Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Mean tweets are worse than inflation, wwIII, governance by skin tone and genitals, sexually grooming kids, corruption and racist hate. Got it.

---

Going to lose if Trump is the nominee ...deal with it .

There is a whole wide world of other choices out there.......winning choices.

---

with your attitude, of course he would lose.. it was people like you that voted feelings over policy that cost him the 2020 election. %A0Well, that and some very suspect to illegal rule changes plus illegal ballot harvesting.

The populous is screaming for your help, join the fight! %A0Work grass roots for your canidate of choice and get him elected. You beat Trump in the primary. That is the focus, find an electable canidate that isnt a rino uniparty POS and people will vote for him or her.

---

As usual...you are shooting from the hip....and missing .

I voted for Trump both times .

---

If he's on the general ballot are you going to vote for him?

Personally I'd rather have DeSantis. I'll vote for DeSantis in the primary if he runs.

If Trump ends up being the nominee, I won't hesitate to vote for him again.

---

I will not vote for Trump a 3rd time.

---

Nor I

---

The Democrats thank you both for helping work against a GOP White House

---

Lets hope Trump is not the candidate,.

---

Why? %A0Would you prefer another McCain or Romney?

I'm fine if we get someone with the right attitude and policies. %A0 But Trump, warts and all, did a damn good job, especially considering the lack of support he got from the GOP-controlled Congress his first 2 years.

40% of Trump's problems are him. %A0 But a lot are people like you, who want his results but without him.

---

The Democrats thank you for helping work against a GOP White House

---

Wrong.

The plain fact is that a divided party always loses. %A0Trump was doing a great job, but some wet-panty whiners fractured voter support.

Once we have a nominee, it's the moral obligation of everyone in the party to see that nominee gets elected. %A0 The fact that McCain was a poor choice in 2008 in no way makes it better that Obama was elected. %A0 A great deal of Trump's work was trying to repair the damage done by Obama.

So it's false to pretend that supporting Trump if he wins the nomination somehow helps the Democrats, %A0 Very much the opposite, it is the refusal to support the nominee which leads to Obama, Biden and their ilk.

---

I agree that Trump's policies were good. %A0Once he got his Cabinet in place and got rid of those forced or strongly recommended (I believe was a huge problem for him) he did much better. %A0Early on was bad in terms of his getting backstabbed by his "own" people. %A0

(The only one I think came out with any respect was Mattis , he didn't agree with his personality or desire to go it alone, but at least said Trump was doing a good job at rebuilding military and NATO was stronger after him.) %A0

The problem I see with Trump running again is he is a lightning rod. %A0His running will guarantee record turnout on the Democrat side. %A0Trump does not appeal to the Independent and especially Independent Women. %A0He would be a Democrat dream to run against.

GOP needs someone like a Halley, Scott or even Condi Rice (I know left field, I thought she did great.) that would be tough for media to go after like Trump or DeSantis. %A0Tough to make into an either/or situation. %A0Although, it appears they are using Abortion instead of race this time at least for midterms. %A0

---

Then find a candidate you like and support them with your time and money in the primaries.

I did that for Cruz in 2016 and would do so again in 2024 if he chose to run. %A0 Like many here, I would love to see DeSantis run and would support him in a run, but I take him at his word that right now at least he is not running.

But if Trump does win the GOP nomination in 2024, like it or not the choice is to support his policies at the cost of his personality, or accept that anything else helps the Democrats.

---

And that's all that matters...never mind what helps the country.

---

If you think another 4 years of Biden/Harris "helps the country", you are insane.

---

I'm sure it wouldn't, but I'm capable of imagining that some things might be as bad or worse.

---

Mean tweets? Lol

---

Jan 6. LOL

---

Ah yes, the infamous rowdy tourist group that almost took over our government with an elderly unarmed army. Totally erased the year of democrat led riots over every crackhead of color that got themselves shot while fighting with police.

---

The rowdy tourists who are pleading guilty to seditious conspiracy and testifying against your Oath Keepers?

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Mean tweets are worse than inflation, wwIII, governance by skin tone and genitals, sexually grooming kids, corruption and racist hate. Got it.

---

Going to lose if Trump is the nominee ...deal with it .

There is a whole wide world of other choices out there.......winning choices.

---

with your attitude, of course he would lose.. it was people like you that voted feelings over policy that cost him the 2020 election. %A0Well, that and some very suspect to illegal rule changes plus illegal ballot harvesting.

The populous is screaming for your help, join the fight! %A0Work grass roots for your canidate of choice and get him elected. You beat Trump in the primary. That is the focus, find an electable canidate that isnt a rino uniparty POS and people will vote for him or her.

---

As usual...you are shooting from the hip....and missing .

I voted for Trump both times .

---

If he's on the general ballot are you going to vote for him?

Personally I'd rather have DeSantis. I'll vote for DeSantis in the primary if he runs.

If Trump ends up being the nominee, I won't hesitate to vote for him again.

---

I will not vote for Trump a 3rd time.

---

Nor I

---

The Democrats thank you both for helping work against a GOP White House

---

Lets hope Trump is not the candidate,.

---

Why? %A0Would you prefer another McCain or Romney?

I'm fine if we get someone with the right attitude and policies. %A0 But Trump, warts and all, did a damn good job, especially considering the lack of support he got from the GOP-controlled Congress his first 2 years.

40% of Trump's problems are him. %A0 But a lot are people like you, who want his results but without him.

---

The Democrats thank you for helping work against a GOP White House

---

Wrong.

The plain fact is that a divided party always loses. %A0Trump was doing a great job, but some wet-panty whiners fractured voter support.

Once we have a nominee, it's the moral obligation of everyone in the party to see that nominee gets elected. %A0 The fact that McCain was a poor choice in 2008 in no way makes it better that Obama was elected. %A0 A great deal of Trump's work was trying to repair the damage done by Obama.

So it's false to pretend that supporting Trump if he wins the nomination somehow helps the Democrats, %A0 Very much the opposite, it is the refusal to support the nominee which leads to Obama, Biden and their ilk.

---

I agree that Trump's policies were good. %A0Once he got his Cabinet in place and got rid of those forced or strongly recommended (I believe was a huge problem for him) he did much better. %A0Early on was bad in terms of his getting backstabbed by his "own" people. %A0

(The only one I think came out with any respect was Mattis , he didn't agree with his personality or desire to go it alone, but at least said Trump was doing a good job at rebuilding military and NATO was stronger after him.) %A0

The problem I see with Trump running again is he is a lightning rod. %A0His running will guarantee record turnout on the Democrat side. %A0Trump does not appeal to the Independent and especially Independent Women. %A0He would be a Democrat dream to run against.

GOP needs someone like a Halley, Scott or even Condi Rice (I know left field, I thought she did great.) that would be tough for media to go after like Trump or DeSantis. %A0Tough to make into an either/or situation. %A0Although, it appears they are using Abortion instead of race this time at least for midterms. %A0

---

Then find a candidate you like and support them with your time and money in the primaries.

I did that for Cruz in 2016 and would do so again in 2024 if he chose to run. %A0 Like many here, I would love to see DeSantis run and would support him in a run, but I take him at his word that right now at least he is not running.

But if Trump does win the GOP nomination in 2024, like it or not the choice is to support his policies at the cost of his personality, or accept that anything else helps the Democrats.

---

And that's all that matters...never mind what helps the country.

---

If you think another 4 years of Biden/Harris "helps the country", you are insane.

---

I'm sure it wouldn't, but I'm capable of imagining that some things might be as bad or worse.

---

Mean tweets? Lol

---

Jan 6. LOL

---

Ah yes, the infamous rowdy tourist group that almost took over our government with an elderly unarmed army. Totally erased the year of democrat led riots over every crackhead of color that got themselves shot while fighting with police.

---

The rowdy tourists who are pleading guilty to seditious conspiracy and testifying against your Oath Keepers?

---

Ooh, are they up to three whole convictions now? Those unarmed rowdy tourists almost had control, too.

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Mean tweets are worse than inflation, wwIII, governance by skin tone and genitals, sexually grooming kids, corruption and racist hate. Got it.

---

Going to lose if Trump is the nominee ...deal with it .

There is a whole wide world of other choices out there.......winning choices.

---

with your attitude, of course he would lose.. it was people like you that voted feelings over policy that cost him the 2020 election. %A0Well, that and some very suspect to illegal rule changes plus illegal ballot harvesting.

The populous is screaming for your help, join the fight! %A0Work grass roots for your canidate of choice and get him elected. You beat Trump in the primary. That is the focus, find an electable canidate that isnt a rino uniparty POS and people will vote for him or her.

---

As usual...you are shooting from the hip....and missing .

I voted for Trump both times .

---

If he's on the general ballot are you going to vote for him?

