muddybrazos said:

---

Update: New - 48% of Maricopa election centers had printer or tabulator malfunctions on election day, not the previously estimated 20%. And no such widespread issues were reported during the early voting period that preceded election day and used the very same equipment. Wow. https://t.co/EEzH2LbcZs

— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) November 17, 2022

---

Lake should mobilize and attack the AZ capitol to prevent the canvassing of the votes.

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Update: New - 48% of Maricopa election centers had printer or tabulator malfunctions on election day, not the previously estimated 20%. And no such widespread issues were reported during the early voting period that preceded election day and used the very same equipment. Wow. https://t.co/EEzH2LbcZs

— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) November 17, 2022

---

Lake should mobilize and attack the AZ capitol to prevent the canvassing of the votes.

---

Or she could send an unarmed elderly tourist group to take pictures and the media will report it as an attack anyway...

---

There was no attack on Jan 6? Interesting. You should run for political office. Trump will endorse you (if there is money in it for him)

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Update: New - 48% of Maricopa election centers had printer or tabulator malfunctions on election day, not the previously estimated 20%. And no such widespread issues were reported during the early voting period that preceded election day and used the very same equipment. Wow. https://t.co/EEzH2LbcZs

— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) November 17, 2022

---

Lake should mobilize and attack the AZ capitol to prevent the canvassing of the votes.

---

Or she could send an unarmed elderly tourist group to take pictures and the media will report it as an attack anyway...

---

There was no attack on Jan 6? Interesting. You should run for political office. Trump will endorse you (if there is money in it for him)

---

Oh gosh yes, it was such a vicious attack that one could easily have believed Ghengis Kahn and Napoleon Bonaparte had been resurrected and were staging an insurrection right before our eyes! Why, one guy had a fuzzy hat! Another warrior took a camera out of her purse and took PICTURES! I even heard a couple people had fire extinguishers! We almost lost our democracy that day...

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Update: New - 48% of Maricopa election centers had printer or tabulator malfunctions on election day, not the previously estimated 20%. And no such widespread issues were reported during the early voting period that preceded election day and used the very same equipment. Wow. https://t.co/EEzH2LbcZs

— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) November 17, 2022

---

Lake should mobilize and attack the AZ capitol to prevent the canvassing of the votes.

---

Or she could send an unarmed elderly tourist group to take pictures and the media will report it as an attack anyway...

---

There was no attack on Jan 6? Interesting. You should run for political office. Trump will endorse you (if there is money in it for him)

---

Oh gosh yes, it was such a vicious attack that one could easily have believed Ghengis Kahn and Napoleon Bonaparte had been resurrected and were staging an insurrection right before our eyes! Why, one guy had a fuzzy hat! Another warrior took a camera out of her purse and took PICTURES! I even heard a couple people had fire extinguishers! We almost lost our democracy that day...

---

Napoleon's coup makes a rather unfortunate comparison, as it was less violent than Trump's.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Update: New - 48% of Maricopa election centers had printer or tabulator malfunctions on election day, not the previously estimated 20%. And no such widespread issues were reported during the early voting period that preceded election day and used the very same equipment. Wow. https://t.co/EEzH2LbcZs

— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) November 17, 2022

---

Lake should mobilize and attack the AZ capitol to prevent the canvassing of the votes.

---

Or she could send an unarmed elderly tourist group to take pictures and the media will report it as an attack anyway...

---

There was no attack on Jan 6? Interesting. You should run for political office. Trump will endorse you (if there is money in it for him)

---

Oh gosh yes, it was such a vicious attack that one could easily have believed Ghengis Kahn and Napoleon Bonaparte had been resurrected and were staging an insurrection right before our eyes! Why, one guy had a fuzzy hat! Another warrior took a camera out of her purse and took PICTURES! I even heard a couple people had fire extinguishers! We almost lost our democracy that day...

---

Napoleon's coup makes a rather unfortunate comparison, as it was less violent than Trump's.

---

Did Napoleon not have velvet ropes to stay within? Did Napoleon not have guards open gates and allow his people through?

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Update: New - 48% of Maricopa election centers had printer or tabulator malfunctions on election day, not the previously estimated 20%. And no such widespread issues were reported during the early voting period that preceded election day and used the very same equipment. Wow. https://t.co/EEzH2LbcZs

— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) November 17, 2022

---

Lake should mobilize and attack the AZ capitol to prevent the canvassing of the votes.

---

Or she could send an unarmed elderly tourist group to take pictures and the media will report it as an attack anyway...

---

There was no attack on Jan 6? Interesting. You should run for political office. Trump will endorse you (if there is money in it for him)

---

Oh gosh yes, it was such a vicious attack that one could easily have believed Ghengis Kahn and Napoleon Bonaparte had been resurrected and were staging an insurrection right before our eyes! Why, one guy had a fuzzy hat! Another warrior took a camera out of her purse and took PICTURES! I even heard a couple people had fire extinguishers! We almost lost our democracy that day...

---

Napoleon's coup makes a rather unfortunate comparison, as it was less violent than Trump's.

---

Did Napoleon not have velvet ropes to stay within? Did Napoleon not have guards open gates and allow his people through?

---

I'm not sure what this is meant to signify, but kudos for seizing another chance to say "velvet ropes."

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

Update: New - 48% of Maricopa election centers had printer or tabulator malfunctions on election day, not the previously estimated 20%. And no such widespread issues were reported during the early voting period that preceded election day and used the very same equipment. Wow. https://t.co/EEzH2LbcZs

— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) November 17, 2022

---

Lake should mobilize and attack the AZ capitol to prevent the canvassing of the votes.

