That would be Trump.

And what about the “I would be a dictator for one day” comment?

(I’m not looking for an argument, just curious)

Whatever one fears or hopes for with a second Trump term, the first is not a good template for the future because there will be less restraint from the team he was saddled with to win party support. I would rather not find out.

Thank God for term limits whatever will be the end result. And these guys are old so if we're lucky whoever is elected dies on us before that limit is reached. And I won't shed a tear.

As a participant in the U.S. polity, your roll of the dice between candidates does not capture the cultural war happening here.

Honestly, I gave up long ago following every mad thing he says. The stupider and more offensive the better for him it seems. But, yes, judging on domestic policy, he probably would be a nightmare. On foreign policy, it's more polarised: he could be far better than Biden or he could do something absolutely crazy and start a world war.

I'm sure some leaders of countries would insist on that. On the other hand, maybe a 100 years from now, western Europe will be poor and they simply don't have to money to spend on it. That doesn't end the rights and responsibilities under the treaty. That's why the 2% spending is a guideline but the treaty obligation is different:

In order more effectively to achieve the objectives of this Treaty, the Parties, separately and jointly, by means of continuous and effective self-help and mutual aid, will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack. — Nato treaty

This doesn't say "spend money" and can be achieved in part through training instead of buying US produced weapons. I'd like to think treaty obligations like this are "for better or worse". If you don't want to meet your obligations, there's a mechanism to leave the treaty.

he could be far better than Biden or he could do something absolutely crazy and start a world war.

Fair enough.

I have on occasion thought he (Trump) could be better than Biden on foreign policy. But it only ever lasts a second or two, until I reflect on his policy on some key geopolitical issues, their incoherence and his megalomania.

The obvious question is what does far better than Biden look like, regardless of who it is we’re talking about?

Yikes. Biden stole classified documents and gets off.

Now we know what Trump needs to do to get off the majority of his indictments. Prove he is old and with a poor memory. Better still demonstrate that he is not of sound mind.

A walk in the park.

I voted against Trump twice. This is not a defense of him. But it’s time to wake up.

If you really think Trump and Biden are similar with respect to cognitive decline, then fine. I suppose these are subjective judgements.

But you have to accept that you’re in the minority and the median voter disagrees with you. And that’s not likely to change. Rationally, there is no other way to explain why Trump is crushing Biden in the polls despite all of the obvious weaknesses that Trump has—having lost last time, numerous indictments, not the incumbent, etc.

For Biden to be losing this badly at this point would make no sense if the median voter didn’t broadly agree with my subjective perception.

You can cherry pick a video of Trump confusing some names if you’d like. To me that seems like a fantastic way to lose to Trump. Why not just concede as a fact-on-the-ground that the median voter sees something that you don’t and adjust strategies accordingly?

For Biden to be losing this badly at this point would make no sense if the median voter didn’t broadly agree with my subjective perception. — Chisholm

What higher standard of objectivity could one hope for?

Diagnosis, I would think.

But you have to accept that you’re in the minority and the median voter disagrees with you. — Chisholm

None of us have the facts necessary to make an objective judgment of the cognitive capacities of either candidate. The fact that more people believe Biden is cognitively incapable of doing the job is a tribute to the success of right-wing media at pushing that narrative. Consequently, it's an issue for Biden's campaign to deal with it. They may, or may not, be successful.

That said, I absolutely would prefer a younger, more dynamic candidate - who is a better campaigner. My main criticism of Biden is that he's a poor politician. I nevertheless think he's done a good job in his Presidential duties.

Biden stole classified documents and gets off. — NOS4A2

Your allegation is unsupported by evidence. Here's a statement from the Hur report:

“We have concluded that there is not a prosecutable case against Biden. Although there was a basis to open the investigation based on the fact that classified documents were found in Biden’s homes and office space, that is insufficient to establish a crime was committed.The illegal retention or dissemination of national defense information requires that he knew of the existence of such documents and that he knew they contained national defense information.It is not a crime without those additional elements. Our investigation, after a thorough year-long review, concludes that there is an absence of such necessary proof. Indeed, we have found a number of innocent explanations as to which we found no contrary evidence to refute them and found affirmative evidence in support of them.”