Personally I'd rather have DeSantis. I'll vote for DeSantis in the primary if he runs.

If Trump ends up being the nominee, I won't hesitate to vote for him again.

---

I will not vote for Trump a 3rd time.

---

Nor I

---

The Democrats thank you both for helping work against a GOP White House

---

Lets hope Trump is not the candidate,.

---

Why? %A0Would you prefer another McCain or Romney?

I'm fine if we get someone with the right attitude and policies. %A0 But Trump, warts and all, did a damn good job, especially considering the lack of support he got from the GOP-controlled Congress his first 2 years.

40% of Trump's problems are him. %A0 But a lot are people like you, who want his results but without him.

---

The Democrats thank you for helping work against a GOP White House

---

Wrong.

The plain fact is that a divided party always loses. %A0Trump was doing a great job, but some wet-panty whiners fractured voter support.

Once we have a nominee, it's the moral obligation of everyone in the party to see that nominee gets elected. %A0 The fact that McCain was a poor choice in 2008 in no way makes it better that Obama was elected. %A0 A great deal of Trump's work was trying to repair the damage done by Obama.

So it's false to pretend that supporting Trump if he wins the nomination somehow helps the Democrats, %A0 Very much the opposite, it is the refusal to support the nominee which leads to Obama, Biden and their ilk.

---

I agree that Trump's policies were good. %A0Once he got his Cabinet in place and got rid of those forced or strongly recommended (I believe was a huge problem for him) he did much better. %A0Early on was bad in terms of his getting backstabbed by his "own" people. %A0

(The only one I think came out with any respect was Mattis , he didn't agree with his personality or desire to go it alone, but at least said Trump was doing a good job at rebuilding military and NATO was stronger after him.) %A0

The problem I see with Trump running again is he is a lightning rod. %A0His running will guarantee record turnout on the Democrat side. %A0Trump does not appeal to the Independent and especially Independent Women. %A0He would be a Democrat dream to run against.

GOP needs someone like a Halley, Scott or even Condi Rice (I know left field, I thought she did great.) that would be tough for media to go after like Trump or DeSantis. %A0Tough to make into an either/or situation. %A0Although, it appears they are using Abortion instead of race this time at least for midterms. %A0

---

Then find a candidate you like and support them with your time and money in the primaries.

I did that for Cruz in 2016 and would do so again in 2024 if he chose to run. %A0 Like many here, I would love to see DeSantis run and would support him in a run, but I take him at his word that right now at least he is not running.

But if Trump does win the GOP nomination in 2024, like it or not the choice is to support his policies at the cost of his personality, or accept that anything else helps the Democrats.

---

And that's all that matters...never mind what helps the country.

---

If you think another 4 years of Biden/Harris "helps the country", you are insane.

---

I'm sure it wouldn't, but I'm capable of imagining that some things might be as bad or worse.

---

Mean tweets? Lol

---

Jan 6. LOL

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

""If he wins the nomination"…. Some of you are tone deaf. The guy shouldn't even be in the primary. He shouldn't even be a candidate. "


Amazing how much this attitude echoes the beliefs of so many Establishment types in 2015.

The hard fact is that Trump is - right now - the man most likely to win election in 2024.

If you want someone else to sit in the Oval Office in 2025, you'd better find them and get them ready for the Primary run right now. But pretending Trump "can't" win is delusional, and imagining he will not run just because you insult him is no better.

---

Trump is an impediment for someone else, and is only propped up by your line of thinking, If he'd get the hell out of the way, you'd be surprised who might run.

---

Wrong again. No one is kept from running by Trump.

I know some of you have Trump set up as the Boogeyman, but you look stupid for that,

---

"Trump made Ron, and if Ron ran against Trump there would be hell to pay," said a Republican who has discussed DeSantis' and Trump's presidential plans with the former president.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna26714

So tell me more about being wrong.

Your man crush is likely to give the Democrats their only shot to win in 2024.

---

So you found a Trump-hating source ....


Does not change anything I wrote.

---

A Trump hating source? It was one of his advisors. Trump feels owed and is willing to go scorched Earth to get it. Others at least have a semblance of decency not to force that into reality. So they're sitting on the sideline.

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Mean tweets are worse than inflation, wwIII, governance by skin tone and genitals, sexually grooming kids, corruption and racist hate. Got it.

---

Going to lose if Trump is the nominee ...deal with it .

There is a whole wide world of other choices out there.......winning choices.

---

with your attitude, of course he would lose.. it was people like you that voted feelings over policy that cost him the 2020 election. %A0Well, that and some very suspect to illegal rule changes plus illegal ballot harvesting.

The populous is screaming for your help, join the fight! %A0Work grass roots for your canidate of choice and get him elected. You beat Trump in the primary. That is the focus, find an electable canidate that isnt a rino uniparty POS and people will vote for him or her.

---

As usual...you are shooting from the hip....and missing .

I voted for Trump both times .

---

If he's on the general ballot are you going to vote for him?

Personally I'd rather have DeSantis. I'll vote for DeSantis in the primary if he runs.

If Trump ends up being the nominee, I won't hesitate to vote for him again.

---

I will not vote for Trump a 3rd time.

---

Nor I

---

The Democrats thank you both for helping work against a GOP White House

---

Lets hope Trump is not the candidate,.

---

Why? %A0Would you prefer another McCain or Romney?

I'm fine if we get someone with the right attitude and policies. %A0 But Trump, warts and all, did a damn good job, especially considering the lack of support he got from the GOP-controlled Congress his first 2 years.

40% of Trump's problems are him. %A0 But a lot are people like you, who want his results but without him.

---

The Democrats thank you for helping work against a GOP White House

---

Wrong.

The plain fact is that a divided party always loses. %A0Trump was doing a great job, but some wet-panty whiners fractured voter support.

Once we have a nominee, it's the moral obligation of everyone in the party to see that nominee gets elected. %A0 The fact that McCain was a poor choice in 2008 in no way makes it better that Obama was elected. %A0 A great deal of Trump's work was trying to repair the damage done by Obama.

So it's false to pretend that supporting Trump if he wins the nomination somehow helps the Democrats, %A0 Very much the opposite, it is the refusal to support the nominee which leads to Obama, Biden and their ilk.

---

I agree that Trump's policies were good. %A0Once he got his Cabinet in place and got rid of those forced or strongly recommended (I believe was a huge problem for him) he did much better. %A0Early on was bad in terms of his getting backstabbed by his "own" people. %A0

(The only one I think came out with any respect was Mattis , he didn't agree with his personality or desire to go it alone, but at least said Trump was doing a good job at rebuilding military and NATO was stronger after him.) %A0

The problem I see with Trump running again is he is a lightning rod. %A0His running will guarantee record turnout on the Democrat side. %A0Trump does not appeal to the Independent and especially Independent Women. %A0He would be a Democrat dream to run against.

GOP needs someone like a Halley, Scott or even Condi Rice (I know left field, I thought she did great.) that would be tough for media to go after like Trump or DeSantis. %A0Tough to make into an either/or situation. %A0Although, it appears they are using Abortion instead of race this time at least for midterms. %A0

---

Then find a candidate you like and support them with your time and money in the primaries.

I did that for Cruz in 2016 and would do so again in 2024 if he chose to run. %A0 Like many here, I would love to see DeSantis run and would support him in a run, but I take him at his word that right now at least he is not running.

But if Trump does win the GOP nomination in 2024, like it or not the choice is to support his policies at the cost of his personality, or accept that anything else helps the Democrats.

---

And that's all that matters...never mind what helps the country.

---

If you think another 4 years of Biden/Harris "helps the country", you are insane.

---

I'm sure it wouldn't, but I'm capable of imagining that some things might be as bad or worse.

---

Mean tweets? Lol

---

Jan 6. LOL

---

Ah yes, the infamous rowdy tourist group that almost took over our government with an elderly unarmed army. Totally erased the year of democrat led riots over every crackhead of color that got themselves shot while fighting with police.

---

The rowdy tourists who are pleading guilty to seditious conspiracy and testifying against your Oath Keepers?

---

Ooh, are they up to three whole convictions now? Those unarmed rowdy tourists almost had control, too.

---

A lot more than 3.

More than 725 people have been arrested for storming the U.S. Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021, with charges ranging from obstruction of an official proceeding to assault. But at the one-year anniversary of the attempted insurrection, a significant number of rioters are still awaiting their sentencing.

Only around one-tenth of those arrested71 individualshave received criminal sentences, while the rest are waiting for their trials or haven't yet reached plea agreements. According to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia, 31 defendants were sentenced to periods of incarceration, with longer prison terms for those who engaged in violence or threats. So far, the median prison sentence for the Jan. 6 rioters is 45 days. An additional 18 rioters have been sentenced to periods of home detention, while most sentences have included fines, community service and probation for low-level offenses like illegally parading or demonstrating in the Capitol, which is a misdemeanor.

