Looks like America, like many countries before us, has to learn the hard way. What to expect from a Trump presidency, second term.

[Into the Night]

Disagreed.

Is there a reason why you refused to post the link as I did for mine?

Holy links are not a proof, Sybil. Attempted proof by negative.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

MAGA isn't a person, Sybil. There is no such thing as an 'alternate fact'.

No shit, son.

Holy links are not a proof, Sybil. Attempted proof by negative.

My poor, poor son doesn't understand facts. Sad

 

[Patriot]

Disagreed.

Is there a reason why you refused to post the link as I did for mine?

No, here ya go.

Public Trust in Government: 1958-2024

Public trust in government remains low, as it has for much of the 21st century. Roughly two-in-ten Americans say they trust the government in Washington to do what is right “just about always” (2%) or “most of the time” (21%).

www.pewresearch.org

 

[Into the Night]

No shit, son.


My poor, poor son doesn't understand facts. Sad

DON'T TRY TO DENY YOUR OWN POSTS, SYBIL!

 

[Dutch Uncle]

No, here ya go.

Public Trust in Government: 1958-2024

Public trust in government remains low, as it has for much of the 21st century. Roughly two-in-ten Americans say they trust the government in Washington to do what is right “just about always” (2%) or “most of the time” (21%).

www.pewresearch.org

I'm happy you educated yourself that the 15% in 2012 was erroneous. Good for you, son!

Was making errors like that why you never got past 2LT?

 

[Patriot]

I'm happy you educated yourself that the 15% in 2012 was erroneous. Good for you, son!

Was making errors like that why you never got past 2LT?

Oh, yep, good catch. I should have said 2011. Good thing that doesn't change the point I was making.

 

[Patriot]

Wow. So who is the bitch of the news media, "Patriot"??? LOL

Thanks for your factless media and TikTok driven opinion, comrade.

Oh, factless is it? Why don't you show me the facts then? Educate me. I'd like to see the facts on how raising taxes on the wealthy alone would pay for the increased federal spending we've seen in recent years. Go ahead, I'll wait.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Oh, yep, good catch. I should have said 2011. Good thing that doesn't change the point I was making.

Facts matter. As an officer, you should know that.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Oh, factless is it? Why don't you show me the facts then? Educate me. I'd like to see the facts on how raising taxes on the wealthy alone would pay for the increased federal spending we've seen in recent years. Go ahead, I'll wait.

I'm not an accountant. This isn't the first time you've claimed something as fact and were unapologetically W-R-O-N-G. You've been caught lying and now seek to blame others for your mistakes. Is that what being a "captain" taught you? WTFO?

This, IMO, means you are inherently dishonest and not to be trusted....on anything.

 

[Patriot]

I'm not an accountant. This isn't the first time you've claimed something as fact and were unapologetically W-R-O-N-G. You've been caught lying and now seek to blame others for your mistakes. Is that what being a "captain" taught you? WTFO?

This, IMO, means you are inherently dishonest and not to be trusted....on anything.

Wrong on all counts. And it appears you can't come up with anything to dispute my claims. Interesting.

This, IMHO, means you've lost the argument and are now resorting to personal attacks. So pathetic.

 

[Patriot]

Just a public service message for anyone planning to send me a message and wondering why I'm not responding. I'll be signing off this forum for a while. I have to leave in the morning for some personal business. I hope to get back on in the not too distant future to resume the political sparring. For now, peace out.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Wrong on all counts. And it appears you can't come up with anything to dispute my claims. Interesting.

This, IMHO, means you've lost the argument and are now resorting to personal attacks. So pathetic.

It's okay that you've lied about your service, your oaths and the multiple false claims you've made on this thread. All MAGAts lie and are never to be trusted.

Calling a liar a liar is not a personal attack, son. It's stating a fact.

I TRIGGERED MAGAts

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Just a public service message for anyone planning to send me a message and wondering why I'm not responding. I'll be signing off this forum for a while. I have to leave in the morning for some personal business. I hope to get back on in the not too distant future to resume the political sparring. For now, peace out.