---

Or she could send an unarmed elderly tourist group to take pictures and the media will report it as an attack anyway...

---

There was no attack on Jan 6? Interesting. You should run for political office. Trump will endorse you (if there is money in it for him)

---

Oh gosh yes, it was such a vicious attack that one could easily have believed Ghengis Kahn and Napoleon Bonaparte had been resurrected and were staging an insurrection right before our eyes! Why, one guy had a fuzzy hat! Another warrior took a camera out of her purse and took PICTURES! I even heard a couple people had fire extinguishers! We almost lost our democracy that day...

---

Napoleon's coup makes a rather unfortunate comparison, as it was less violent than Trump's.

---

Did Napoleon not have velvet ropes to stay within? Did Napoleon not have guards open gates and allow his people through?

---

I'm not sure what this is meant to signify, but kudos for seizing another chance to say "velvet ropes."

---

I'm just noting all the things that almost cost us our country! We almost lost everything to unarmed elderly photo takers and fire extinguishers so it should be noted in every discussion of "jAnUaRy sIxTh!!!!!!!!"

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

whiterock said:

---

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

McCain wing of the AZ Republicans win another one for the Democrats. They will keep doing it (crossing over to vote D). until they can wrest control of the party back from the (much larger) conservative wing of the party.

---

Perhaps Kari Lake arguing for a bigger tent, as opposed to parroting Trump's conspiracy theories, would have helped her gain the slim margin she needed to win in AZ. But not only did she bend knee to Trump, she also alienated McCain voters with her comments about him.

I don't disagree with you about McCain or his supporters, but she (and Trump) must share a lot of the blame for this one.

---

"success has many fathers and failure is an orphan."

Plenty of blame to go around but in fairness we cannot absolve the Oso/Cheney faction for actively assisting the enemy. Incompetence is one thing, but purposely assisting the enemy while we are in a struggle with them has to be called out for what it is.

That's a silver lining for Desantis. The new guy can side step all the old trenches and wads of razor wire from past conflicts within the party. Old station but new tracks and new train…..

---

I'm Independent, not a faction of the Republican Party. I am disappointed in Cheney's support of Democrats; I wish she wouldn't. I take ownership.

I'm waiting for you to take ownership of a disastrous slate of candidates, your number was 55; you'll be lucky to hold what you have. Instead, you double down on your Dear Leader. You're posting like a Republican precinct chairman in Bum****.

Highest inflation in 40 years
Worst border crisis in history
Most unpopular president since Truman (Biden approval around 40%)
75% of voters say country is going in the wrong direction
Worst crime wave since the 90s

Yet voters looked at the Trump recruited candidates and said "no". Why?

---

Well, you did send Cheney money, and she did use it to help defeat some of those candidates you didn't like, so don't try to hide behind platitudes of disappointment.

Our candidates weren't the problem. They were outspent by as much as 10-1, in no small part because our Senate Leader signaled to the donor class that there was a problem with candidate quality. Far greater critique could be made of Democrat candidates: Pale reflections like Murray, Hobbs, Hassan; wild eyed ideologues like Barnes and Warnock; and on what candidate could Fetterman be considered (by Republicans) a superior candidate to a well-spoken world-famous doctor like Oz? ALL of those equally (or more) flawed candidates were beatable had we had proper and well-funded campaign plans.

Excerpt from excellent article at link:
"The anti-right narrative is a remarkable thing: when a candidate Trump supported lost, like Oz in PA, it was Trump's fault; when a candidate Trump opposed lost, like Joe O'Dea in CO, it was Trump's fault. When a candidate Trump supported won, like Vance in OH, pundits discounted the victory; when a candidate Trump opposed won, like Kemp in GA, the same pundits found it enormously significant. DeSantis's nearly 20-point margin of victory in FL, a big win for the right, was mostly hyped as a defeat for Trump, even though FL is Trump's home base."
https://spectatorworld.com/topic/this-election-was-no-loss-for-trump/

To that last observation about DeSantis, we must note uncontestable facts: DeSantis was a founding member of the "Freedom Caucus" in the House. you know, the place where the MTG-types plot & plan how to move the GOP caucus rightward. Further, Desantis literally owes his first election victory to Trump, whose endorsement elevated him out of a crowded primary field. So Trump's endorsements are hardly a badge of dishonor. And we cannot ignore that DeSantis is not anti-MAGA. He's proto-Maga. Not a rejection of the original, but a new, improved version of it. Finally a word about last Tuesday that is material but thus far overlooked: I'm as excited as anyone about the DeSantis victory. But what was the quality of the candidate he faced? A grey'd out shape-shifter who is now 3 wins, 5 losses in statewide races run on the ticket of both parties - neither liberal enough to enervate Dems,nor conservative enough to enervate conservatives. How many "notional points" did he add to DeSantis's win total? (answer: probably more than the notional "-2.something points" sombear's WDC connections indicated applied to GOP senate candidates.) So yes, Desantis's victory was impressive and cannot be said he beat up on a teddy bear. But neither was it a clash of titans....

Here's the cold hard reality:
There were wins and losses last Tuesday.
Establishment Republicans made no progress in moving the GOP leftward.
The realignment of the GOP as a multi-racial working class party continues.
It cannot be stopped.
Ball is in your court.

---

I am confused with one thing, you seem convinced anyone that believes that MAGA is bad for the future of the GOP is trying to move the Party left? I don't get that.

• Trying to open the party to be more inclusive,
• Trying to have the party by less dark,
• Trying to get away from fear politics,
• Trying to get back to a Reagan-esque view of the world?

All guilty as charged, but further left? No. Policies are fine (Granted, there are always tweaks including whether to work more within the system or blow it up. ), it is the way that the MAGA group operates that is the problem.