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Mean tweets are worse than inflation, wwIII, governance by skin tone and genitals, sexually grooming kids, corruption and racist hate. Got it.

---

Going to lose if Trump is the nominee ...deal with it .

There is a whole wide world of other choices out there.......winning choices.

---

with your attitude, of course he would lose.. it was people like you that voted feelings over policy that cost him the 2020 election. %A0Well, that and some very suspect to illegal rule changes plus illegal ballot harvesting.

The populous is screaming for your help, join the fight! %A0Work grass roots for your canidate of choice and get him elected. You beat Trump in the primary. That is the focus, find an electable canidate that isnt a rino uniparty POS and people will vote for him or her.

---

As usual...you are shooting from the hip....and missing .

I voted for Trump both times .

---

If he's on the general ballot are you going to vote for him?

Personally I'd rather have DeSantis. I'll vote for DeSantis in the primary if he runs.

If Trump ends up being the nominee, I won't hesitate to vote for him again.

---

I will not vote for Trump a 3rd time.

---

Nor I

---

The Democrats thank you both for helping work against a GOP White House

---

Lets hope Trump is not the candidate,.

---

Why? %A0Would you prefer another McCain or Romney?

I'm fine if we get someone with the right attitude and policies. %A0 But Trump, warts and all, did a damn good job, especially considering the lack of support he got from the GOP-controlled Congress his first 2 years.

40% of Trump's problems are him. %A0 But a lot are people like you, who want his results but without him.

---

The Democrats thank you for helping work against a GOP White House

---

Wrong.

The plain fact is that a divided party always loses. %A0Trump was doing a great job, but some wet-panty whiners fractured voter support.

Once we have a nominee, it's the moral obligation of everyone in the party to see that nominee gets elected. %A0 The fact that McCain was a poor choice in 2008 in no way makes it better that Obama was elected. %A0 A great deal of Trump's work was trying to repair the damage done by Obama.

So it's false to pretend that supporting Trump if he wins the nomination somehow helps the Democrats, %A0 Very much the opposite, it is the refusal to support the nominee which leads to Obama, Biden and their ilk.

---

I agree that Trump's policies were good. %A0Once he got his Cabinet in place and got rid of those forced or strongly recommended (I believe was a huge problem for him) he did much better. %A0Early on was bad in terms of his getting backstabbed by his "own" people. %A0

(The only one I think came out with any respect was Mattis , he didn't agree with his personality or desire to go it alone, but at least said Trump was doing a good job at rebuilding military and NATO was stronger after him.) %A0

The problem I see with Trump running again is he is a lightning rod. %A0His running will guarantee record turnout on the Democrat side. %A0Trump does not appeal to the Independent and especially Independent Women. %A0He would be a Democrat dream to run against.

GOP needs someone like a Halley, Scott or even Condi Rice (I know left field, I thought she did great.) that would be tough for media to go after like Trump or DeSantis. %A0Tough to make into an either/or situation. %A0Although, it appears they are using Abortion instead of race this time at least for midterms. %A0

---

Then find a candidate you like and support them with your time and money in the primaries.

I did that for Cruz in 2016 and would do so again in 2024 if he chose to run. %A0 Like many here, I would love to see DeSantis run and would support him in a run, but I take him at his word that right now at least he is not running.

But if Trump does win the GOP nomination in 2024, like it or not the choice is to support his policies at the cost of his personality, or accept that anything else helps the Democrats.

---

And that's all that matters...never mind what helps the country.

---

If you think another 4 years of Biden/Harris "helps the country", you are insane.

---

I'm sure it wouldn't, but I'm capable of imagining that some things might be as bad or worse.

---

Mean tweets? Lol

---

Jan 6. LOL

---

Ah yes, the infamous rowdy tourist group that almost took over our government with an elderly unarmed army. Totally erased the year of democrat led riots over every crackhead of color that got themselves shot while fighting with police.

---

The rowdy tourists who are pleading guilty to seditious conspiracy and testifying against your Oath Keepers?

---

Ooh, are they up to three whole convictions now? Those unarmed rowdy tourists almost had control, too.

---

A lot more than 3.

More than 725 people have been arrested for storming the U.S. Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021, with charges ranging from obstruction of an official proceeding to assault. But at the one-year anniversary of the attempted insurrection, a significant number of rioters are still awaiting their sentencing.

Only around one-tenth of those arrested71 individualshave received criminal sentences, while the rest are waiting for their trials or haven't yet reached plea agreements. According to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia, 31 defendants were sentenced to periods of incarceration, with longer prison terms for those who engaged in violence or threats. So far, the median prison sentence for the Jan. 6 rioters is 45 days. An additional 18 rioters have been sentenced to periods of home detention, while most sentences have included fines, community service and probation for low-level offenses like illegally parading or demonstrating in the Capitol, which is a misdemeanor.

---

Yeah, because probation and community service is what "dangerous insurrectionists" get for trying to overthrow the government. Hahaha, no, it's what low level trespassers get. Take those out and you are still left with a ridiculous story about a few unarmed elderly people "trying to take over the us government". OoOoOoOOh, scary! Did they at least arrest and disbar or impeach all the politicians that paid the bail of the rowdy tourists like they did for the democrat politicians that bailed out the violent blm rioters? Oh wait, they elected one of those democrats to the vice presidency. Zero credibility on the left.

ATL Bear said:

---

"If he wins the nomination"…. Some of you are tone deaf. The guy shouldn't even be in the primary. He shouldn't even be a candidate. Trump can solve this by not running or being convinced not to run. He knows he's destructive yet he pushes forward, bolstered by this "I'll back him if I have to" madness.

Maybe some of these latest revelations will push him or people around him to advise it's best to sit it out. But I doubt it. This will be another circle the wagons and defend to the death moment for him and the die hards. Populism gone awry.

---

Tone deaf??? Trump is running. He is going to come down the gold elevator again.

I agree with you he gives Dems best shot at winning. They will resort to same tactics they used last time unsolicited ballots mailed, vote harvesting and vote drop off boxes. If Trump runs it will be no holds barred.

But if you belief Trump will not run for the good of anyone, other than himself. You are crazy.

Sad thing, him versus a Dem who are you voting for? Like it or not????

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

You simply refuse to recognize extremism on the right. But it does exist, and it's not just bad manners or "mean tweets." It is a rejection of core American values as surely as BLM and Antifa are.

---

I don't see much. The right pole in the GOP is Ron Paul. Yes, in society there are large but statistically insignificant numbers nazis, and white supremacists, and KKK folks,......but the ones who are not in prison are out in the trailer park giving one another tattoos between runs to buy/sell crystal meth. Oath Keepers and Proud Boys are indeed extremists, but also notably not Republicans and they number in hundreds, not thousands. etc.... They did not organize the demonstration at the Capitol, and neither did they instigate the (limited) outbreak of violence.

Literally all the mobs are leftists. Not one of the nearly 600 documented riots totaling over $2b in property damage in 2020 were perpetrated by an angry right wing mob coursing through the street. The people in nightly phalanx struggles with federal police over control of a federal building? leftists. The people who seized a police station and set up a 6 square block of autonomous territory? Leftists. The thugs entering a public restaurant and backing patrons up against the wall screaming them to "say the words!" Leftists. The mob who broke down a gate and threatened armed homeowners on their doorstep? Leftists. The people burning cities block by block? Leftists. The people shooting cops in the back? Leftists. All the people beating up on Jews and Asians? Not Republicans. No Republicans or even right wing radicals surrounded Kennedy's house after Obergefell. Not only do Republicans not cancel anyone on social media, they can't obtain or keep employment anywhere in Silicon Valley. Republicans are silencing anyone at school board meetings, etc..... Republicans are not the anti-science mask mandate crowd, or the mandatory vaccination crowd. Republicans are not using state power to suppress their opponents.

Republicans are not the problem here.
Republicans are not the current threat to liberty.
Democrats are.
Democrats have become patently authoritarian bigots.
Ordinary people can see that.
And ordinary people hate bullies.
That's why Democrats are going to get their asses handed to them the next couple of election cycles.

The left has left the bridge of classical liberalism. The right remains squarely on it, and has finally decided that it needs defending. You and Canada (for different reasons) are not going to participate in the fight. You are standing on the right bank looking back out into an empty landscape to conjure demons, because the Frankfurt School tells us that tyranny can only come from the right. Canada has decided the general has bad breath and retired to the 1st tee box. Meanwhile, the leftist militias drive a SCOTUS justice from his home over a draft ruling that will enjoy support of a majority of the public. Obviously, DJT is responsible for all of these problems, because he looked the barbarians in the eye and said, figuratively, "Foxtrot Uniform."