Run, little liar, run. LOL

I expect you'll just be switching usernames since you've sullied this one.

I TRIGGERED MAGAts

 

[Taichiliberal]

If your argument to exonerate Obama from being responsible for the debt incurred during his presidency on the grounds that "spending and policies can carry over from one administration to the next" then that would also be true for every Republican president who followed a Democrat president.

I'm sure if Trump was involved at all in restarting Gain of Function research, it was a rubber stamp at best, informed by bureaucratic advisors like Fauci, who knew better. And if you claim that Trump should have been more informed or involved in the decision to restart GoF, then you'd also have to admit that Obama is the most responsible for it, as it started while he was president.

Oh, so now their not fascists, just proto-fascists, right? Glad to see we're making progress. Maybe, just maybe with additional education and reflection, you'll finally admit that they're just people with whom you disagree, and not everyone with whom you disagree is an automatic fascist. Also, just FYI, resorting to name calling is a good sign that you are losing the argument. I can almost taste your irrational seething anger and hatred. Get your emotions under control and you might be able to think more clearly.

Cool. You can find a few extreme examples. I was referring to non-famous, common people. The internet is loaded with deranged leftists, albeit common people, screaming about how they're leaving the country, disowning their families, shaving their heads, etc. born of an ignorant idea that "Hitler" has won the election and the world is now coming to an end. Excuse me, make that proto-Hitler (cuz Hitler was elected just like Trump so they're the same and stuff).

Yes, my family roots go back to before the United States was a country. Why is that so hard to believe? And you don't believe we should have went after the Taliban/Al Qaeda in Afghanistan after they were responsible for thousand of American deaths on our own soil on 9/11? Interesting. And I never said the Nazis came out murdering people right off the bat. Your side are the ones equating Trump supporters to Nazis, which means they expect them to eventually do the same types of things Nazis did. So, if that's true, you'd think you'd be taking more drastic steps to stop them. The fact that you're not, while Biden shakes Trump's hand and congratulates him on his win, proves that you don't really believe that, but only use that kind of hyperbolic language as a kind of emotionally immature venting or scare tactic. Your all caps, exclamation points, profanity, and personal insults don't phase me, by the way, but they do indicate that you are prone to emotional outburst as opposed to reasoned discussion. Somehow, I'm not surprised.

1. Nixon/Ford screw up with a 5 Year Plan, Carter gets that and hostile GOPers in Congress. Reagan/Bush screw up for 12 years, Clinton turns that around in 8 years to leave a balanced budget & surplus. Bush Jr. really screws up, Obama pulls the country out of a near depression. Trump takes credit for Obama's economics, Covid hits Trump reignites reaganomics. Biden makes some improvements.

2. Pure supposition and conjecture on your part, as Trump wailed "chy-nuh" virus and Fauci wouldn't divulge what U.S. labs outsourced to Wuhan.

3. Look up the definitions of neo & proto genius, then go back and review what I wrote.

4. Included were sample postings from the general population. Learn to read carefully and comprehensively.

5. YOU inserted questions about my citizenship. I've maintained my identity as a black American on this site for years. You're just pissed because I and others expose your intellectual dishonesty and limits. Carry on.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Run, little liar, run. LOL

I expect you'll just be switching usernames since you've sullied this one.

I TRIGGERED MAGAts

Pathetic little troll, is he not?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Pathetic little troll, is he not?

Agreed. And a liar too.

I wonder if he knows that impersonating an officer is a federal crime?

 

[Into the Night]

Agreed. And a liar too.

I wonder if he knows that impersonating an officer is a federal crime?

Doesn't seem to bother you, Sybil.

 

[Publius]

Instead of going over boring evidentiary details, which you’ll simply claim don’t meet the standard of “hard evidence,” including eye witness testimony from former Hunter Biden partner Tony Bobulinski, let me just ask you this: do you honestly believe that ““10% held by H for the big guy” does not refer to Joe Biden? Or do you just prefer not to believe that?

