Think back on your school days for a second. If you scored a 52 on a test - you scored a whopping F Minus. Not much to build a meaningful GPA on. Not going to look good on your transcript, is it?
52% (F-minus) will not suffice as a passing grade in school it is all that is required for a political candidate to gain a position of power. The candidates (politicians) are all very aware of this.
Look around. Pay attention. Politicians don't even disguise the fact that they make no attempt at unifying the country. Why try to make sense to 75% (only a C) when an F-minus will get you elected?
The two parties have figured out that all they have to do to get their cushy gigs is to appeal to or appease a specific number of malcontents. This has resulted in two groups of snarling, foaming extremists who seem literally ready to kill the other group.
Would you get in a plane with a pilot who left flight school who scored a 52 on his final exams or instrument tests? Would you go under the knife of a surgeon who was ... kicked out of Med School after maintaining an average grade of 52%? Yet, we find ourselves in a situation where we give the reins to the most powerful nation in the world to a guy (or gal) with test grade of 52%
Personally, I believe that the future of our country depends on the emergence of alternate political parties. This can only happen with the participation of the press and media. In 2016 I proudly supported Gary Johnson over Hillary and Donny boy.
Johnson may or may not have been a great leader himself, but I didn't care much at all for the former two. He stood a literal snowball's chance in hell because the media would not give him the time of day. If you remember, he had exactly two media moments - one where he misunderstood the reporter's question on Aleppo (sounded like he was asked about a "leppo") and the other where he said that there was no world leader whose ideas he believed in. The person who eventually won that election said one moronic thing after another ... and the press could not take their eyes off of him. The biggest irony - Trump didn't even win the majority of the popular vote ... yet won anyway. How the hell is this?
Voters seem afraid to vote for a third party candidate. Many seem to think of doing so as "throwing their vote away". It seems that it's etched in stone that it's gotta be or going to be one of the "big two".
Democrats and Republicans are never going to unite us as a country or a people. They are both happier than a dead pig in the hot sun with their F-minus. I think that it's time to start listening to some new ideas.
This is all opinion, here. Or is it?
I voted 3rd party once - when Jimmy Carter was running. I thought he was an intelligent man who probably was a good governor (no idea), but he was a genuinely religious man who wouldn't be able to make the hard decisions. I didn't think I was throwing my vote away; I was voting for who I thought would be best able to carry out the job. Carter won w/o my vote, but he was perceived as weak and was a one-term prez.
I'm farther along than you. I think our 245 yr experiment democracy has failed. Congress can't function if no one - despite all logic & evidence to the contrary - will break party ranks, the Executive branch has been fatally compromised, and SCOTUS - conceived by Hamilton to be the weakest of the 3 branches of government - has suddenly decided to eviscerate laws that have been in place for 60 years so there is no stability in what is/isn't legal.
Worse, I don't think the majority of Americans have the ability (whether lack of education & ignorance or just plain lovers of being outlaws) to discern just how catastrophic these last 6 years have been to the basic tenets of government. They don't care about democracy. They care about gas prices which has nothing to do w/political parties.
I agree it would be beneficial to have a third or independent party but I am not sure it can work in our current broken political system where the two political parties have a stranglehold on the power structure.
Even if all States were to make it easier for an independent to get on the ticket I am not sure they could overcome the established political machines of the two parties already in place.
I doubt they could raise the money necessary to run a successful campaign to get enough votes to win.
Most likely they would just steal votes from one of the candidates and tip the election in favour of the other.
A conservative independent candidate would benefit the Democrats by stealing votes from the Republican candidate and vice a versa.
Sadly I envision our Democracy, or what's left of it, becoming a dictatorship at some point down the road as our freedoms are slowly whittled away due to the general voting publics apathy and our impotent politicians desire to stay in power rather than do what is in the best interest of the public.
If Trumps Presidency taught us anything it is that the supposed checks and balances of the three branches of Government our fore fathers envisioned are no longer working and that the President can do pretty much anything they want and ignore the law to their benefit with little to no repercussions.
What's really silly is we probably collectively agree on more now than ever, but the small things in between have been weaponized by political candidates aiming to divide and conquer (and make money). People refer to "red state" and "blue state" as if it's Axis vs Allies, when most states are divided pretty close to 50%, as @Rusty says. Here in FL, DeSantis defeated Gilliam in a very close race but you would think it was some kind of mandate.