GOP has some nice winners, Trump attacks them and tries to discredit them. That summarized the problem to me. There is no Team GOP, either you are Trump or you will be attacked and discredited. That is not the conservative Party I signed up for.

---

Trump is a survivor. Do not miscalculate that he will just fade away. He will be a very, very tough out.

---

You make a lot of well-thought out decent points, but I really don't get your reasoning here, and your track record on predictions is pretty abysmal.

Trump lost the 2020 election handily to a geriatric patient with no good ideas. The candidates he really threw his weight behind performed poorly in 2022. Yes, I know you would like to blame that all on funding, but it's interesting that "funding" hurt Trump's sycophants much worse than it hurt non-sycophants. In fact, despite your now stated excuse of lack of funding being the reason Trump's candidates were defeated, you told us just a couple of weeks ago there would be a red wave, and that someone like Kari Lake could replace DeSantis as the GOP wunderkind and be a potential VP. Now we know how that turned out. No wave, and Lake got beaten by a frumpy Democrat who was too scared to debate her. Yet again another bad prediction. In fact, as of late, I am having difficulty remembering the last time one of your predictions has proven right.

Tell us, why should we believe your prediction that Trump will be a tough out, and should get the party nod over other candidates given your less than stellar track record at predicting these things? He lost in 2020, and that was before the election denying nonsense and myriad of legal issues. All of the polls show he is much less popular now than he was then. Hell, his own children apparently don't even want him to run. What makes you think a guy his age, with his track record, and inability to control his worse impulses, who is a loser in the last election, is all the sudden going to find his mojo again at the ripe old age of 76? And if he does get the nod and runs again and loses handily, what is your excuse going to be next time after you inaccurately predict another win for Trump?

There is no denying Trump did some good things, and helped the Republican Party's demographic problem. I think his populist bent is something the party can build on to form a bigger tent, and generally agree with your opinion of the establishment Republicans and neocons (they're terrible). But Trump hasn't won anything since 2016. He caught lightning in a bottle running against a terrible candidate. We would have to completely ignore his track record since then to buy what you're selling.

---

Did anyone other than Canada get it right on predictions for this election? I got sucked into thinking momentum would win it in AZ and that NH was in play, based on polling, and missed it like everyone else in PA and NV. Walker still should win GA. State and national GOP has plenty to get it done. But can they? Walker is hardly a more flawed candidate than Warnock, and GA is still not a blue state.

The candidates Trump endorsed had a very good performance on 2022, just not in a handful of key races. And yes, funding is a pretty big issue. Getting outspent by up to 10-1 by an incumbent has infinitesimally small win record. (that Specator article I've posted elsewhere, in whole & in part, is instructive on this point. It takes quite a bit of framing bias to lay 2022 at Trump's feet.)

Trump will be a tough out in the primary because he has last I recall $200m in the bank and a 75m vote head start. He also has a critical advantage in a crowded primary field - a large, fervent, unshakeable base of support, He's going to start off at ca. 30% support in every race. He only needs to pick up a few percentage points to guarantee a top-2 finish. He has a record of accomplishment in office that will be appealing given likely future socio-economic conditions. Populism is hardly a spent force and he excels at appealing to it. Finally, he will be campaigning all day every day from here. The best of his competition face governance responsibilities that will for sure give opportunity for earned media, but will also place significant limits on travel & time. The lower tier candidates will be left to toil away on the rubber chicken circuit raising little or no money, hoping to catch fire with a grassroots already in love with another candidate.

Now, all that said, we are a year before it's time to make early predictions. But to look at the field at the moment and write an epitaph for Trump is wishful thinking. I think an estimate that, as of today, RDS has 50-50 odds of winning the nomination is pretty sober.

---

No, Trump's big time MAGA candidates had problems in swing states. Greene winning in her district or Gaetz winning in the Panhandle, is not an accomplishment. In the places that counted, Trump failed. Walker should have destroyed Wornack.

There is a reason the elected GOPs are distancing from Trump. If he was the winner you say, they would be lining up behind him. He will not be able to win a General Election.

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

---

Trumpkins are adamantly opposed to war and invasion when Democrats are in control. They're also adamantly opposed to withdrawal and negotiation when Democrats are in control, so there's that.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

---

Trumpkins are adamantly opposed to war and invasion when Democrats are in control. They're also adamantly opposed to withdrawal and negotiation when Democrats are in control, so there's that.

---

Close; we like withdrawal and negotiations but we don't like dumbass withdrawals that aid the enemy and dumbass negotiations that hand over intel on our citizens and allies to our enemies. Trump plans to mow your lawn but before he can he is fired and Joe is hired. Joe shows up, does a few donuts on your lawn with his camry and then sets the grass on fire. Yet you still want to blame Trump for the bad lawn mowing simply because Trump had planned on mowing.

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

---

Trumpkins are adamantly opposed to war and invasion when Democrats are in control. They're also adamantly opposed to withdrawal and negotiation when Democrats are in control, so there's that.

---

Close; we like withdrawal and negotiations but we don't like dumbass withdrawals that aid the enemy and dumbass negotiations that hand over intel on our citizens and allies to our enemies. Trump plans to mow your lawn but before he can he is fired and Joe is hired. Joe shows up, does a few donuts on your lawn with his camry and then sets the grass on fire. Yet you still want to blame Trump for the bad lawn mowing simply because Trump had planned on mowing.

---

I'm not blaming Trump for anything. I suspect the operation would have been even hastier and less organized with him in charge, but that's no excuse for Biden.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

---

Trumpkins are adamantly opposed to war and invasion when Democrats are in control. They're also adamantly opposed to withdrawal and negotiation when Democrats are in control, so there's that.