Bobulinski 'evidence' was never corroborated and thus he has been discredited, and I know that his being discredited was valid and was accepted by the DOJ, given the fact that the DOJ investigated Hunter for over 6 years and his testimony did not lead to any charges of 1. Money laundering. 2. Influence peddling, or 3. Bribery/corruption.

"10% held by H for the big guy" in an email is not evidence. Even the guy that first wrote that email said he didn't witness Joe receiving any money from Hunter. Anyway, that it's not evidence because there was no corroboration.

In 2012, only 15% of Americans trusted the federal government, so this number has been low for some time, and well before Trump entered the political scene. So your argument that Trump has somehow “bamboozled the masses” is hollow. If anything, Trump has given tens of millions of Americans hope that the government may become more trustworthy in the future, thus the recent huge election win.

Yes, after SCOTUS handed the presidency to Bush even after Gore won the popular vote by some 500k votes, it was natural what happened led to a greater distrust. However, Trump has made it far worse. Trump has single handedly destroyed confidence in the electoral process, and democracy as a whole, in the minds of some 75,000,000 people, and by that fact, he has been the greatest threat to American democracy of any person seeking the presidency in history. At every rally, he declared, long before the first ballot was ever cast, 'the only way Democrats can win is if they rig the election'. he said this to his followers over and over and over again.

And please don’t quote Mitch McConnell to me. He is one of the stuffiest, most bureaucratic, establishmentarians alive today. He just put his finger out, checked which way the wind seemed to be blowing, and issued his little statement, like a good ol’ boys does.

Both he and kevin McCarthy made accurate statements in a RARE moment of clarity. Sorry, what he said was true. Being an 'establishmentarian' does not equal being automatically discredited. That's a logical fallacy.

And your rush to disregard the feelings of the vast majority of Americans by calling it a “posturing debate trick” indicates a lack of confidence in your own position.

No, any argument that begins with 'nobody.....' or 'everybody' is an assumption. Any vague generality that cannot be substantiated is a weasel word and constitutes a pseudo debate trick.

Do you really think you’re so much smarter than most people? I wouldn’t be surprised if you think that, as it is a leftist elitist trait, and incidentally one of the reasons your side lost so monumentally.

Your question is irrelevant. Either my argument has merit, or it doesn't. That's' all that matters, not these vague sentiments.

So, let’s just get this straight: You don’t equate Trump to Hitler nor his millions of followers to Nazis or Fascists, right? You’re not that deranged? Cool. Do me a favor and tell your colleagues to chill out with that talk also.

I repeat, the comparison was not to Hitler's overall hideous nature, the comparison was to RHETORIC only. Trump has said things that are common to demagogues in general, which would include demagogues like Hitler. Why can't you guys make this distinction?

There should be comprehensive immigration reform that is codified at the federal level, but not at the expense of normalizing illegal border crossin

And yes, the border bill in question would have normalized it because, [...truncated due to the 12k character limit, see original ....]

So Biden kept most of the tariffs and adjusted others, based on what works the best, right? That’s what Trump plans to do. Don’t worry. No need to hyperventilate.

Okay, let’s wade through the swamp of your grievances, point by point:


On that “border bill” claim, you want instant deportation without regard for due process or human rights? There’s no simple fix to immigration. The bill didn’t “normalize” illegal crossings; it aimed to manage surges with a dose of realism. But go ahead, act like the border is a faucet you can shut off with one turn.

And your “secure the border first” argument? Treating symptoms without addressing root causes -- like violence, poverty, and climate -- will keep us in an endless crisis loop. A real solution requires more than piecemeal measures masquerading as "common sense."

As for your emotional pitch on Trump’s wall, if it were a magic fix, why did crossings spike under his policies? The wall was a symbol more than a solution, costing billions without delivering the promised security.

Let’s talk deportations: the Biden administration has deported more people than Trump, and Obama did too. Claiming 'Trump did better' depends on how you frame it. If success is measured through cruelty -- family separations, kids in unsanitary facilities, forced waits in dangerous towns, tear gas, and expedited deportations without due process -- then sure, his numbers went up. But success achieved through inhumane policies isn’t true success; it’s a disgrace.