I think the "Party" system is a failure. It fosters tribalism. Eliminate it, make candidates state their own ideology (if they can) and raise their own money. Or get money out of political races completely. Then you eliminate idea of "3rd Wheel" candidate - their ideals are just as valid even though they aren't joining a 200 year-old political fraternity. Because when people see a third party candidate, the worry is which other candidate is this going to remove votes from? Perot's 18% vote gutted Bush Sr in 1992 (Clinton had just north of 40% but collected 370 electoral votes). I think if we see a third party in the near future it will be a conservative extremist one, branching off from the GOP.
Of course this will never happen, politicians' careers depends on collective strength.
It's the Two- Party conundrum and all the other smoke and mirrors that get me. Consider the following:
We've all seen the "Most Hated Man/Woman" polls that pop up so often on the internet. There was one such posting just before the 2016 election. Near or exactly right at the top of each category (male and female) were the names, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Two of the most despised people on the planet - in the "Political National Championship" as it were. How did this happen?
Regardless of my own feelings toward Hillary - I think she might have been the only person in America less popular than Donald Trump (though she won the mythical "popular vote"). Trump might very well have "won" (you have to use quote marks when discussing this stuff!) solely on the virtue of his NOT being Hillary Clinton. Switch the wheels around and Joe Biden gets the nod in 2020 from a lot of folks - for simply NOT being Donald Trump.
As Americans, we get to choose. But who gives us these choices?
The idea that I have been pushing - have ALL of the Presidential Primaries on the SAME DAY! Quite often, candidates get eliminated before voters and supporters in other states even get a chance to vote for them. Small states like Rhode Island and Iowa get to pare down the slate early on. Yes, you could write in the name of the eliminated candidate, but this would have the same effect of spitting into the Grand Canyon hoping to create a new lake.
On MORALITY issues: why not let the VOTERS decide on issues like abortion, gun control and (gasp!) legalization of cannabis? These issues could be re-voted every 20 years or so as new voters reach maturity and older ones die off. It's as simple as just printing it on the ballot and counting the votes afterward!
Times change - laws and regulations should be allowed to be updated to fit the current times and needs. The Constitution that the current SCOTUS seems hell-bent on enforcing was okay with slavery and denying votes to women (and other groups). The 2nd Amendment was written at a time when muskets and flintlock rifles were the only firearm game in town.
Supreme Court - why aren't these posts ELECTED ones? These positions are actually the most powerful ones in America! These "justices" are supposedly the boss of the President. Supposedly. This is just too much power to be given to any group of people by another (the sitting president).
Smoke and mirrors! All the power to the people - all of the time!
Peace.
"R"
100%. It's that "collective strength" that baffles me & your reference to Axis/Allies that disheartens me. I can't think of a time when GOP Senators moved in such lockstep w/McConnell whipping them in shape that at best 4 might "break ranks" - as though their allegiance is to a man rather than the country - to create or even vote on reasonable bi-partisan legislation. Going back to Nixon, GOP politicians and advisors had the sense, integrity, & decency NOT to support him. They urged him to resign for the good of the country. And, as much as I disliked Nixon, he did have self-respect and enough hope for his foreign policy legacy that he did. Granted, that was 50 years ago, but GOP elected officials in 2022 won't do anything outside some strict party motto of Thou Shalt Not Disobey Trump. Why? And I don't believe it's because they don't want to lose his base. What's the platform? Hate Democrats? They've won the abortion issue so what exactly is it that base wants? White Supremacy? No blacks, Jews, women?
I've been reading & re-reading a lot about WW2. I happened to be reading about Germany's invasion of Ukraine in WW2 when Russian actually invaded. As I've gone along, I see more and more parallels to Hitler's well-planned rise to power & manipulation of "the people" who fell for him - ordinary people who did heinous things for him.
Bob, you mention DeSantis pretending he has a mandate. In some ways, he's scarier than Trump. He didn't have a national TV show so he's not a celebrity, but he's smarter, better educated, & braver than Trump. He's a very long way from Jeb Bush who mistakenly believed in the traditional GOP.
If Trumps Presidency taught us anything it is that the supposed checks and balances of the three branches of Government our fore fathers envisioned are no longer working and that the President can do pretty much anything they want and ignore the law to their benefit with little to no repercussions.
