The Real timschochet

I don’t think he does. This instance is a special case because Trump has kissed Putin’s ass for the last 10 years or so. That has been mostly bad for the USA but it could work to our advantage here. Which is why I am optimistic. But I wouldn’t make any greater assumptions about Trump because of it. In most cases he is still the bumbling idiot/con man he has always been.

If Russia gets to keep all of the territory they seized then this is a surrender. What’s more I can’t see Ukraine ever agreeing to it. I CAN see Ukraine agreeing to giving up Crimea.

Hard for me to admit but I think that, provided this works out, you make a solid point here.

Again I’m hoping for good things. But if the peace involves a surrender by Ukraine, then the choice of Munich as the meeting site would be unfortunate…

I gave you three specific reasons why I think this is so. If you choose to ignore them, that’s on you. If you want to refute them be my guest.

I’m not paying attention to any specific number. Prices are going up.

Sure. They asked Russia not to invade. Then they asked Russia to pull back their troops. Then they offered Russia an end to our embargo if they pulled back their troops.

I don’t think it’s too early to hold Trump responsible for inflation because of the specific reasons I brought up earlier: tariffs, the persecution of undocumented immigrants, and the weakening of our means to combat the avian flu.

I supported President Biden’s policy of supporting Ukraine. But now we have a new President so let’s see what he can do.

As I wrote in the other thread I am optimistic.

I think that for any lasting peace the U.S. is going to have to guarantee Ukraine’s sovereignty in some fashion.

Well I don’t want US troops in Ukraine so that doesn’t bother me. And the NATO thing was an idea. Anyhow what Hegseth says doesn’t matter. Trump is meeting with Putin and then we’ll know. I’m hoping for the best.

1. It’s no honor to be congratulated by Donald Trump. 2. Ruining America is a full time job.

It would be interesting to meet the person who says “in my opinion I’m usually wrong.”

I don’t make that argument and I used the Nuremberg trials to justify the argument I WAS making. I hope you realize that your response deliberately misapplying what I wrote makes you an unserious poster.

It won’t. HTH

1. It’s an argument. I disagree with your argument. 2. This forum is pretty heavily pro-Trump and pro-Maga. So as a woke guy I am often going to appear to be wrong in this forum. Doesn’t mean I am. In point of fact I’m usually right. 3. Democrats lost because inflation was too high, the border is perceived as out of control, and this nation still has trouble accepting a woman in charge. In that order.

Damn you responded to me again. I remain gratified by your attention.

What I am arguing is that Democrats could go even further left than they are now and still win. The key to this is not their specific ideology on any given issue but that they represent the alternative in a two party system. So long as that remains true (and it will for decades to come) Democrats will ALWAYS win and ALWAYS lose in a cycle. Now the question of whether Democrats have lost their edge in national elections is a different issues Since 1992 Democrats have won the popular vote in 6 out of 8 national elections. I think it’s a little early yet to believe that 2024 represents a sea change.

I think that for the time being I’m going to stop criticizing Musk here. Let’s see where this goes. I honestly don’t mind cutting waste out of government so long as it done thoughtfully and legally; I suspect in both cases it isn’t. But I also suspect that almost all of what is happening here is performative. So I’m going to leave this alone unless there are further confrontations between Trump and the judges- that part interests me. Let’s revisit this in 6 months and evaluate.

If you think I’m being emotional here is your opportunity to offer a reasoned argument as to why I am off base.

It’s a new argument that I didn’t consider before. But I listened to a well known economist, Paul Krugman, the other day and he said that the threat alone creates instability which can cause prices to rise. That made sense to me. Perhaps you disagree but if you find it “illiterate” feel free to make your case.

How will you explain it when Democrats win again as inevitably they will?

I didn’t ignore it. I read everyone of your posts. I don’t always respond because sometimes you write things so stupid that I feel bad for you and would prefer not to highlight your idiocy. That was such an instance. I will repeat my earlier argument that sometimes in rare instances it’s justifiable to disobey laws if those laws are clearly immoral. This principle was established by the United States at the Nuremberg Trials when it was determined that military officers, civil servants and private citizens had a moral duty to refuse to obey immoral laws or instructions. This principle does not apply to most instances and it certainly doesn’t apply to corrupt Donald Trump. So no I’m not a hypocrite and I will continue to call Trump a lawbreaker and continue to call you a supporter of lawbreaking. Suck it right back.

1. You don’t have firsthand knowledge that they knew anything about 9/11, which is what you wrote. You suspect they knew something, that’s all. Which is meaningless. 2. You wrote “Jewish owned company.” I suspect that means that the ownership had a Jewish sounding surname. Unfortunately you wrote this in response to @Frozenbeernuts anti-Semitic screed accusing Israel of being behind 9/11. Very unfortunate for you because by doing so you appear to agree with, or at least accept the possibility of, his bigoted nonsense. But you’re welcome to repudiate that.