And the “crime” argument? Undocumented immigrants commit fewer crimes per capita than U.S. citizens.

Moving to Kamala Harris and the “root causes” approach: her role was to address migration’s underlying issues, not play Border Patrol chief. And Biden halting wall construction was about avoiding billions wasted on an ineffective project, not an admission of defeat.

In fact, we’re facing a labor shortage in key industries -- agriculture, hospitality, construction—that need immigrant labor. What we need is a streamlined path to citizenship, not the xenophobic, fear-mongering Trump uses for political gain.

As for “draining the swamp” -- spare us. Trump didn’t challenge norms for the nation’s betterment; he did it for loyalty tests and self-interest. “The swamp” was just a slogan, and Trump brought plenty of it with him.

And claiming Trump “pushed the system to the breaking point” to protect America? Border crossings didn’t “skyrocket under Biden” due to lax policies; it’s a global trend driven by economic pressures and instability, not U.S. politics.

The old “Democrats filibustered more” trope? That record’s from the Civil Rights era. Republicans are the ones who’ve turned it into a modern obstruction tool.

The social programs rant? Please. Since the 60s, the right’s been screaming that Democrats want “socialism.” But investing in safety nets isn’t Marxist; it’s how democracies ensure stability. Housing and transportation as rights? It’s about keeping people afloat, not Teslas and mansions.

And your revisionist take on JFK? Historical figures don’t fit your boxes as neatly as you think. Equal rights? This is a party struggling with basic anti-discrimination protections.

Undecided voters caring about more than the economy? Sure, but only in the simplified narrative you’re peddling. Immigration, foreign policy—these deserve real solutions, not sound bites. And inflation isn’t just due to “price gouging” or “COVID effects”; it’s global economics and necessary stimulus during the pandemic.

Trump’s “not riding off into the sunset”? Hardly altruistic. He craves power and attention, pushing for re-election as a show of ego, not selflessness.

Biden keeping some tariffs? Sure, he’ll use policies that work, but it’s not mimicking Trump; it’s applying what’s effective.

This isn’t “real simple.” Your argument is wrapped in nostalgia for a time that never was. Real-world issues aren’t black and white—there are more shades than you’re willing to admit.

 

[Nordberg]

Oh, factless is it? Why don't you show me the facts then? Educate me. I'd like to see the facts on how raising taxes on the wealthy alone would pay for the increased federal spending we've seen in recent years. Go ahead, I'll wait.

The wealth gap in America is worse than in the Gilded Age. You are cheating by saying alone. It will require raising taxes on corporations too. The math is not a one-time thing. Raising their taxes will add revenue year after year. it is real and significant. https://www.inequalitymedia.org/how...gfM6PoJajmEFCsbsO6apw3iYWWcWaDvhoC0XgQAvD_BwE

 

[ADreamOfLiberty]

Bobulinski 'evidence' was never corroborated

It is highly corroborated.

and thus he has been discredited

The propaganda zombies aren't aware of Bobulinski, which means the only kinds of people who think it has been "discredited" are fools and liars.

I know that his being discredited was valid and was accepted by the DOJ, given the fact that the DOJ investigated Hunter for over 6 years and his testimony did not lead to any charges of 1. Money laundering. 2. Influence peddling, or 3. Bribery/corruption.

I wonder if your trust in the DOJ will taken a sudden nosedive in January.

"10% held by H for the big guy" in an email is not evidence.

Of course it is evidence.

Even the guy that first wrote that email said he didn't witness Joe receiving any money from Hunter.

rofl, who do you think you're fooling.

"Look, all I heard was 'send him to sleep with the fishes' I didn't see anyone get killed" -> "not evidence"!

Anyway, that it's not evidence because there was no corroboration.

You seem a little confused as to the definitions of those words.

Witness reports are evidence, and when evidence supports a theory and other evidence also supports that theory then the second piece of evidence corroborates the first and the first corroborates the second.

You seem to think you can just say "uncorroborated" every time a new piece of evidence is presented to you, and since you accept no evidence as evidence due to "lack of corroboration" you accept no evidence at all and then there is no corroboration.