Trump couldn't have done 1/10th of what he did w/o enablers. That's what disturbs me - no one said no to him so that's on ordinary civil servants & appointees in a position to stop him who didn't & Americans who didn't vote out those GOP goons in mid-terms & 2020. The worst is the Senate who let Kavanaugh cry & lie his way onto SCOTUS & confirmed that schoolmarm w/no legal legitimacy & member of an extremist Catholic sect. They barely confirmed the impeccably credentialed Jackson to replace Breyer because she was black? a Dem nominee? a woman? Trump declared her untrustworthy? Politicians have their positions because "we" elect them & "we" are becoming increasingly incredibly ignorant, gullible, or apathetic.
Going back to the creation of government, the intent was that SCOTUS be a referee to ensure that the legislative & executive branches acted within the parameters of the constitution. Hamilton wrote the most about SCOTUS & insisted that they be lifers so they wouldn't be influenced by POLITICS or short-term solutions. His intent was that it be the weakest of the 3 branches.
Congress has a lot to answer for. Sandra Day O'Connor wrote in virtually every opinion "the legislature should be making legislation on this issue." She didn't hint or wink. She practically shouted "Congress, DO SOMETHING." Had Congress made abortion legal across the nation in 1974, Roe would be moot. They had the votes then & the mood of the country was certainly for it, so why did it sit on its hands?
Justices don't get seated w/o Senate approval & they made a huge mistake w/Thomas - people were faxing like crazy during his confirmation hearings re Anita Hill's testimony saying this guy isn't who he pretends to be. More mistakes followed w/Kavanaugh & The Schoolmarm. And here we are.
There's nothing that says all seats have to be filled.
I personally (& I am no one in the scheme of things) find the practice of Justices retiring to be disrespectful to the lifetime appointment wording because it is precisely what SCOTUS is not supposed to be - political. The longest-serving Justice Douglass retired after 36 years due to a debilitating stroke that didn't kill him until 4 years later; RBG served until she died despite poor health; Scalia died. They're the ones who understood their role and undertook it seriously.
Exactly, they're legislating from the bench. This past week we've seen abortion, school prayer, public funding for parochial schools, and conceal/carry laws targeted by the court. All prominent conservative causes. That's not a coincidence. They had a long-term plan, it's something Alito has even outlined in the past, and I imagine they aren't finished.
If Trumps Presidency taught us anything it is that the supposed checks and balances of the three branches of Government our fore fathers envisioned are no longer working and that the President can do pretty much anything they want and ignore the law to their benefit with little to no repercussions.
Trump couldn't have done 1/10th of what he did w/o enablers. That's what disturbs me - no one said no to him so that's on ordinary civil servants & appointees in a position to stop him who didn't & Americans who didn't vote out those GOP goons in mid-terms & 2020. The worst is the Senate who let Kavanaugh cry & lie his way onto SCOTUS & confirmed that schoolmarm w/no legal legitimacy & member of an extremist Catholic sect. They barely confirmed the impeccably credentialed Jackson to replace Breyer because she was black? a Dem nominee? a woman? Trump declared her untrustworthy? Politicians have their positions because "we" elect them & "we" are becoming increasingly incredibly ignorant, gullible, or apathetic.
Completely agree he was facilitated by sycophant's but he also slowly replaced all the appointees that did not support his agenda which allowed him to do some of the questionable things he did.
Bill Barr is the perfect example. It wasn't until it was obvious Trump was going to lose the election that he turned on Trump to try to save his own neck.
If you look at his cabinet he basically replaced everyone who passively opposed him over time to try to get his people in place to do his bidding. There is an interesting story on CNN on how Trump was trying to get his last minute appointees in the DOJ to help overturn the election.
There were also lower level people who quietly opposed what he was doing and actually prevented some of his lesser agenda items from being implemented.
The GOP politicians in power who are elected sold their souls to him as they see the power of his endorsements and wanted to be sure they got reelected by his loyal supporter base. Privately some of them admitted they did not support his agenda and BS stolen election claims but needed him to stay in power so they jumped on his bandwagon to stay in power.
Many of the GOP who did eventually speak out and opposed Trump did not run for reelection as they felt they would lose to whomever he endorsed. Of course many waited until they announced they would not run again and Trump had no leverage on them before they spoke out.
The few who had the courage to stand up to Trump, think Liz Cheney, have become outcasts in their own party and are fighting for their political lives.