---

Trump is using the leftist tactic of populism to gain power. It's just constituencies of the right are falling in line with it. The blind spot some of you have to this is fascinating. He's a threat to republicanism. Not the party, the concept. A cult of personality that has many of you wrapped up in his allure. The Executive Branch has way too much authority, so I fear zealots of any stripe.

So I ask. Why is Donald Trump running and why should he be the candidate for the GOP? In a matter of 90 days he exposed himself for who he really was. This reminds me of banana republics that resurrect the deposed leader who was "wronged" by the opposition. It never turns out well.

RMF5630 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

"If he wins the nomination"…. Some of you are tone deaf. The guy shouldn't even be in the primary. He shouldn't even be a candidate. Trump can solve this by not running or being convinced not to run. He knows he's destructive yet he pushes forward, bolstered by this "I'll back him if I have to" madness.

Maybe some of these latest revelations will push him or people around him to advise it's best to sit it out. But I doubt it. This will be another circle the wagons and defend to the death moment for him and the die hards. Populism gone awry.

---

Tone deaf??? Trump is running. He is going to come down the gold elevator again.

I agree with you he gives Dems best shot at winning. They will resort to same tactics they used last time unsolicited ballots mailed, vote harvesting and vote drop off boxes. If Trump runs it will be no holds barred.

But if you belief Trump will not run for the good of anyone, other than himself. You are crazy.

Sad thing, him versus a Dem who are you voting for? Like it or not????

---

I believe Trump has and always will only run for the good of himself. I'm trying to convince others why that's a bad thing, but all I get is an odd defense about polls and "I'll vote for him if I have to". Maybe if more people would say, no I won't vote for him, and he knew it, he'd either be defeated or figure out an ungraceful exit.

ATL Bear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

You simply refuse to recognize extremism on the right. But it does exist, and it's not just bad manners or "mean tweets." It is a rejection of core American values as surely as BLM and Antifa are.

---

I don't see much. The right pole in the GOP is Ron Paul. Yes, in society there are large but statistically insignificant numbers nazis, and white supremacists, and KKK folks,......but the ones who are not in prison are out in the trailer park giving one another tattoos between runs to buy/sell crystal meth. Oath Keepers and Proud Boys are indeed extremists, but also notably not Republicans and they number in hundreds, not thousands. etc.... They did not organize the demonstration at the Capitol, and neither did they instigate the (limited) outbreak of violence.

Literally all the mobs are leftists. Not one of the nearly 600 documented riots totaling over $2b in property damage in 2020 were perpetrated by an angry right wing mob coursing through the street. The people in nightly phalanx struggles with federal police over control of a federal building? leftists. The people who seized a police station and set up a 6 square block of autonomous territory? Leftists. The thugs entering a public restaurant and backing patrons up against the wall screaming them to "say the words!" Leftists. The mob who broke down a gate and threatened armed homeowners on their doorstep? Leftists. The people burning cities block by block? Leftists. The people shooting cops in the back? Leftists. All the people beating up on Jews and Asians? Not Republicans. No Republicans or even right wing radicals surrounded Kennedy's house after Obergefell. Not only do Republicans not cancel anyone on social media, they can't obtain or keep employment anywhere in Silicon Valley. Republicans are silencing anyone at school board meetings, etc..... Republicans are not the anti-science mask mandate crowd, or the mandatory vaccination crowd. Republicans are not using state power to suppress their opponents.

Republicans are not the problem here.
Republicans are not the current threat to liberty.
Democrats are.
Democrats have become patently authoritarian bigots.
Ordinary people can see that.
And ordinary people hate bullies.
That's why Democrats are going to get their asses handed to them the next couple of election cycles.

The left has left the bridge of classical liberalism. The right remains squarely on it, and has finally decided that it needs defending. You and Canada (for different reasons) are not going to participate in the fight. You are standing on the right bank looking back out into an empty landscape to conjure demons, because the Frankfurt School tells us that tyranny can only come from the right. Canada has decided the general has bad breath and retired to the 1st tee box. Meanwhile, the leftist militias drive a SCOTUS justice from his home over a draft ruling that will enjoy support of a majority of the public. Obviously, DJT is responsible for all of these problems, because he looked the barbarians in the eye and said, figuratively, "Foxtrot Uniform."

---

Trump is using the leftist tactic of populism to gain power. It's just constituencies of the right are falling in line with it. The blind spot some of you have to this is fascinating. He's a threat to republicanism. Not the party, the concept. A cult of personality that has many of you wrapped up in his allure. The Executive Branch has way too much authority, so I fear zealots of any stripe.

So I ask. Why is Donald Trump running and why should he be the candidate for the GOP? In a matter of 90 days he exposed himself for who he really was. This reminds me of banana republics that resurrect the deposed leader who was "wronged" by the opposition. It never turns out well.

---

Wish I could say you were wrong.

ATL Bear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

"If he wins the nomination"…. Some of you are tone deaf. The guy shouldn't even be in the primary. He shouldn't even be a candidate. Trump can solve this by not running or being convinced not to run. He knows he's destructive yet he pushes forward, bolstered by this "I'll back him if I have to" madness.

Maybe some of these latest revelations will push him or people around him to advise it's best to sit it out. But I doubt it. This will be another circle the wagons and defend to the death moment for him and the die hards. Populism gone awry.

---

Tone deaf??? Trump is running. He is going to come down the gold elevator again.

I agree with you he gives Dems best shot at winning. They will resort to same tactics they used last time unsolicited ballots mailed, vote harvesting and vote drop off boxes. If Trump runs it will be no holds barred.

But if you belief Trump will not run for the good of anyone, other than himself. You are crazy.

Sad thing, him versus a Dem who are you voting for? Like it or not????

---

I believe Trump has and always will only run for the good of himself. I'm trying to convince others why that's a bad thing, but all I get is an odd defense about polls and "I'll vote for him if I have to". Maybe if more people would say, no I won't vote for him, and he knew it, he'd either be defeated or figure out an ungraceful exit.

---

If one person can be described as tone deaf. It would be Trump.

Sometimes it works well for him, but like Jan 6th I fear this won't.

He will not get the message...

Sam Biden: "Yeah, a point that totally undermines your argument here."

Rather the opposite, but I realize you cannot see past your assumptions.

Sam Biden: "Trump already has a large base of support that no other Republican does."

Which is really meaningless. Trump was not even considered a serious contender when he announced in 2015, but passed the field, lapped them really, in 2016.

Obama was not the leader when he announced, either. Nor Clinton, nor GHW Bush in his time. Now it's true Reagan and George W led their packs wire to wire, but none of that kept anyone else from running.

History shows you wrong again and again, Sam

Sam Biden: "Most candidates will think it's smarter to sit this one out instead of wasting money on a futile contest and antagonizing voters in the process. With luck they could even get an endorsement next time around."

An assumption based on nothing but your imagination, and unworthy of several potential contenders.


Sam Biden: "It's funny how you were lecturing on Trump's continuing influence a couple of weeks ago and now you're denying it."

Sad how Sam always falls back to lying about me. I have been consistent all along about Trump's influence because of his record. That never meant and I never said nor implied that Trump running would mean an empty field.

Spite lowers one's mental acuity, it appears, judging from Sam's inability to understand the difference between influence and control.


Sam Biden: " Someone says he's over and done, and you attack. Someone says he's still meddling, and you attack."

No son, I rebut, not attack. Something you cannot do, it appears, for all your misuse of the word 'debunked' over the last several months.



Sam Biden: "Anything that looks, sounds, or feels the least bit negative must be shouted down. He's the magic candidate, irrelevant and unstoppable at the same time. It's no wonder you worship at his feet."

Seriously, what kind of drugs are you on that you post that level of crap, Sam? I have always been direct about the fact that Trump was not my first choice in 2016, nor my second or third, but that I voted for him when the alternative was Hillary. I have always been clear about the limits of Trump to speak without getting into trouble, and the sometimes short-sighted character of his appointments to his staff.

But I never abandoned or ignored his accomplishments, nor the sound character of his policies, something you have been completely unwilling to do pretty much since Trump took office, despite your wet-pantied protests to the contrary, Sam.

I judge Trump in the balance, and unless/until someone better shows up running for the office, the sound and rational choice remains to support Trump, warts and all.

But you are so engrossed in channeling your own version of Amber Heard, that such reason is impossible for you to grasp.

RMF5630 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

"If he wins the nomination"…. Some of you are tone deaf. The guy shouldn't even be in the primary. He shouldn't even be a candidate. Trump can solve this by not running or being convinced not to run. He knows he's destructive yet he pushes forward, bolstered by this "I'll back him if I have to" madness.

Maybe some of these latest revelations will push him or people around him to advise it's best to sit it out. But I doubt it. This will be another circle the wagons and defend to the death moment for him and the die hards. Populism gone awry.