In Trump's case - he knew he had national security documents, refused to turn them over when requested, hid them, and lied about it. And as you know, the classification level of the documents is not directly related to the crimes he is charged with - which stem from the espionage act.

Aside from the crimes, I continue to be astounded that Trump supporters think his alleged blanket declassification of national security documents somehow eliminates the national security risks of doing so.

Passing the Federal Civil Service Exam would be pretty darn objective.

None of us have the facts necessary to make an objective judgment of the cognitive capacities of either candidate. — Relativist

I agree, but who will get elected is not a matter of objective judgment. The damage has been done.

Our investigation, after a thorough year-long review, concludes that there is an absence of such necessary proof. Indeed, we have found a number of innocent explanations as to which we found no contrary evidence to refute them and found affirmative evidence in support of them.” — Relativist

Why didn't Hur just leave it there? He is not qualified to make as assessment of Biden's cognitive capacities and it is extraneous to the assessment he was tasked and is qualified to make.

I don't think he could have honestly reached the same conclusion about Trump's innocence but there is ample evidence to raise questions and concerns about his cognitive capacities.

Why didn't Hur just leave it there? He is not qualified to make as assessment of Biden's cognitive capacities and it is extraneous to the assessment he was tasked and is qualified to make. — Fooloso4

I guess because he wanted to be thorough in presenting potential defenses. Biden IS old, and sounds old. Is a failure to remember specific years when something happened indicative of cognitive impairment? I don't think so, but it fits easily into the narrative.

It is interesting how Enrgoran connected the decision to past scams.

Loser-1's KARMA WATCH: 16Feb24

criminal trials (pending):

• GA 2020 Election Interference RICO Indictment, 13 felonies – TBD in Atlanta

• NY 2016 "Hush Money" Business Fraud Indictment, 34 felonies – trial begins 25Mar24 in NYC

• Federal "January 6th" Conspiracy Indictment, 4 felonies – TBD in Wash. DC

• Federal Espionage, Classified Documents & Obstruction of Justice Indictment, 40 felonies – TBD in Fort Peirce, FL

4 jurisdictions, 4 indictments, 91 charges :up:

civil trials:

• E. Jean Carroll Sexual Assault & Defamation 1 – $5 million verdict

• E. Jean Carroll Defamation 2 – $83.3 million verdict

• Civil financial fraud – +$450 million (disgorgement + interest) verdict

+$538.3 million (currently) :cool:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/881649

civil trials (pending):

• 2 "January 6th" lawsuits by members of the US Congress threatened and traumatized by armed MAGA rioters who stormed the US Capitol Building

• "January 6th" lawsuit by US Capitol Police Officers injured & PTSD'd by armed MAGA rioters who stormed the US Capitol Building

And yet, the Pro-Trump media continues to feed the "witch hunt" narrative. The article Fox posted yesterday announces the verdict, then proceeds to describe Trump's grievances and repeats his courtroom defense - as if the prosecution never mounted a case.

And yet, the Pro-Trump media continues to feed the "witch hunt" narrative. — Relativist

Of course they do – their audience is a loser cult that lives to be lied to – which is good for business. Fox Noise, OAN, NewsMax, Alex Jones, RT, etc still manage to sell the "witch hunt" bs even though ALL the prosecutions' witnesses are MAGA-GOP "flying monkeys". The grift never sleeps. :mask:

The Trump cult has weaponized victimhood, and the GOP has embraced and furthered this paradigm because they perceive it to be successful. (Here's a paper submitted to the 1/6 committee on the topic).