If we recall when Trump announced he is running for President, President Obama stated there is no way the American people would vote for Trump. He would NEVER be elected. The media also said that. Personally I though it was just another of his publicity stunts. And maybe initially that is why Trump did it. To feed his huge ego which is larger than the Pacific Ocean.
Another group also stated THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WOULD NEVER ELECT TRUMP and gave him no chance of winning even the Republican nomination. That other group was THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.
When Trump won the nomination, many Republicans felt the party had no chance to win the White House and so did the Democrats and the Press.
I remember watching a round table discussion on NBC the night Obama won which included Tom Brokaw and those journalists stated the Republican party is so out of touch with where America is now, especially the young people, that the Democrats will dominate and control both houses of Congress and the White House for the next 40 years!!!!
When Trump won the Presidency it shocked the Dems, Hillary, the Press and the Republicans.
It was at that point the Republicans AND conservative Catholics and other Christians held their nose and fell in line behind a man who actually is nothing like they are. Suddenly they all supported Trump because they realized they could accomplish shaping America differently than Democrats after all. It wasn't 40 years out of power!!! Thanks to Trump it was only 8 years.
My conservative Catholic relatives and friends were embarrassed and very uncomfortable with Trump and how he lives and talks. But they held their nose to get power and overturning Roe V Wade happened to their joy. These people think abortion is MURDER just as does The Roman Catholic Church.
Interestingly these people I'm talking about don't agree with the Republicans and 2nd amendment zealots on guns.
But I'm sure they would vote for Trump again if he was the choice between Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren, AOC etc whom they find evil and opposed to God and his teachings while admitting they don't expect to see Trump behind the pearly gates either in the life to come!
Now that they've gotten Roe over-ruled, why on earth would they vote for him again?
Religious zealots confuse our form of government (democracy) w/theocracy. We theoretically have separation of church & state so as long as a believer doesn't have an abortion, why did they care what others did. They don't have to drink, gamble, or have an abortion - all of which were legal in certain circumstances.
You mentioned Pelosi's communion status. I don't care. That's between her & her priest. It has nothing to do w/her role in government. The question arose when JFK - the 2nd Catholic - ran for prez. There was concern that he'd answer to the Vatican not the US people. He obviously convinced voters he was fully capable of separating his presidential duties from his religious beliefs. Its when justices like the last one (before Brown's confirmation) merge the two.
@cyclone88 Conservative Catholics believe God knows every hair on their head and what they think or do. For years I've been an agnostic and I sense some of my relatives ( cousins now, only have one Aunt and no uncles left and my Aunt is 95) I sense they are skeptical about my commitment.
So conservative Catholics in general (perhaps there are some in this big country of ours who would vote differently) Conservative Catholics in general can't let God see them vote for people such as Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, AOC, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren etc because to them they support the killing of babies, gay marriage, abolishing prayer in school, forcing Catholic run businesses to provide health insurance that contains contraceptive and abortion coverage etc etc.
Remember Nancy Pelosi's Archbishop in California released a statement that she will not accept his phone calls so the Archbishop can explain to her what a scandal and evil with which she is involved and SHE IS PUTTING HER OWN SOUL AT RISK!!! As you may know Jesus said in the New Testament "It would be better for someone to have a millstone tied around his neck and cast into the sea than to stand before a Holy God after harming a little child". And Jesus rebuked his disciples when they stopped a group of little children from running up to Jesus and Jesus said " Do not hinder the little children and let them come to me. For such as these is the Kingdom of Heaven".
Speaker Pelosi claims she takes the teachings of her church and Jesus seriously and that is why she had a number of children ( no birth control I assume is what she means) but she and President Biden do not hold to placing their religion's positions on a secular society made up of millions of people who are not Catholic. And it is said it is very important to Joe Biden to take Holy Communion often. Biden hadn't been denied access to the Lord's table so far in his Parrish. But some of his fellow parishioners hold up signs which read "HIPPOCRITE" when he walks into his home church in Delaware.
As odd as it may seem, many conservative Catholics would hold their nose and vote for Trump again while regarding his personal conduct as embarrassing and un-Christian before they could vote for liberal Democrats who support what they see as radical and evil social positions.
John F. Kennedy, like me and many, many Catholics was not a Conservative Church/Bible believing Catholic. JFK cheating on his wife regularly. You shall not murder. But in that list is You shall not commit adultery.