---

Close; we like withdrawal and negotiations but we don't like dumbass withdrawals that aid the enemy and dumbass negotiations that hand over intel on our citizens and allies to our enemies. Trump plans to mow your lawn but before he can he is fired and Joe is hired. Joe shows up, does a few donuts on your lawn with his camry and then sets the grass on fire. Yet you still want to blame Trump for the bad lawn mowing simply because Trump had planned on mowing.

---

I'm not blaming Trump for anything. I suspect the operation would have been even hastier and less organized with him in charge, but that's no excuse for Biden.

---

The only problem most had with withdrawing from Afghanistan was the way it was carried out, not who was in control. To suggest otherwise is pure politics. To suggest Trump would have done worse is also pure politics and based on nothing but your own bias.

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

---

Trumpkins are adamantly opposed to war and invasion when Democrats are in control. They're also adamantly opposed to withdrawal and negotiation when Democrats are in control, so there's that.

---

Close; we like withdrawal and negotiations but we don't like dumbass withdrawals that aid the enemy and dumbass negotiations that hand over intel on our citizens and allies to our enemies. Trump plans to mow your lawn but before he can he is fired and Joe is hired. Joe shows up, does a few donuts on your lawn with his camry and then sets the grass on fire. Yet you still want to blame Trump for the bad lawn mowing simply because Trump had planned on mowing.

---

I'm not blaming Trump for anything. I suspect the operation would have been even hastier and less organized with him in charge, but that's no excuse for Biden.

---

The only problem most had with withdrawing from Afghanistan was the way it was carried out, not who was in control. To suggest otherwise is pure politics. To suggest Trump would have done worse is also pure politics and based on nothing but your own bias.

---

Actually it's based on the fact that he ordered a rush withdrawal before Biden's inauguration, and his generals basically ignored the order because it was so dangerous and impractical. I get being foggy on the French Revolution, but this was last year.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

---

Trumpkins are adamantly opposed to war and invasion when Democrats are in control. They're also adamantly opposed to withdrawal and negotiation when Democrats are in control, so there's that.

---

Close; we like withdrawal and negotiations but we don't like dumbass withdrawals that aid the enemy and dumbass negotiations that hand over intel on our citizens and allies to our enemies. Trump plans to mow your lawn but before he can he is fired and Joe is hired. Joe shows up, does a few donuts on your lawn with his camry and then sets the grass on fire. Yet you still want to blame Trump for the bad lawn mowing simply because Trump had planned on mowing.

---

I'm not blaming Trump for anything. I suspect the operation would have been even hastier and less organized with him in charge, but that's no excuse for Biden.

---

The only problem most had with withdrawing from Afghanistan was the way it was carried out, not who was in control. To suggest otherwise is pure politics. To suggest Trump would have done worse is also pure politics and based on nothing but your own bias.

---

Actually it's based on the fact that he ordered a rush withdrawal before Biden's inauguration, and his generals basically ignored the order because it was so dangerous and impractical. I get being foggy on the French Revolution, but this was last year.

---

But it all of sudden became a reasonable plan that they implemented once Biden became President? Or did Biden come up with his own plan and that is what was executed? Or did the Generals execute Trump's bad plan to sabotage Biden?

He Hate Me said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

---

Trumpkins are adamantly opposed to war and invasion when Democrats are in control. They're also adamantly opposed to withdrawal and negotiation when Democrats are in control, so there's that.

---

Close; we like withdrawal and negotiations but we don't like dumbass withdrawals that aid the enemy and dumbass negotiations that hand over intel on our citizens and allies to our enemies. Trump plans to mow your lawn but before he can he is fired and Joe is hired. Joe shows up, does a few donuts on your lawn with his camry and then sets the grass on fire. Yet you still want to blame Trump for the bad lawn mowing simply because Trump had planned on mowing.

---

I'm not blaming Trump for anything. I suspect the operation would have been even hastier and less organized with him in charge, but that's no excuse for Biden.

---

The only problem most had with withdrawing from Afghanistan was the way it was carried out, not who was in control. To suggest otherwise is pure politics. To suggest Trump would have done worse is also pure politics and based on nothing but your own bias.

---

Actually it's based on the fact that he ordered a rush withdrawal before Biden's inauguration, and his generals basically ignored the order because it was so dangerous and impractical. I get being foggy on the French Revolution, but this was last year.

---

But it all of sudden became a reasonable plan that they implemented once Biden became President? Or did Biden come up with his own plan and that is what was executed? Or did the Generals execute Trump's bad plan to sabotage Biden?

---

Biden's plan was almost as bad, though I've never heard a Dem admit it. Would Trump's plan have been reasonable in MAGA world regardless of the results? Absolutely. It's all about who's in control.

Sam Lowry said:

---

He Hate Me said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

---

Trumpkins are adamantly opposed to war and invasion when Democrats are in control. They're also adamantly opposed to withdrawal and negotiation when Democrats are in control, so there's that.

---

Close; we like withdrawal and negotiations but we don't like dumbass withdrawals that aid the enemy and dumbass negotiations that hand over intel on our citizens and allies to our enemies. Trump plans to mow your lawn but before he can he is fired and Joe is hired. Joe shows up, does a few donuts on your lawn with his camry and then sets the grass on fire. Yet you still want to blame Trump for the bad lawn mowing simply because Trump had planned on mowing.

---

I'm not blaming Trump for anything. I suspect the operation would have been even hastier and less organized with him in charge, but that's no excuse for Biden.

---

The only problem most had with withdrawing from Afghanistan was the way it was carried out, not who was in control. To suggest otherwise is pure politics. To suggest Trump would have done worse is also pure politics and based on nothing but your own bias.