---

Tone deaf??? Trump is running. He is going to come down the gold elevator again.

I agree with you he gives Dems best shot at winning. They will resort to same tactics they used last time unsolicited ballots mailed, vote harvesting and vote drop off boxes. If Trump runs it will be no holds barred.

But if you belief Trump will not run for the good of anyone, other than himself. You are crazy.

Sad thing, him versus a Dem who are you voting for? Like it or not????

---

I believe Trump has and always will only run for the good of himself. I'm trying to convince others why that's a bad thing, but all I get is an odd defense about polls and "I'll vote for him if I have to". Maybe if more people would say, no I won't vote for him, and he knew it, he'd either be defeated or figure out an ungraceful exit.

---

If one person can be described as tone deaf. It would be Trump.

Sometimes it works well for him, but like Jan 6th I fear this won't.

He will not get the message...

---

I fear you are correct.

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

You simply refuse to recognize extremism on the right. But it does exist, and it's not just bad manners or "mean tweets." It is a rejection of core American values as surely as BLM and Antifa are.

---

I don't see much. The right pole in the GOP is Ron Paul. Yes, in society there are large but statistically insignificant numbers nazis, and white supremacists, and KKK folks,......but the ones who are not in prison are out in the trailer park giving one another tattoos between runs to buy/sell crystal meth. Oath Keepers and Proud Boys are indeed extremists, but also notably not Republicans and they number in hundreds, not thousands. etc.... They did not organize the demonstration at the Capitol, and neither did they instigate the (limited) outbreak of violence.

Literally all the mobs are leftists. Not one of the nearly 600 documented riots totaling over $2b in property damage in 2020 were perpetrated by an angry right wing mob coursing through the street. The people in nightly phalanx struggles with federal police over control of a federal building? leftists. The people who seized a police station and set up a 6 square block of autonomous territory? Leftists. The thugs entering a public restaurant and backing patrons up against the wall screaming them to "say the words!" Leftists. The mob who broke down a gate and threatened armed homeowners on their doorstep? Leftists. The people burning cities block by block? Leftists. The people shooting cops in the back? Leftists. All the people beating up on Jews and Asians? Not Republicans. No Republicans or even right wing radicals surrounded Kennedy's house after Obergefell. Not only do Republicans not cancel anyone on social media, they can't obtain or keep employment anywhere in Silicon Valley. Republicans are silencing anyone at school board meetings, etc..... Republicans are not the anti-science mask mandate crowd, or the mandatory vaccination crowd. Republicans are not using state power to suppress their opponents.

Republicans are not the problem here.
Republicans are not the current threat to liberty.
Democrats are.
Democrats have become patently authoritarian bigots.
Ordinary people can see that.
And ordinary people hate bullies.
That's why Democrats are going to get their asses handed to them the next couple of election cycles.

The left has left the bridge of classical liberalism. The right remains squarely on it, and has finally decided that it needs defending. You and Canada (for different reasons) are not going to participate in the fight. You are standing on the right bank looking back out into an empty landscape to conjure demons, because the Frankfurt School tells us that tyranny can only come from the right. Canada has decided the general has bad breath and retired to the 1st tee box. Meanwhile, the leftist militias drive a SCOTUS justice from his home over a draft ruling that will enjoy support of a majority of the public. Obviously, DJT is responsible for all of these problems, because he looked the barbarians in the eye and said, figuratively, "Foxtrot Uniform."

---

It's the Oath Keepers who are pleading guilty to seditious conspiracy, not Ron Paul.

There's a saying that to a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail. You have a lot of good insight on cultural and theoretical topics like the Frankfurt School, but the Frankfurt School is not the answer to every question. Pretending tyranny can only come from the right makes as much sense as pretending it can only come from the left.

---

Typical strawman argument from you.

I have often stated here and elsewhere that tyranny exists on both the right and the left. I do so because progressivism ideologically maintains (and Democrats & moderate Republicans tacitly agree) that liberty sits on the left and tyranny sits on the right. The left can pursue liberty by openly suppressing free speech, because, well, Marcuse wrote an essay on "repressive tolerance" which explains how the left has the right to suppress the right. That creates a dynamic where BLM/Antifa are noble, no matter how many city blocks they burn, because they do so in pursuit of liberty for the oppressed, while conservatives are fascist, no matter what they do or not do, simply because they disagree.

Repressive tolerance is intolerance.

It is not pretense to note that....AT THIS MOMENT IN OUR HISTORY, all the mob action, bullying, cancel culture, etc....is on the left, and that there simply is nothing remotely comparable in sight on the right, either in frequency or intensity. None of that is a surprise because, in their worldview, they believe the right things which includes the right to repress those who do not.

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

You simply refuse to recognize extremism on the right. But it does exist, and it's not just bad manners or "mean tweets." It is a rejection of core American values as surely as BLM and Antifa are.

---

I don't see much. The right pole in the GOP is Ron Paul. Yes, in society there are large but statistically insignificant numbers nazis, and white supremacists, and KKK folks,......but the ones who are not in prison are out in the trailer park giving one another tattoos between runs to buy/sell crystal meth. Oath Keepers and Proud Boys are indeed extremists, but also notably not Republicans and they number in hundreds, not thousands. etc.... They did not organize the demonstration at the Capitol, and neither did they instigate the (limited) outbreak of violence.

Literally all the mobs are leftists. Not one of the nearly 600 documented riots totaling over $2b in property damage in 2020 were perpetrated by an angry right wing mob coursing through the street. The people in nightly phalanx struggles with federal police over control of a federal building? leftists. The people who seized a police station and set up a 6 square block of autonomous territory? Leftists. The thugs entering a public restaurant and backing patrons up against the wall screaming them to "say the words!" Leftists. The mob who broke down a gate and threatened armed homeowners on their doorstep? Leftists. The people burning cities block by block? Leftists. The people shooting cops in the back? Leftists. All the people beating up on Jews and Asians? Not Republicans. No Republicans or even right wing radicals surrounded Kennedy's house after Obergefell. Not only do Republicans not cancel anyone on social media, they can't obtain or keep employment anywhere in Silicon Valley. Republicans are silencing anyone at school board meetings, etc..... Republicans are not the anti-science mask mandate crowd, or the mandatory vaccination crowd. Republicans are not using state power to suppress their opponents.

Republicans are not the problem here.
Republicans are not the current threat to liberty.
Democrats are.
Democrats have become patently authoritarian bigots.
Ordinary people can see that.
And ordinary people hate bullies.
That's why Democrats are going to get their asses handed to them the next couple of election cycles.

The left has left the bridge of classical liberalism. The right remains squarely on it, and has finally decided that it needs defending. You and Canada (for different reasons) are not going to participate in the fight. You are standing on the right bank looking back out into an empty landscape to conjure demons, because the Frankfurt School tells us that tyranny can only come from the right. Canada has decided the general has bad breath and retired to the 1st tee box. Meanwhile, the leftist militias drive a SCOTUS justice from his home over a draft ruling that will enjoy support of a majority of the public. Obviously, DJT is responsible for all of these problems, because he looked the barbarians in the eye and said, figuratively, "Foxtrot Uniform."

---

It's the Oath Keepers who are pleading guilty to seditious conspiracy, not Ron Paul.

There's a saying that to a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail. You have a lot of good insight on cultural and theoretical topics like the Frankfurt School, but the Frankfurt School is not the answer to every question. Pretending tyranny can only come from the right makes as much sense as pretending it can only come from the left.

---

I have often stated here and elsewhere that tyranny exists on both the right and the left.

---

Sure, you pay lip service to the idea while denying the reality at every turn. It's the same instinct we see on the mainstream left. Unfortunately it guts the credibility of your argument. It's sad because you have a lot to offer. Again, put away the hammer. The Jan. 6 mob wasn't reading Marcuse.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Biden: "Yeah, a point that totally undermines your argument here."

Rather the opposite, but I realize you cannot see past your assumptions.

Sam Biden: "Trump already has a large base of support that no other Republican does."

Which is really meaningless. Trump was not even considered a serious contender when he announced in 2015, but passed the field, lapped them really, in 2016.

Obama was not the leader when he announced, either. Nor Clinton, nor GHW Bush in his time. Now it's true Reagan and George W led their packs wire to wire, but none of that kept anyone else from running.

History shows you wrong again and again, Sam

Sam Biden: "Most candidates will think it's smarter to sit this one out instead of wasting money on a futile contest and antagonizing voters in the process. With luck they could even get an endorsement next time around."

An assumption based on nothing but your imagination, and unworthy of several potential contenders.


Sam Biden: "It's funny how you were lecturing on Trump's continuing influence a couple of weeks ago and now you're denying it."