Many Catholics ignore the teachings of the Church and Scripture. Usually, like me, were born into the faith.
Bernie Sanders was born a Jew. But I've read he is actually an atheist. He doesn't believe his own faith to be true. Every religion has those.
Donald Trump at conservative Christian conventions had claimed he is a Christian. But those such as his niece who really know him say Trump isn't at all religious. His religion is Donald Trump.
Donald Trump promises to support an agenda that Conservative Catholics want ONLY TO GET THEIR VOTE! And it worked. Trump's personal faith is null and void. Trump runs around with any woman that will let him, tells one lie after another, degrades women and cripple people, cheats people in business dealings and has ZERO Christian humility. Trump is a complete egotistical jerk.
The Bible also says " Those who say they love the Lord Jesus yet NOT KEEP HIS COMMANDMENTS IS A LIAR".
Elsewhere Jesus said " If you love me keep my commandments. And all the law and prophets hang on these two. Love God with all your mind and spirit AND LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS MUCH AS YOU LOVE YOURSELF.
I don't measure up to that BUT CERTAINLY TRUMP COULDN'T. The Lord probably has more mercy for Stormy Daniels !!!!!!!!
I'm Jewish and not attuned to some of what you said. My point was the basic idea of the Founding Fathers was to separate church & state. Most of them were agnostics or atheists. So, when you hold public office, you do the work of your constituency and not according to your private personal religious beliefs.
Trump is nothing. He claims his family attended Norman Vince Peale's Presbyterian church in Manhattan & he was quite taken w/Peale's Power of Positive Thinking. The church denies he's a member even though it's where he married his 1st wife Ivana (raised as a Communist atheist). Melania's father - a Communist atheist - had her secretly baptized as Catholic & she was blessed by the Pope during her visit to the Vatican. Their son Baron was baptized in an Episcopal church.
Don't get if G-d sees how people vote, that voting for a religious person whose job is to carry out the will of her constituents is worse than voting for a womanizing, thief, liar, and corrupt Trump is preferable, but I truly don't care. I think there are a lot of people who would be happy if the US became a theocracy.
@cyclone88 Yes I've met Catholics, other Christians and worked with a couple of Muslims who preferred loosing some freedoms in order to live under Biblical or Islamic law.
But as strange as it is to some people, devout people can't vote for someone who supports the taking of human life in the womb. So when faced with choosing between Nancy Pelosi or Joe Biden and Democrats who are now talking about opening abortion clinics on Federal Land in Red States and voting for a person like Donald Trump who promised to fight with them to stop the taking of human life in the womb, they would be forced to vote for what they see as the lesser of two evils.
I would assume they would prefer a better candidate. I've heard some personally say at a family picnic they don't want Trump to run again. And that Trump obviously doesn't share their positions on proper behaviour.
If we could get back to President Clinton's position; abortion should be legal, safe and RARE maybe this will cool off.
But I saw on TV today abortion providers in Blue states are expecting to have 30 to 40 thousand more procedures with women in Red States coming to Blue states.
I don't know what the numbers are but it seems abortion now is just a method of birth control in many cases.
Two of my good friends in the 70's who loved the Allman Brothers, especially Duane, were Jewish. And like me they didn't practice their faith to the degree their parents wanted:)
Good topic Rusty, and interesting thread responses up to a certain point and then it went off the rails.
Yes. Rusty's original point was a good one & worth discussing. It veered off into the religion & abortion topic & I shouldn't have responded. That's a separate topic - now that the religious fanatics have gotten Roe over-ruled, what is it they want (White Supremacy & the elimination of blacks, Jews, gays, women, anyone who doesn't own a gun) so badly that they'd align themselves w/Trump again? If the GOP could get over their fear of Trump's reprisals, the 2-party system might be workable. I don't know how much more evidence anyone needs that he's a loser, the candidates he backed mostly lost last Tuesday, & he's thinks his VP deserved hanging. I still don't believe that fear of losing Trump's base is what kept the GOP senators in line even on the most benign issues.
Getting back to the original point - the advent of the 24 hour news cycle led us to the never ending election cycle.
During football season (as an example) some of us can get into heated arguments over anything from the performances of coaches and players to controversial calls made on the field by officials. Generally, by the end of the game (or season) we get back into the swing of everyday life. We put these spats and disagreements behind us and get back to the more important aspects of daily life. I seem to remember when the same sort of behavior applied to politics.