---

Actually it's based on the fact that he ordered a rush withdrawal before Biden's inauguration, and his generals basically ignored the order because it was so dangerous and impractical. I get being foggy on the French Revolution, but this was last year.

---

But it all of sudden became a reasonable plan that they implemented once Biden became President? Or did Biden come up with his own plan and that is what was executed? Or did the Generals execute Trump's bad plan to sabotage Biden?

---

Biden's plan was almost as bad, though I've never heard a Dem admit it. Would Trump's plan have been reasonable in MAGA world regardless of the results? Absolutely. It's all about who's in control.

---

Would Trump's success have been reasonable in Sam Lowry's world? Absolutely not. It's all about who is in control.

Sam Lowry said:

---

He Hate Me said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

---

Trumpkins are adamantly opposed to war and invasion when Democrats are in control. They're also adamantly opposed to withdrawal and negotiation when Democrats are in control, so there's that.

---

Close; we like withdrawal and negotiations but we don't like dumbass withdrawals that aid the enemy and dumbass negotiations that hand over intel on our citizens and allies to our enemies. Trump plans to mow your lawn but before he can he is fired and Joe is hired. Joe shows up, does a few donuts on your lawn with his camry and then sets the grass on fire. Yet you still want to blame Trump for the bad lawn mowing simply because Trump had planned on mowing.

---

I'm not blaming Trump for anything. I suspect the operation would have been even hastier and less organized with him in charge, but that's no excuse for Biden.

---

The only problem most had with withdrawing from Afghanistan was the way it was carried out, not who was in control. To suggest otherwise is pure politics. To suggest Trump would have done worse is also pure politics and based on nothing but your own bias.

---

Actually it's based on the fact that he ordered a rush withdrawal before Biden's inauguration, and his generals basically ignored the order because it was so dangerous and impractical. I get being foggy on the French Revolution, but this was last year.

---

But it all of sudden became a reasonable plan that they implemented once Biden became President? Or did Biden come up with his own plan and that is what was executed? Or did the Generals execute Trump's bad plan to sabotage Biden?

---

Biden's plan was almost as bad, though I've never heard a Dem admit it. Would Trump's plan have been reasonable in MAGA world regardless of the results? Absolutely. It's all about who's in control.

---

Does that make you feel better? To argue with yourself like that as though you needed some convincing?

Who is that masked man?

whiterock said:

---

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

McCain wing of the AZ Republicans win another one for the Democrats. They will keep doing it (crossing over to vote D). until they can wrest control of the party back from the (much larger) conservative wing of the party.

---

Perhaps Kari Lake arguing for a bigger tent, as opposed to parroting Trump's conspiracy theories, would have helped her gain the slim margin she needed to win in AZ. But not only did she bend knee to Trump, she also alienated McCain voters with her comments about him.

I don't disagree with you about McCain or his supporters, but she (and Trump) must share a lot of the blame for this one.

---

"success has many fathers and failure is an orphan."

Plenty of blame to go around but in fairness we cannot absolve the Oso/Cheney faction for actively assisting the enemy. Incompetence is one thing, but purposely assisting the enemy while we are in a struggle with them has to be called out for what it is.

That's a silver lining for Desantis. The new guy can side step all the old trenches and wads of razor wire from past conflicts within the party. Old station but new tracks and new train…..

---

I'm Independent, not a faction of the Republican Party. I am disappointed in Cheney's support of Democrats; I wish she wouldn't. I take ownership.

I'm waiting for you to take ownership of a disastrous slate of candidates, your number was 55; you'll be lucky to hold what you have. Instead, you double down on your Dear Leader. You're posting like a Republican precinct chairman in Bum****.

Highest inflation in 40 years
Worst border crisis in history
Most unpopular president since Truman (Biden approval around 40%)
75% of voters say country is going in the wrong direction
Worst crime wave since the 90s

Yet voters looked at the Trump recruited candidates and said "no". Why?

---

Well, you did send Cheney money, and she did use it to help defeat some of those candidates you didn't like, so don't try to hide behind platitudes of disappointment.

Our candidates weren't the problem. They were outspent by as much as 10-1, in no small part because our Senate Leader signaled to the donor class that there was a problem with candidate quality. Far greater critique could be made of Democrat candidates: Pale reflections like Murray, Hobbs, Hassan; wild eyed ideologues like Barnes and Warnock; and on what candidate could Fetterman be considered (by Republicans) a superior candidate to a well-spoken world-famous doctor like Oz? ALL of those equally (or more) flawed candidates were beatable had we had proper and well-funded campaign plans.

Excerpt from excellent article at link:
"The anti-right narrative is a remarkable thing: when a candidate Trump supported lost, like Oz in PA, it was Trump's fault; when a candidate Trump opposed lost, like Joe O'Dea in CO, it was Trump's fault. When a candidate Trump supported won, like Vance in OH, pundits discounted the victory; when a candidate Trump opposed won, like Kemp in GA, the same pundits found it enormously significant. DeSantis's nearly 20-point margin of victory in FL, a big win for the right, was mostly hyped as a defeat for Trump, even though FL is Trump's home base."
https://spectatorworld.com/topic/this-election-was-no-loss-for-trump/

To that last observation about DeSantis, we must note uncontestable facts: DeSantis was a founding member of the "Freedom Caucus" in the House. you know, the place where the MTG-types plot & plan how to move the GOP caucus rightward. Further, Desantis literally owes his first election victory to Trump, whose endorsement elevated him out of a crowded primary field. So Trump's endorsements are hardly a badge of dishonor. And we cannot ignore that DeSantis is not anti-MAGA. He's proto-Maga. Not a rejection of the original, but a new, improved version of it. Finally a word about last Tuesday that is material but thus far overlooked: I'm as excited as anyone about the DeSantis victory. But what was the quality of the candidate he faced? A grey'd out shape-shifter who is now 3 wins, 5 losses in statewide races run on the ticket of both parties - neither liberal enough to enervate Dems,nor conservative enough to enervate conservatives. How many "notional points" did he add to DeSantis's win total? (answer: probably more than the notional "-2.something points" sombear's WDC connections indicated applied to GOP senate candidates.) So yes, Desantis's victory was impressive and cannot be said he beat up on a teddy bear. But neither was it a clash of titans....

