Predictions for the 2026 Midterms

[IBDaMann]

You don’t know much do you?

You've never applied any critical reasoning, have you?

WaPo is Bezos media and Bezos is a Trump supporter.

So, your position is that whenever the Washington Post butchers Trump, it isn't butchering Trump ... because the owner, who doesn't control daily operations, has had dinner with Trump?

Your position is asinine. Were you posting in your sleep?

Daily News is Murdock, like Fox News.

Radical leftists. Fox News has been leftist crap for over fifteen years. They fired all their effective conservative voices.

WSJ is conservative.

WSJ is liberal.

BBC and Al Jezeera play it right down the middle on U.S. news coverage.

BBC and Al Jazeera are leftist in their ideologies. BBC HATES America although Al Jazeera has improved greatly from their "Great Satan" days.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

You've never applied any critical reasoning, have you?

I was a highly rated professional investigator for over 40 years and literally got paid for my deductive and critical thinking skills in both the public and private sectors. So I have a professional record to show what I am capable of, how about you?

So, your position is that whenever the Washington Post butchers Trump, it isn't butchering Trump ... because the owner, who doesn't control daily operations, has had dinner with Trump?

Not at all. It just isn't what you are painting it as.

Your position is asinine. Were you posting in your sleep?

That is not a counter argument. It is ad hominem horse manure. The personal attack that say, "I know I am losing this argument."

Radical leftists. Fox News has been leftist crap for over fifteen years. They fired all their effective conservative voices.

Fox News is radical Lefties? OK then... {LOL}. They aren't as bad as they use to be, but Jesse Watters appearence every week night at 8pm says you are very wrong about that, even before you get to Hannity.

WSJ is liberal.

On what planet?

BBC and Al Jazeera are leftist in their ideologies. BBC HATES America although Al Jazeera has improved greatly from their "Great Satan" days.

Both are relatively straight down the center on their coverage of US news. They report, for the most part, facts and leave the reader to determine what they mean.

I worked in politics for a time [until I realized it is too dirty a business and I too honest a person to live comfortably within it]. I worked in both radio and TV and print media before I became a professional law enforcer. I have a portfiolio few others can claim and your insults are water off a duck's ass when aimed at me.

So try sticking to facts and try to refute my arguments with them [I promise I will blow a hole the size of a Howitzer's in most of them] rather than try the personal attack crap.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

Let's turn our attention to your insane confusion that Trump is somehow Congress. Why do you even bother the rest of us at the adults' table? You have no business participating in this discussion. Learn the fundamentals of government first. The President is not Congress. I shouldn't be the first person to teach you this.

I didn't say the President is Congress. I implied the President usurped Congressional authority and he has. He is placing tariffs outside the realm of Artical One of the Constitution. He is doing the same with making war over the 60 day period of the War Powers Act. Both of which are clearly defined by law as Congress' job.

There are no Trump tax cuts. Congress owns everything about taxes, to include tax cuts, e.g. when they take effect and when they end.

Trump stamped HIS name all over the BBB nonsense. HE claims it as his own. When HE did so how am *I* wrong in accrediting it to him, when HE claims it?

Your argument is spurious and weak. Further, as I would like to think you have a brain you are aware that is so, which is why you went for the personal attack instead of a solid counter argument.

Do better.

 

[IBDaMann]

I was a highly rated professional investigator for over 40 years

The "highly rated" part is your own assessment.

and literally got paid for my deductive and critical thinking skills

Nope. You got paid because someone signed a contract to reimburse you for your time.

So I have a professional record to show what I am capable of,

Nope. You have nothing to show your capabilities outside your posts, which show that you aren't bright enough by which to read.

Not at all. It just isn't what you are painting it as.

Dial it back. Your (lack of) logic dismissed the Washington Post's attacks on Trump as somehow not being attacks on Trump because Bezos owns the Washington Post. You suck at logic.

That is not a counter argument. It is ad hominem

Correct. I felt like embellishing my commentary with a fitting assessment of your obvious cognitive shortcomings.

horse manure. The personal attack that say, "I know I am losing this argument."

Once again, you aren't very bright. You are declaring me to be losing an argument that I am not presenting. You, on the other hand, have presented gibberish, leaving readers to wonder if you will ever get make a coherent point. Vegas sports books are giving very low odds of that ever happening.

Fox News is radical Lefties? OK then... {LOL}. They aren't as bad as they use to be, but Jesse Watters appearence every week night at 8pm says you are very wrong

Too funny! James and Lachlan Murdoch, who run everything, HATE Trump. You pointed to only one pawn at Fox News. Point to 46 more like him and maybe you'll have a point. The Murdoch's have gotten rid of all the effective conservative voices. Long has it been since anyone could get actual news from Fox News.

even before you get to Hannity.

What about Hannity? All you can say about him is that he doesn't bash Trump. To you and your TDS-infection, simply not bashing Trump is tantamount to far-right bending-of-the-knee.

On what planet?

I forgot, you're speaking from your perspective on the extreme Marxist left that wants the US Constitution dismantled ... so yes, you're correct, from your point of view, WSJ is conservative.

To any rational adult, however, WSJ is left-shifted.

Both are relatively straight down the center on their coverage of US news.