The election was held (President) every four years. If your candidate didn't win, maybe you belly-ached for a week or two - then life just returned to normal. This never-ending political cycle has produced hateful rhetoric and sometimes violent actions. Angry speech is one thing - now people are literally carrying out acts of violent protest. Beyond this - many people have become increasingly strident in their believes and behavior. I am not exaggerating when I tell you that many of my personal relationships (family and life-long friends) have suffered or have pretty much ended due to this type of behavior.
There has always been a healthy division in attitudes and political opinions, but the abyss is widening. We really need to start finding some middle ground. We don't seem to be getting any help with this from our elected leaders.
Good topic Rusty, and interesting thread responses up to a certain point and then it went off the rails.
Yes. Rusty's original point was a good one & worth discussing. It veered off into the religion & abortion topic & I shouldn't have responded. That's a separate topic - now that the religious fanatics have gotten Roe over-ruled, what is it they want (White Supremacy & the elimination of blacks, Jews, gays, women, anyone who doesn't own a gun) so badly that they'd align themselves w/Trump again? If the GOP could get over their fear of Trump's reprisals, the 2-party system might be workable. I don't know how much more evidence anyone needs that he's a loser, the candidates he backed mostly lost last Tuesday, & he's thinks his VP deserved hanging. I still don't believe that fear of losing Trump's base is what kept the GOP senators in line even on the most benign issues.
A nation founded in part on the SEPARATION of Church and State - some are okay when Pentecostals and other hard-core right wing Christians insist on taking the wheel, yet scream "Terrorist!" when a Muslim dare attain public office. I remember when JFK was under attack for BEING Catholic ... and Irish!
I have to admit I never followed politics except during Watergate & the most recent prez. I just don't find it interesting. I have a friend who retired from being the chief political analyst for a big city newspaper so he wouldn't have to cover the lunatic former prez & he traveled when he wanted. Somewhere along the line, he started traveling ALL the time following primaries 2 years in advance of elections. Then he'd mention red/blue states - something I'd never heard of. I don't know when the primaries changed, but it just makes election season endless. My friend is as far left as one can get, the son of a Southern Baptist minister (before Baptists lost their minds in the 80s) & probably the smartest person I know, but he ALWAYS put his opinions aside to analyze what was actually being said. The point is the Founders thought Americans were capable of separating church & state, many of us do, and I'm not sure when the religious leaders & political leaders cozied up. Now that Roe is over-ruled, those religious people need to get back in their pews & out of DC.
One would think 24/7 news would make the primary period shorter - we can learn everything we need to know about anyone rapidly so we don't need 2 years to "narrow the field." I don't see much of a "field" these days anyway.
I haven't lost friends, but I certainly have plenty of acquaintances I avoid because they want to do in-your-face politics (like a Covid mask was a political rather than medical issue) all the time. I also don't get the need to have TV news on all day/night. People usually respond "oh, I like to have background noise." I think I'd lose my mind if I HAD to have Fox blaring at me every minute I was home. I remember the old days when The News came on at 7 pm for 1/2 hr & that was that. We could still have that - we just need to limit viewing to 1 hr/day. Maybe people would calm down.
@cyclone88 Almost two years into Biden's presidency and Trump (and his minions and boot-lickers) continue to hold rallys. I remember when none other than Rush Limbaugh chastised criticism of "W" by former Clinton backers saying that, "...there is an unwritten "RULE" - that the previous administration does not criticize the new administration until the 2nd year of the term ...". I don't know if this was an etched in stone "rule" or not. I have always tried not to pay that much attention myself. The politicians and the media (FOX News and CNN especially) don't give us much of a break these days.
FYI - I find the current hearing to be fascinating. A whole lot of damnable testimony ... which will have no effect at all on the staunchest supporters of Trump. This by itself is disturbing.
FYI - I find the current hearing to be fascinating. A whole lot of damnable testimony ... which will have no effect at all on the staunchest supporters of Trump. This by itself is disturbing.
I watch the video recaps & so far, I think it's damning but fairly presented. IMO there's a huge segment of people who wouldn't believe Trump is anything but their savior even if HE came out & stated "I'm the biggest liar, thief, & cheat you've ever seen & think you're the dumbest suckers on earth."