Here's the cold hard reality:
There were wins and losses last Tuesday.
Establishment Republicans made no progress in moving the GOP leftward.
The realignment of the GOP as a multi-racial working class party continues.
It cannot be stopped.
Ball is in your court.

---

I am confused with one thing, you seem convinced anyone that believes that MAGA is bad for the future of the GOP is trying to move the Party left? I don't get that.

• Trying to open the party to be more inclusive,
• Trying to have the party by less dark,
• Trying to get away from fear politics,
• Trying to get back to a Reagan-esque view of the world?

All guilty as charged, but further left? No. Policies are fine (Granted, there are always tweaks including whether to work more within the system or blow it up. ), it is the way that the MAGA group operates that is the problem.

GOP has some nice winners, Trump attacks them and tries to discredit them. That summarized the problem to me. There is no Team GOP, either you are Trump or you will be attacked and discredited. That is not the conservative Party I signed up for.

---

Trump is a survivor. Do not miscalculate that he will just fade away. He will be a very, very tough out.

---

You make a lot of well-thought out decent points, but I really don't get your reasoning here, and your track record on predictions is pretty abysmal.

Trump lost the 2020 election handily to a geriatric patient with no good ideas. The candidates he really threw his weight behind performed poorly in 2022. Yes, I know you would like to blame that all on funding, but it's interesting that "funding" hurt Trump's sycophants much worse than it hurt non-sycophants. In fact, despite your now stated excuse of lack of funding being the reason Trump's candidates were defeated, you told us just a couple of weeks ago there would be a red wave, and that someone like Kari Lake could replace DeSantis as the GOP wunderkind and be a potential VP. Now we know how that turned out. No wave, and Lake got beaten by a frumpy Democrat who was too scared to debate her. Yet again another bad prediction. In fact, as of late, I am having difficulty remembering the last time one of your predictions has proven right.

Tell us, why should we believe your prediction that Trump will be a tough out, and should get the party nod over other candidates given your less than stellar track record at predicting these things? He lost in 2020, and that was before the election denying nonsense and myriad of legal issues. All of the polls show he is much less popular now than he was then. Hell, his own children apparently don't even want him to run. What makes you think a guy his age, with his track record, and inability to control his worse impulses, who is a loser in the last election, is all the sudden going to find his mojo again at the ripe old age of 76? And if he does get the nod and runs again and loses handily, what is your excuse going to be next time after you inaccurately predict another win for Trump?

There is no denying Trump did some good things, and helped the Republican Party's demographic problem. I think his populist bent is something the party can build on to form a bigger tent, and generally agree with your opinion of the establishment Republicans and neocons (they're terrible). But Trump hasn't won anything since 2016. He caught lightning in a bottle running against a terrible candidate. We would have to completely ignore his track record since then to buy what you're selling.

---

Did anyone other than Canada get it right on predictions for this election? I got sucked into thinking momentum would win it in AZ and that NH was in play, based on polling, and missed it like everyone else in PA and NV. Walker still should win GA. State and national GOP has plenty to get it done. But can they? Walker is hardly a more flawed candidate than Warnock, and GA is still not a blue state.

The candidates Trump endorsed had a very good performance on 2022, just not in a handful of key races. And yes, funding is a pretty big issue. Getting outspent by up to 10-1 by an incumbent has infinitesimally small win record. (that Specator article I've posted elsewhere, in whole & in part, is instructive on this point. It takes quite a bit of framing bias to lay 2022 at Trump's feet.)

Trump will be a tough out in the primary because he has last I recall $200m in the bank and a 75m vote head start. He also has a critical advantage in a crowded primary field - a large, fervent, unshakeable base of support, He's going to start off at ca. 30% support in every race. He only needs to pick up a few percentage points to guarantee a top-2 finish. He has a record of accomplishment in office that will be appealing given likely future socio-economic conditions. Populism is hardly a spent force and he excels at appealing to it. Finally, he will be campaigning all day every day from here. The best of his competition face governance responsibilities that will for sure give opportunity for earned media, but will also place significant limits on travel & time. The lower tier candidates will be left to toil away on the rubber chicken circuit raising little or no money, hoping to catch fire with a grassroots already in love with another candidate.

Now, all that said, we are a year before it's time to make early predictions. But to look at the field at the moment and write an epitaph for Trump is wishful thinking. I think an estimate that, as of today, RDS has 50-50 odds of winning the nomination is pretty sober.

---

I was talking about the general election, not the nomination. I agree with you Trump will be a tough out in the primaries. He has enough delusional people who believe he can somehow win an election again as a less popular and more unhinged candidate than he was in 2020. My question was regarding the general election. What makes you think he's the best candidate to run against the Dem in 2024? What makes you think a guy who has lost since 2016 is going to somehow turn it around now, if that is indeed what you still believe?

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

---

Trumpkins are adamantly opposed to war and invasion when Democrats are in control. They're also adamantly opposed to withdrawal and negotiation when Democrats are in control, so there's that.