Sad how Sam always falls back to lying about me. I have been consistent all along about Trump's influence because of his record. That never meant and I never said nor implied that Trump running would mean an empty field.

Spite lowers one's mental acuity, it appears, judging from Sam's inability to understand the difference between influence and control.


Sam Biden: " Someone says he's over and done, and you attack. Someone says he's still meddling, and you attack."

No son, I rebut, not attack. Something you cannot do, it appears, for all your misuse of the word 'debunked' over the last several months.



Sam Biden: "Anything that looks, sounds, or feels the least bit negative must be shouted down. He's the magic candidate, irrelevant and unstoppable at the same time. It's no wonder you worship at his feet."

Seriously, what kind of drugs are you on that you post that level of crap, Sam? I have always been direct about the fact that Trump was not my first choice in 2016, nor my second or third, but that I voted for him when the alternative was Hillary. I have always been clear about the limits of Trump to speak without getting into trouble, and the sometimes short-sighted character of his appointments to his staff.

But I never abandoned or ignored his accomplishments, nor the sound character of his policies, something you have been completely unwilling to do pretty much since Trump took office, despite your wet-pantied protests to the contrary, Sam.

I judge Trump in the balance, and unless/until someone better shows up running for the office, the sound and rational choice remains to support Trump, warts and all.

But you are so engrossed in channeling your own version of Amber Heard, that such reason is impossible for you to grasp.

---

Do you have an argument?

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Biden: "Yeah, a point that totally undermines your argument here."

Rather the opposite, but I realize you cannot see past your assumptions.

Sam Biden: "Trump already has a large base of support that no other Republican does."

Which is really meaningless. Trump was not even considered a serious contender when he announced in 2015, but passed the field, lapped them really, in 2016.

Obama was not the leader when he announced, either. Nor Clinton, nor GHW Bush in his time. Now it's true Reagan and George W led their packs wire to wire, but none of that kept anyone else from running.

History shows you wrong again and again, Sam

Sam Biden: "Most candidates will think it's smarter to sit this one out instead of wasting money on a futile contest and antagonizing voters in the process. With luck they could even get an endorsement next time around."

An assumption based on nothing but your imagination, and unworthy of several potential contenders.


Sam Biden: "It's funny how you were lecturing on Trump's continuing influence a couple of weeks ago and now you're denying it."

Sad how Sam always falls back to lying about me. I have been consistent all along about Trump's influence because of his record. That never meant and I never said nor implied that Trump running would mean an empty field.

Spite lowers one's mental acuity, it appears, judging from Sam's inability to understand the difference between influence and control.


Sam Biden: " Someone says he's over and done, and you attack. Someone says he's still meddling, and you attack."

No son, I rebut, not attack. Something you cannot do, it appears, for all your misuse of the word 'debunked' over the last several months.



Sam Biden: "Anything that looks, sounds, or feels the least bit negative must be shouted down. He's the magic candidate, irrelevant and unstoppable at the same time. It's no wonder you worship at his feet."

Seriously, what kind of drugs are you on that you post that level of crap, Sam? I have always been direct about the fact that Trump was not my first choice in 2016, nor my second or third, but that I voted for him when the alternative was Hillary. I have always been clear about the limits of Trump to speak without getting into trouble, and the sometimes short-sighted character of his appointments to his staff.

But I never abandoned or ignored his accomplishments, nor the sound character of his policies, something you have been completely unwilling to do pretty much since Trump took office, despite your wet-pantied protests to the contrary, Sam.

I judge Trump in the balance, and unless/until someone better shows up running for the office, the sound and rational choice remains to support Trump, warts and all.

But you are so engrossed in channeling your own version of Amber Heard, that such reason is impossible for you to grasp.

---

Do you have an argument?

---

If you bothered to read my posts, you'd know I do.

Or are you just annoyed that your significant other (Sam) is rebutted again?

ATL Bear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

"If he wins the nomination"…. Some of you are tone deaf. The guy shouldn't even be in the primary. He shouldn't even be a candidate. Trump can solve this by not running or being convinced not to run. He knows he's destructive yet he pushes forward, bolstered by this "I'll back him if I have to" madness.

Maybe some of these latest revelations will push him or people around him to advise it's best to sit it out. But I doubt it. This will be another circle the wagons and defend to the death moment for him and the die hards. Populism gone awry.

---

Tone deaf??? Trump is running. He is going to come down the gold elevator again.

I agree with you he gives Dems best shot at winning. They will resort to same tactics they used last time unsolicited ballots mailed, vote harvesting and vote drop off boxes. If Trump runs it will be no holds barred.

But if you belief Trump will not run for the good of anyone, other than himself. You are crazy.

Sad thing, him versus a Dem who are you voting for? Like it or not????

---

I believe Trump has and always will only run for the good of himself. I'm trying to convince others why that's a bad thing, but all I get is an odd defense about polls and "I'll vote for him if I have to". Maybe if more people would say, no I won't vote for him, and he knew it, he'd either be defeated or figure out an ungraceful exit.

---

Amen Our country deserves better leadership/.

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

"If he wins the nomination"…. Some of you are tone deaf. The guy shouldn't even be in the primary. He shouldn't even be a candidate. Trump can solve this by not running or being convinced not to run. He knows he's destructive yet he pushes forward, bolstered by this "I'll back him if I have to" madness.

Maybe some of these latest revelations will push him or people around him to advise it's best to sit it out. But I doubt it. This will be another circle the wagons and defend to the death moment for him and the die hards. Populism gone awry.

---

Tone deaf??? Trump is running. He is going to come down the gold elevator again.

I agree with you he gives Dems best shot at winning. They will resort to same tactics they used last time unsolicited ballots mailed, vote harvesting and vote drop off boxes. If Trump runs it will be no holds barred.

But if you belief Trump will not run for the good of anyone, other than himself. You are crazy.

Sad thing, him versus a Dem who are you voting for? Like it or not????

---

I believe Trump has and always will only run for the good of himself. I'm trying to convince others why that's a bad thing, but all I get is an odd defense about polls and "I'll vote for him if I have to". Maybe if more people would say, no I won't vote for him, and he knew it, he'd either be defeated or figure out an ungraceful exit.

---

Amen Our country deserves better leadership/.

---

I agree. But, when down to 2 candidates and one is Biden or Harris, it will be tough to do that!

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Biden: "Yeah, a point that totally undermines your argument here."

Rather the opposite, but I realize you cannot see past your assumptions.

Sam Biden: "Trump already has a large base of support that no other Republican does."

Which is really meaningless. Trump was not even considered a serious contender when he announced in 2015, but passed the field, lapped them really, in 2016.

Obama was not the leader when he announced, either. Nor Clinton, nor GHW Bush in his time. Now it's true Reagan and George W led their packs wire to wire, but none of that kept anyone else from running.

History shows you wrong again and again, Sam

---

You are completely missing the point. None of those candidates were running against an incumbent of the same party when they announced. Ted Kennedy tried it in 1980 and lost to Carter. That's right, Carter. Remember Harold Stassen? No one else does either. He ran against Reagan in '84 and had to withdraw from the race. Pat Buchanan failed in '92. Someone named Jimmy Griffin tried in '96 and ended up with fewer votes than Lyndon LaRouche. Dubya faced negligible opposition in '04. Same with Obama in '12. What all these would-be challengers had in common is that none of them rebounded after their defeats. Kennedy contemplated running again, but even his presidential hopes were all but finished.

This is the history of incumbency in modern politics. While Trump isn't quite an incumbent, he has a huge advantage and would be a huge obstacle to any other Republican's success in '24. Everyone knows that, Trump best of all.

No Sam, I am not 'missing the point', although I am amused by your limited knowledge of History.

First, while Trump will certainly have name recognition, he is definitely not the incumbent. That would be like claiming Teddy Roosevelt was the 'incumbent' in 1912 when he lost the election.

And as to why parties stick with the incumbent, it's because they know what happens when the part dumps the incumbent. In 1952, for example, the Democrats abandoned Harry Truman, preferring to go with Adlai Stevenson. Then in 1968, the Democrats abandoned LBJ (yes, he said he chose not to run but historians are clear that he was shoved out) and the Vice-President, Humphrey, carried the nomination into battle against Nixon, who beat him with the help of George Wallace splitting the South.

That has nothing to do with Trump, but is relevant because the Democrats will eventually decide they have to stay with Joe Biden for their 2024 nomination. And that decision will decide the 2024 election more than what Trump does or does not change from his past campaigns.

I have been assured by several of the more verbose and one of the best posters here that Biden will not make it to the end of the term and will not be the dems nominee.

Oldbear83 said:

---

No Sam, I am not 'missing the point', although I am amused by your limited knowledge of History.

First, while Trump will certainly have name recognition, he is definitely not the incumbent. That would be like claiming Teddy Roosevelt was the 'incumbent' in 1912 when he lost the election.

