYAA3No6?format=jpg&name=small


 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
7.1  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @7    2 months ago

watching the GOP get destroyed by maga for the next 7 months will be hilarious, but the real fun starts in 10 months.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @7.1    2 months ago

As you say "tik Tok."  Of course, there are those who like to tell me "you don't mean anything by that."

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @7.1    2 months ago

I'm loving every minute of it

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
7.1.3  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.1    one month ago

make sure you drive your truck, and don't forget to top off the tank first...

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @7.1.3    one month ago

I love watching the monster that is maga that they created destroy them.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.2  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @7    2 months ago

All lies

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.2.1