---

The only withdrawal I've seen Republicans oppose since January 2021 is Biden's ridiculous withdrawal in Afghanistan. And that was not because they wanted to keep troops there, but instead because of the horrid way in which the withdrawal was handled, which even the Biden admin acknowledged was a ****ing disaster that needlessly got people killed.

What other withdrawals and negotiations have Republicans been opposed to the last 2 years?

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

He Hate Me said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

---

Trumpkins are adamantly opposed to war and invasion when Democrats are in control. They're also adamantly opposed to withdrawal and negotiation when Democrats are in control, so there's that.

---

Close; we like withdrawal and negotiations but we don't like dumbass withdrawals that aid the enemy and dumbass negotiations that hand over intel on our citizens and allies to our enemies. Trump plans to mow your lawn but before he can he is fired and Joe is hired. Joe shows up, does a few donuts on your lawn with his camry and then sets the grass on fire. Yet you still want to blame Trump for the bad lawn mowing simply because Trump had planned on mowing.

---

I'm not blaming Trump for anything. I suspect the operation would have been even hastier and less organized with him in charge, but that's no excuse for Biden.

---

The only problem most had with withdrawing from Afghanistan was the way it was carried out, not who was in control. To suggest otherwise is pure politics. To suggest Trump would have done worse is also pure politics and based on nothing but your own bias.

---

Actually it's based on the fact that he ordered a rush withdrawal before Biden's inauguration, and his generals basically ignored the order because it was so dangerous and impractical. I get being foggy on the French Revolution, but this was last year.

---

But it all of sudden became a reasonable plan that they implemented once Biden became President? Or did Biden come up with his own plan and that is what was executed? Or did the Generals execute Trump's bad plan to sabotage Biden?

---

Biden's plan was almost as bad, though I've never heard a Dem admit it. Would Trump's plan have been reasonable in MAGA world regardless of the results? Absolutely. It's all about who's in control.

---

Would Trump's success have been reasonable in Sam Lowry's world? Absolutely not. It's all about who is in control.

---

I've always given him credit for his successes. Likely this would not have been one of them.

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

---

Trumpkins are adamantly opposed to war and invasion when Democrats are in control. They're also adamantly opposed to withdrawal and negotiation when Democrats are in control, so there's that.

---

The only withdrawal I've seen Republicans oppose since January 2021 is Biden's ridiculous withdrawal in Afghanistan. And that was not because they wanted to keep troops there, but instead because of the horrid way in which the withdrawal was handled, which even the Biden admin acknowledged was a ****ing disaster that needlessly got people killed.

What other withdrawals and negotiations have Republicans been opposed to the last 2 years?

---

I can't think of any others to have supported or opposed in the last two years.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

He Hate Me said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

---

Trumpkins are adamantly opposed to war and invasion when Democrats are in control. They're also adamantly opposed to withdrawal and negotiation when Democrats are in control, so there's that.

---

Close; we like withdrawal and negotiations but we don't like dumbass withdrawals that aid the enemy and dumbass negotiations that hand over intel on our citizens and allies to our enemies. Trump plans to mow your lawn but before he can he is fired and Joe is hired. Joe shows up, does a few donuts on your lawn with his camry and then sets the grass on fire. Yet you still want to blame Trump for the bad lawn mowing simply because Trump had planned on mowing.

---

I'm not blaming Trump for anything. I suspect the operation would have been even hastier and less organized with him in charge, but that's no excuse for Biden.

---

The only problem most had with withdrawing from Afghanistan was the way it was carried out, not who was in control. To suggest otherwise is pure politics. To suggest Trump would have done worse is also pure politics and based on nothing but your own bias.

---

Actually it's based on the fact that he ordered a rush withdrawal before Biden's inauguration, and his generals basically ignored the order because it was so dangerous and impractical. I get being foggy on the French Revolution, but this was last year.

---

But it all of sudden became a reasonable plan that they implemented once Biden became President? Or did Biden come up with his own plan and that is what was executed? Or did the Generals execute Trump's bad plan to sabotage Biden?

---

Biden's plan was almost as bad, though I've never heard a Dem admit it. Would Trump's plan have been reasonable in MAGA world regardless of the results? Absolutely. It's all about who's in control.

---

Would Trump's success have been reasonable in Sam Lowry's world? Absolutely not. It's all about who is in control.

---

I've always given him credit for his successes. Likely this would not have been one of them.

---

Insert The Dude telling you that that's just your opinion here. Man.

Since 2000, has a Republican won a close race where there was irregularities in large, Democrat-controlled counties?

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

He Hate Me said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

---

Trumpkins are adamantly opposed to war and invasion when Democrats are in control. They're also adamantly opposed to withdrawal and negotiation when Democrats are in control, so there's that.

---

Close; we like withdrawal and negotiations but we don't like dumbass withdrawals that aid the enemy and dumbass negotiations that hand over intel on our citizens and allies to our enemies. Trump plans to mow your lawn but before he can he is fired and Joe is hired. Joe shows up, does a few donuts on your lawn with his camry and then sets the grass on fire. Yet you still want to blame Trump for the bad lawn mowing simply because Trump had planned on mowing.

---

I'm not blaming Trump for anything. I suspect the operation would have been even hastier and less organized with him in charge, but that's no excuse for Biden.

---

The only problem most had with withdrawing from Afghanistan was the way it was carried out, not who was in control. To suggest otherwise is pure politics. To suggest Trump would have done worse is also pure politics and based on nothing but your own bias.

---

Actually it's based on the fact that he ordered a rush withdrawal before Biden's inauguration, and his generals basically ignored the order because it was so dangerous and impractical. I get being foggy on the French Revolution, but this was last year.