And as to why parties stick with the incumbent, it's because they know what happens when the part dumps the incumbent. In 1952, for example, the Democrats abandoned Harry Truman, preferring to go with Adlai Stevenson. Then in 1968, the Democrats abandoned LBJ (yes, he said he chose not to run but historians are clear that he was shoved out) and the Vice-President, Humphrey, carried the nomination into battle against Nixon, who beat him with the help of George Wallace splitting the South.

That has nothing to do with Trump, but is relevant because the Democrats will eventually decide they have to stay with Joe Biden for their 2024 nomination. And that decision will decide the 2024 election more than what Trump does or does not change from his past campaigns.

---

It will decide the outcome for you because the only outcome you care about is a Republican winning. If you cared about a decent Republican winning, you'd have remembered that we're not just talking about who can beat Biden. We're talking about who, if anyone, can beat Trump in the primary. Few will attempt it if he decides to run. And no matter your protests about your personal disdain for the man, you'll be part of the reason.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

No Sam, I am not 'missing the point', although I am amused by your limited knowledge of History.

First, while Trump will certainly have name recognition, he is definitely not the incumbent. That would be like claiming Teddy Roosevelt was the 'incumbent' in 1912 when he lost the election.

And as to why parties stick with the incumbent, it's because they know what happens when the part dumps the incumbent. In 1952, for example, the Democrats abandoned Harry Truman, preferring to go with Adlai Stevenson. Then in 1968, the Democrats abandoned LBJ (yes, he said he chose not to run but historians are clear that he was shoved out) and the Vice-President, Humphrey, carried the nomination into battle against Nixon, who beat him with the help of George Wallace splitting the South.

That has nothing to do with Trump, but is relevant because the Democrats will eventually decide they have to stay with Joe Biden for their 2024 nomination. And that decision will decide the 2024 election more than what Trump does or does not change from his past campaigns.

---

It will decide the outcome for you because the only outcome you care about is a Republican winning. If you cared about a decent Republican winning, you'd have remembered that we're not just talking about who can beat Biden. We're talking about who, if anyone, can beat Trump in the primary. Few will attempt it if he decides to run. And no matter your protests about your personal disdain for the man, you'll be part of the reason.

---

But your view is that Trump running is worse than Biden. Of course I want a different direction as Biden, if it isn't Trump than it will be whoever the GOP runs. I have heard Biden's platform and seen his execution of it and cannot in good conscience vote for more of this. So, it is not a Party thing. It is who can stop and/or prevent this Progressive Agenda. The Dems are getting worse, not better. I am not seeing ANY swing back to the middle. I have to believe that Biden IS their middle.

Your undying moral support for Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumer et al is noted.

With appropriate contempt.

The plain fact, Sam, is that there has not been a morally decent Democrat nominated for President in the last quarter-century.

Your desperate fixation to blame Trump for everything blinds you to this fact.

I am quite willing to vote for a decent, competent Democrat. However, they simply do not exist at this time, and anyone with a brain, moral compass and even a cursory knowledge of the last eleven Administrations knows this to be so.

Trump at his worst is better than anyone the Democrats will nominate.

Oldbear83 said:

---

No Sam, I am not 'missing the point', although I am amused by your limited knowledge of History.

First, while Trump will certainly have name recognition, he is definitely not the incumbent. That would be like claiming Teddy Roosevelt was the 'incumbent' in 1912 when he lost the election.

And as to why parties stick with the incumbent, it's because they know what happens when the part dumps the incumbent. In 1952, for example, the Democrats abandoned Harry Truman, preferring to go with Adlai Stevenson. Then in 1968, the Democrats abandoned LBJ (yes, he said he chose not to run but historians are clear that he was shoved out) and the Vice-President, Humphrey, carried the nomination into battle against Nixon, who beat him with the help of George Wallace splitting the South.

That has nothing to do with Trump, but is relevant because the Democrats will eventually decide they have to stay with Joe Biden for their 2024 nomination. And that decision will decide the 2024 election more than what Trump does or does not change from his past campaigns.

---

Looky here. You made an argument without insult.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Your undying moral support for Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumer et al is noted.

With appropriate contempt.

The plain fact, Sam, is that there has not been a morally decent Democrat nominated for President in the last quarter-century.

Your desperate fixation to blame Trump for everything blinds you to this fact.

---

Looky here. No argument, just insults

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Your undying moral support for Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumer et al is noted.

With appropriate contempt.

The plain fact, Sam, is that there has not been a morally decent Democrat nominated for President in the last quarter-century.

Your desperate fixation to blame Trump for everything blinds you to this fact.

---

Looky here. No argument, just insults

---

Oh, there's a perfectly valid argument there, Sam.

Ironically you keep proving my other complaints correct by missing them over and over.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Biden: "Yeah, a point that totally undermines your argument here."

Rather the opposite, but I realize you cannot see past your assumptions.

Sam Biden: "Trump already has a large base of support that no other Republican does."

Which is really meaningless. Trump was not even considered a serious contender when he announced in 2015, but passed the field, lapped them really, in 2016.

Obama was not the leader when he announced, either. Nor Clinton, nor GHW Bush in his time. Now it's true Reagan and George W led their packs wire to wire, but none of that kept anyone else from running.

History shows you wrong again and again, Sam

Sam Biden: "Most candidates will think it's smarter to sit this one out instead of wasting money on a futile contest and antagonizing voters in the process. With luck they could even get an endorsement next time around."

An assumption based on nothing but your imagination, and unworthy of several potential contenders.


Sam Biden: "It's funny how you were lecturing on Trump's continuing influence a couple of weeks ago and now you're denying it."

Sad how Sam always falls back to lying about me. I have been consistent all along about Trump's influence because of his record. That never meant and I never said nor implied that Trump running would mean an empty field.

Spite lowers one's mental acuity, it appears, judging from Sam's inability to understand the difference between influence and control.


Sam Biden: " Someone says he's over and done, and you attack. Someone says he's still meddling, and you attack."

No son, I rebut, not attack. Something you cannot do, it appears, for all your misuse of the word 'debunked' over the last several months.



Sam Biden: "Anything that looks, sounds, or feels the least bit negative must be shouted down. He's the magic candidate, irrelevant and unstoppable at the same time. It's no wonder you worship at his feet."

Seriously, what kind of drugs are you on that you post that level of crap, Sam? I have always been direct about the fact that Trump was not my first choice in 2016, nor my second or third, but that I voted for him when the alternative was Hillary. I have always been clear about the limits of Trump to speak without getting into trouble, and the sometimes short-sighted character of his appointments to his staff.

But I never abandoned or ignored his accomplishments, nor the sound character of his policies, something you have been completely unwilling to do pretty much since Trump took office, despite your wet-pantied protests to the contrary, Sam.

I judge Trump in the balance, and unless/until someone better shows up running for the office, the sound and rational choice remains to support Trump, warts and all.

But you are so engrossed in channeling your own version of Amber Heard, that such reason is impossible for you to grasp.

---

Do you have an argument?

---

If you bothered to read my posts, you'd know I do.

Or are you just annoyed that your significant other (Sam) is rebutted again?

---

Do you have an argument?

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Your undying moral support for Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumer et al is noted.

With appropriate contempt.

The plain fact, Sam, is that there has not been a morally decent Democrat nominated for President in the last quarter-century.

Your desperate fixation to blame Trump for everything blinds you to this fact.

---

Looky here. No argument, just insults

---

Oh, there's a perfectly valid argument there, Sam.

Ironically you keep proving my other complaints correct by missing them over and over.

---

Do you have an argument, Hillary?

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Your undying moral support for Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumer et al is noted.

With appropriate contempt.

The plain fact, Sam, is that there has not been a morally decent Democrat nominated for President in the last quarter-century.

Your desperate fixation to blame Trump for everything blinds you to this fact.

---

Looky here. No argument, just insults

---

Oh, there's a perfectly valid argument there, Sam.

Ironically you keep proving my other complaints correct by missing them over and over.

---

Do you have an argument, Hillary?

---

Already answered.

And you don't have to sign your posts as 'Hillary'.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Your undying moral support for Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumer et al is noted.

With appropriate contempt.

The plain fact, Sam, is that there has not been a morally decent Democrat nominated for President in the last quarter-century.

Your desperate fixation to blame Trump for everything blinds you to this fact.

---

Looky here. No argument, just insults

---

Oh, there's a perfectly valid argument there, Sam.

Ironically you keep proving my other complaints correct by missing them over and over.

---

Do you have an argument, Hillary?

---

Already answered.

And you don't have to sign your posts as 'Hillary'.

---

Okay Hillary Biden

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Mean tweets are worse than inflation, wwIII, governance by skin tone and genitals, sexually grooming kids, corruption and racist hate. Got it.