Thanks, but I've read the official J6 Report by the US House Special Cmte as well as paid close attention to the MAGA movement since 2015 as well as the Birther & Tea Party movements before that. This "weaponized victimhood" goes back 30-40ish years with many rightwingers and blue collar whites. Loser-1 is only a dangerous symptom, not the cause – the paranoid impulses in American politics are at least as old as the republic. We're overdue for a political, if not national, course correction which I'm confident is happening as we watch the dominoes begin to fall in 2024. :mask:

Gold Sneakers and a large amount of money to spend.

Apologies to Steely Dan.

Don't know how much of this stuff is news around here, was to me anyway:

Former Wisconsin Republican Party chair says he was tricked by fake elector plan
^{— Anderson Cooper, Aliza Chasan, Sarah Koch, Madeleine Carlisle · CBS · Feb 18, 2024}

From a 2020 thread Ranking American Presidents...

My assessments, I'm afraid, are fairly conventional. Wiki, etc has helped me to recall the devilish details (always mindful of historical contexts and the risks, constraints, & opportunities (missed & taken) for presidential leadership). Of course, in the end, just a game of charades (or ideological rorschach) ... :cool:

5 Best U.S. Presiden(ts) - 2 or more of the following: leadership in war; statemanship (i.e. diplomacy to prevent armed conflict); strengthened 'the rule-of-law' (i.e. constitutional order & norms); promoted civil political or fiscal reforms in order to minimize domestic social conflicts; etc

1. Lincoln
2. FDR
3. Jefferson
4. TR
5. Washington

5 Worst U.S. Presiden(cies) - 2 or more of the following: mal-administration (i.e. conspicuous incompetence); flagrant corruption (further undermining public trust ...); demogoguery (i.e. inciting / pandering to "racists" "xenophobes" "misogynists" "nationalists" "religious bigots" "conspiracy" wingnut agitprop, etc); weakening 'the rule-of-law' (i.e anti-democratic abuses of one or more branches of government, etc); hawkish militarism (e.g. "wars of opportunity"); etc ...

1. TR45H (aka "Individual-1" "Putin's Bitch" "Agent Orange" "M.oscow A.sset G.rifting A.merica" "SCROTUS" ...)
2. Buchanan (+ Pierce + Tyler + Fillmore)
3. Harding + Bush 43 (aka "Dubya" "Shrub")
4. A. Johnson + Cleveland 2nd
5. Cleveland 1st + B. Harrison — 180 Proof

154 varied and distinguished scholars agree: Loser-1 is still ranked at the bottom of the list of 46 US Presidents – and if this Republic is lucky, no future president will be nearly as bad as or worse than this malignantly narcissistic demonstrable ignoramus, misogynist, defamer, rapist, racist, con artist, fraudster, insurrectionist, wannabe gangster / autocrat & pathological liar who was once (thanks, Shillary!) the 45th – and never to be again – occupant of the White House.

https://www.npr.org/2024/02/19/1232447088/historians-presidents-survey-trump-last-biden-14th

The Fox headline was: "New presidential rankings place Obama in top 10, Reagan and Trump below Biden"

Within the article, they did acknowledge Trump came in dead last, but some readers won't look past the headlines.

If Trump wins the election he will listed as the 47th President. Will he then have two places in the ranking?

FOX spews lies to an audience who wants be lied to, many of whom don't vote, so those "headlines" are as irrelevant as the Ranking of Presidents is irrelevant to historiical illiterates. And, IMO, Loser-1 will not win another term of POTUS so your question is moot.

A gofundme was set up to help Donald pay his just judgement. IN the 10 days since this was set up, they've raised enough money to cover about 10 days worth of interest on the judgement.

No solicitation here at TPF. As a matter of interest, what principles do you think distinguish between honest solicitation and scamming?

My bad: I didn't think about the fact this would constitute solicitation. I've edited that out.

I tend to assume scam unless it's verifiably from a known source for a clear purpose, and that source has no history of scamming.