---

But it all of sudden became a reasonable plan that they implemented once Biden became President? Or did Biden come up with his own plan and that is what was executed? Or did the Generals execute Trump's bad plan to sabotage Biden?

---

Biden's plan was almost as bad, though I've never heard a Dem admit it. Would Trump's plan have been reasonable in MAGA world regardless of the results? Absolutely. It's all about who's in control.

---

Would Trump's success have been reasonable in Sam Lowry's world? Absolutely not. It's all about who is in control.

---

I've always given him credit for his successes. Likely this would not have been one of them.

---

Insert The Dude telling you that that's just your opinion here. Man.

---

Just me and more or less everyone in military leadership. Man.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

He Hate Me said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

---

Trumpkins are adamantly opposed to war and invasion when Democrats are in control. They're also adamantly opposed to withdrawal and negotiation when Democrats are in control, so there's that.

---

Close; we like withdrawal and negotiations but we don't like dumbass withdrawals that aid the enemy and dumbass negotiations that hand over intel on our citizens and allies to our enemies. Trump plans to mow your lawn but before he can he is fired and Joe is hired. Joe shows up, does a few donuts on your lawn with his camry and then sets the grass on fire. Yet you still want to blame Trump for the bad lawn mowing simply because Trump had planned on mowing.

---

I'm not blaming Trump for anything. I suspect the operation would have been even hastier and less organized with him in charge, but that's no excuse for Biden.

---

The only problem most had with withdrawing from Afghanistan was the way it was carried out, not who was in control. To suggest otherwise is pure politics. To suggest Trump would have done worse is also pure politics and based on nothing but your own bias.

---

Actually it's based on the fact that he ordered a rush withdrawal before Biden's inauguration, and his generals basically ignored the order because it was so dangerous and impractical. I get being foggy on the French Revolution, but this was last year.

---

But it all of sudden became a reasonable plan that they implemented once Biden became President? Or did Biden come up with his own plan and that is what was executed? Or did the Generals execute Trump's bad plan to sabotage Biden?

---

Biden's plan was almost as bad, though I've never heard a Dem admit it. Would Trump's plan have been reasonable in MAGA world regardless of the results? Absolutely. It's all about who's in control.

---

Would Trump's success have been reasonable in Sam Lowry's world? Absolutely not. It's all about who is in control.

---

I've always given him credit for his successes. Likely this would not have been one of them.

---

Insert The Dude telling you that that's just your opinion here. Man.

---

Just me and more or less everyone in military leadership. Man.

---

Yes yes, "all scientists agree with me on climate change" "all doctors agree with me on trans procedures on children." "All military agrees the laptop is Russian disinformation." Believe me, the ol " all people of authority on this topic agree with my opinion!" is not new, my friend.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Since 2000, has a Republican won a close race where there was irregularities in large, Democrat-controlled counties?

---

Did Republicans typically win a lot of Democratic counties before 2000?

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

He Hate Me said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Oh right, I almost forgot, there were guns in another state so it was REALLY close to total anarchy all across the country.

---

Another not-so-strong comparison, at least from your point of view. Far from causing anarchy, Napoleon was initially welcomed by a people who craved stability and strong leadership. You'd have liked him.

---

He was also into invasions and war, so there is something for the neocons as well!

---

Trumpkins are adamantly opposed to war and invasion when Democrats are in control. They're also adamantly opposed to withdrawal and negotiation when Democrats are in control, so there's that.

---

Close; we like withdrawal and negotiations but we don't like dumbass withdrawals that aid the enemy and dumbass negotiations that hand over intel on our citizens and allies to our enemies. Trump plans to mow your lawn but before he can he is fired and Joe is hired. Joe shows up, does a few donuts on your lawn with his camry and then sets the grass on fire. Yet you still want to blame Trump for the bad lawn mowing simply because Trump had planned on mowing.

---

I'm not blaming Trump for anything. I suspect the operation would have been even hastier and less organized with him in charge, but that's no excuse for Biden.

---

The only problem most had with withdrawing from Afghanistan was the way it was carried out, not who was in control. To suggest otherwise is pure politics. To suggest Trump would have done worse is also pure politics and based on nothing but your own bias.

---

Actually it's based on the fact that he ordered a rush withdrawal before Biden's inauguration, and his generals basically ignored the order because it was so dangerous and impractical. I get being foggy on the French Revolution, but this was last year.

---

But it all of sudden became a reasonable plan that they implemented once Biden became President? Or did Biden come up with his own plan and that is what was executed? Or did the Generals execute Trump's bad plan to sabotage Biden?

---

Biden's plan was almost as bad, though I've never heard a Dem admit it. Would Trump's plan have been reasonable in MAGA world regardless of the results? Absolutely. It's all about who's in control.

---

Would Trump's success have been reasonable in Sam Lowry's world? Absolutely not. It's all about who is in control.

---

I've always given him credit for his successes. Likely this would not have been one of them.

---

Insert The Dude telling you that that's just your opinion here. Man.

---

Just me and more or less everyone in military leadership. Man.

---

Yes yes, "all scientists agree with me on climate change" "all doctors agree with me on trans procedures on children." "All military agrees the laptop is Russian disinformation." Believe me, the ol " all people of authority on this topic agree with my opinion!" is not new, my friend.

---

The fact they agree with me doesn't mean I'm right. It means it's not just my opinion.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Since 2000, has a Republican won a close race where there was irregularities in large, Democrat-controlled counties?

---

Did Republicans typically win a lot of Democratic counties before 2000?

---

I did not ask if they won Democrat counties, I asked if a Republican has won a race where there were irregularities and delays in Democrat counties.