---

Going to lose if Trump is the nominee ...deal with it .

There is a whole wide world of other choices out there.......winning choices.

---

with your attitude, of course he would lose.. it was people like you that voted feelings over policy that cost him the 2020 election. %A0Well, that and some very suspect to illegal rule changes plus illegal ballot harvesting.

The populous is screaming for your help, join the fight! %A0Work grass roots for your canidate of choice and get him elected. You beat Trump in the primary. That is the focus, find an electable canidate that isnt a rino uniparty POS and people will vote for him or her.

---

As usual...you are shooting from the hip....and missing .

I voted for Trump both times .

---

If he's on the general ballot are you going to vote for him?

Personally I'd rather have DeSantis. I'll vote for DeSantis in the primary if he runs.

If Trump ends up being the nominee, I won't hesitate to vote for him again.

---

I will not vote for Trump a 3rd time.

---

Nor I

---

The Democrats thank you both for helping work against a GOP White House

---

Lets hope Trump is not the candidate,.

---

Why? %A0Would you prefer another McCain or Romney?

I'm fine if we get someone with the right attitude and policies. %A0 But Trump, warts and all, did a damn good job, especially considering the lack of support he got from the GOP-controlled Congress his first 2 years.

40% of Trump's problems are him. %A0 But a lot are people like you, who want his results but without him.

---

The Democrats thank you for helping work against a GOP White House

---

Wrong.

The plain fact is that a divided party always loses. %A0Trump was doing a great job, but some wet-panty whiners fractured voter support.

Once we have a nominee, it's the moral obligation of everyone in the party to see that nominee gets elected. %A0 The fact that McCain was a poor choice in 2008 in no way makes it better that Obama was elected. %A0 A great deal of Trump's work was trying to repair the damage done by Obama.

So it's false to pretend that supporting Trump if he wins the nomination somehow helps the Democrats, %A0 Very much the opposite, it is the refusal to support the nominee which leads to Obama, Biden and their ilk.

---

I agree that Trump's policies were good. %A0Once he got his Cabinet in place and got rid of those forced or strongly recommended (I believe was a huge problem for him) he did much better. %A0Early on was bad in terms of his getting backstabbed by his "own" people. %A0

(The only one I think came out with any respect was Mattis , he didn't agree with his personality or desire to go it alone, but at least said Trump was doing a good job at rebuilding military and NATO was stronger after him.) %A0

The problem I see with Trump running again is he is a lightning rod. %A0His running will guarantee record turnout on the Democrat side. %A0Trump does not appeal to the Independent and especially Independent Women. %A0He would be a Democrat dream to run against.

GOP needs someone like a Halley, Scott or even Condi Rice (I know left field, I thought she did great.) that would be tough for media to go after like Trump or DeSantis. %A0Tough to make into an either/or situation. %A0Although, it appears they are using Abortion instead of race this time at least for midterms. %A0

---

Then find a candidate you like and support them with your time and money in the primaries.

I did that for Cruz in 2016 and would do so again in 2024 if he chose to run. %A0 Like many here, I would love to see DeSantis run and would support him in a run, but I take him at his word that right now at least he is not running.

But if Trump does win the GOP nomination in 2024, like it or not the choice is to support his policies at the cost of his personality, or accept that anything else helps the Democrats.

---

And that's all that matters...never mind what helps the country.

---

If you think another 4 years of Biden/Harris "helps the country", you are insane.

---

I'm sure it wouldn't, but I'm capable of imagining that some things might be as bad or worse.

---

Mean tweets? Lol

---

Jan 6. LOL

---

Ah yes, the infamous rowdy tourist group that almost took over our government with an elderly unarmed army. Totally erased the year of democrat led riots over every crackhead of color that got themselves shot while fighting with police.

---

The rowdy tourists who are pleading guilty to seditious conspiracy and testifying against your Oath Keepers?

---

Ooh, are they up to three whole convictions now? Those unarmed rowdy tourists almost had control, too.

---

So was it 3 or were you just making up stuff again?

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Your undying moral support for Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumer et al is noted.

With appropriate contempt.

The plain fact, Sam, is that there has not been a morally decent Democrat nominated for President in the last quarter-century.

Your desperate fixation to blame Trump for everything blinds you to this fact.

---

Looky here. No argument, just insults

---

Oh, there's a perfectly valid argument there, Sam.

Ironically you keep proving my other complaints correct by missing them over and over.

---

Do you have an argument, Hillary?

---

Already answered.

And you don't have to sign your posts as 'Hillary'.

---

Okay Hillary Biden

---

Wow, a new sig.


Glad to meet you Ms. Biden, I'm Daniel, posting under OldBear83.

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Mean tweets are worse than inflation, wwIII, governance by skin tone and genitals, sexually grooming kids, corruption and racist hate. Got it.

---

Going to lose if Trump is the nominee ...deal with it .

There is a whole wide world of other choices out there.......winning choices.

---

with your attitude, of course he would lose.. it was people like you that voted feelings over policy that cost him the 2020 election. %A0Well, that and some very suspect to illegal rule changes plus illegal ballot harvesting.

The populous is screaming for your help, join the fight! %A0Work grass roots for your canidate of choice and get him elected. You beat Trump in the primary. That is the focus, find an electable canidate that isnt a rino uniparty POS and people will vote for him or her.

---

As usual...you are shooting from the hip....and missing .

I voted for Trump both times .

---

If he's on the general ballot are you going to vote for him?

Personally I'd rather have DeSantis. I'll vote for DeSantis in the primary if he runs.

If Trump ends up being the nominee, I won't hesitate to vote for him again.

---

I will not vote for Trump a 3rd time.

---

Nor I

---

The Democrats thank you both for helping work against a GOP White House

---

Lets hope Trump is not the candidate,.

---

Why? %A0Would you prefer another McCain or Romney?

I'm fine if we get someone with the right attitude and policies. %A0 But Trump, warts and all, did a damn good job, especially considering the lack of support he got from the GOP-controlled Congress his first 2 years.

40% of Trump's problems are him. %A0 But a lot are people like you, who want his results but without him.

---

The Democrats thank you for helping work against a GOP White House

---

Wrong.

The plain fact is that a divided party always loses. %A0Trump was doing a great job, but some wet-panty whiners fractured voter support.

Once we have a nominee, it's the moral obligation of everyone in the party to see that nominee gets elected. %A0 The fact that McCain was a poor choice in 2008 in no way makes it better that Obama was elected. %A0 A great deal of Trump's work was trying to repair the damage done by Obama.

So it's false to pretend that supporting Trump if he wins the nomination somehow helps the Democrats, %A0 Very much the opposite, it is the refusal to support the nominee which leads to Obama, Biden and their ilk.

---

I agree that Trump's policies were good. %A0Once he got his Cabinet in place and got rid of those forced or strongly recommended (I believe was a huge problem for him) he did much better. %A0Early on was bad in terms of his getting backstabbed by his "own" people. %A0

(The only one I think came out with any respect was Mattis , he didn't agree with his personality or desire to go it alone, but at least said Trump was doing a good job at rebuilding military and NATO was stronger after him.) %A0

The problem I see with Trump running again is he is a lightning rod. %A0His running will guarantee record turnout on the Democrat side. %A0Trump does not appeal to the Independent and especially Independent Women. %A0He would be a Democrat dream to run against.

GOP needs someone like a Halley, Scott or even Condi Rice (I know left field, I thought she did great.) that would be tough for media to go after like Trump or DeSantis. %A0Tough to make into an either/or situation. %A0Although, it appears they are using Abortion instead of race this time at least for midterms. %A0

---

Then find a candidate you like and support them with your time and money in the primaries.

I did that for Cruz in 2016 and would do so again in 2024 if he chose to run. %A0 Like many here, I would love to see DeSantis run and would support him in a run, but I take him at his word that right now at least he is not running.

But if Trump does win the GOP nomination in 2024, like it or not the choice is to support his policies at the cost of his personality, or accept that anything else helps the Democrats.

---

And that's all that matters...never mind what helps the country.

---

If you think another 4 years of Biden/Harris "helps the country", you are insane.

---

I'm sure it wouldn't, but I'm capable of imagining that some things might be as bad or worse.

---

Mean tweets? Lol

---

Jan 6. LOL

---

Ah yes, the infamous rowdy tourist group that almost took over our government with an elderly unarmed army. Totally erased the year of democrat led riots over every crackhead of color that got themselves shot while fighting with police.

---

The rowdy tourists who are pleading guilty to seditious conspiracy and testifying against your Oath Keepers?

---

Ooh, are they up to three whole convictions now? Those unarmed rowdy tourists almost had control, too.

---

So was it 3 or were you just making up stuff again?

---

How many of those were pleas just to get the mess overwith, and how many were actual trials?