Nope. I can see why an America-HATING Marxist, such as yourself, would say that, though. A rational, dispassionate adult, however, would not be able to help but see the anti-American bias from Al Jazeera and the BBC that serves as life-giving manna from heaven to the likes of you.

I worked in politics for a time

The Socialist Party of America? ... or the Social Democrats of America?

I have a portfiolio few others can claim

Perhaps you should look into building the same portfolio that many other intelligent people have.

and your insults are water off a duck's ass when aimed at me.

Too funny! You consider my recommendations to apply critical reasoning, and to stop allowing other people to do your thinking for you, to be insults that just roll right off of you.

So try sticking to facts

So try learning what a "fact" is, and yes, that necessarily entails abandoning your intellectual laziness and actually learning. Remaining too stupid to learn won't work out well for you in the end.

and try to refute my arguments

OK. Make a coherent argument. The ball is in your court.

 

[IBDaMann]

I didn't say the President is Congress.

You absolutely do say everything that you imply. Perhaps you should pay attention and choose your words with care. Everything you wrote was stupid.

I implied the President usurped Congressional authority and he has.

Nope. You are a moron.

He is placing tariffs outside the realm of Artical One of the Constitution.

Have I mentioned that you are a moron. This statement is simply what you have been ordered to regurgitate by the people who do your thinking for you. Article 1 gives Congress the authority to make laws regarding tariffs, and that allows Congress to make laws that allow the President to control tariffs, e.g. Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Section 232, Trade Act of 1974, Section 301, Trade Act of 1974, Section 201, Trade Act of 1974, Section 122, Tariff Act of 1930, Section 338 (19 U.S.C. § 1338), International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977, etc.

He is doing the same with making war over the 60 day period of the War Powers Act.

Too funny! You are incompetently stupid. The President can wage war indefinitely. Why haven't you bothered to read the War Powers Act before stupidly citing it to support what you have been ordered to regurgitate by the people who do your thinking for you? The President merely has to inform Congress of what he is doing, and he has done so.

Has Congress ordered the attacks to cease? Have they? If they have not, then you have some 'splain'n to do, Lucy.

Trump stamped HIS name all over the BBB nonsense.

See? I knew it. You think Trump is Congress. You think that Trump can become Congress by "stamping his name" all over things ... whatever that means. Let's not pretend that you have any clue about what you speak. You gibber.

HE claims it as his own.

Is that how you think it works in the US? If I claim the Pentagon as my own, is it therefore mine? Your perspective is fuqked.

Your argument is spurious and weak.

My claim: The President is not Congress
Your claim: The President is Congress

You're a moron.

Further, as I would like to think you have a brain

... because it wouldn't reflect well on you being raked over the coals by someone without a brain.

Do better.

Too funny. You might want to try. Let me know if you need any help. I'm here for you.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

The "highly rated" part is your own assessment.


Nope. You got paid because someone signed a contract to reimburse you for your time.


Nope. You have nothing to show your capabilities outside your posts, which show that you aren't bright enough by which to read.


Dial it back. Your (lack of) logic dismissed the Washington Post's attacks on Trump as somehow not being attacks on Trump because Bezos owns the Washington Post. You suck at logic.


Correct. I felt like embellishing my commentary with a fitting assessment of your obvious cognitive shortcomings.


Once again, you aren't very bright. You are declaring me to be losing an argument that I am not presenting. You, on the other hand, have presented gibberish, leaving readers to wonder if you will ever get make a coherent point. Vegas sports books are giving very low odds of that ever happening.


Too funny! James and Lachlan Murdoch, who run everything, HATE Trump. You pointed to only one pawn at Fox News. Point to 46 more like him and maybe you'll have a point. The Murdoch's have gotten rid of all the effective conservative voices. Long has it been since anyone could get actual news from Fox News.


What about Hannity? All you can say about him is that he doesn't bash Trump. To you and your TDS-infection, simply not bashing Trump is tantamount to far-right bending-of-the-knee.


I forgot, you're speaking from your perspective on the extreme Marxist left that wants the US Constitution dismantled ... so yes, you're correct, from your point of view, WSJ is conservative.

To any rational adult, however, WSJ is left-shifted.


Nope. I can see why an America-HATING Marxist, such as yourself, would say that, though. A rational, dispassionate adult, however, would not be able to help but see the anti-American bias from Al Jazeera and the BBC that serves as life-giving manna from heaven to the likes of you.


The Socialist Party of America? ... or the Social Democrats of America?


Perhaps you should look into building the same portfolio that many other intelligent people have.


Too funny! You consider my recommendations to apply critical reasoning, and to stop allowing other people to do your thinking for you, to be insults that just roll right off of you.


So try learning what a "fact" is, and yes, that necessarily entails abandoning your intellectual laziness and actually learning. Remaining too stupid to learn won't work out well for you in the end.


OK. Make a coherent argument. The ball is in your court.

You absolutely do say everything that you imply. Perhaps you should pay attention and choose your words with care. Everything you wrote was stupid.


Nope. You are a moron.


Have I mentioned that you are a moron. This statement is simply what you have been ordered to regurgitate by the people who do your thinking for you. Article 1 gives Congress the authority to make laws regarding tariffs, and that allows Congress to make laws that allow the President to control tariffs, e.g. Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Section 232, Trade Act of 1974, Section 301, Trade Act of 1974, Section 201, Trade Act of 1974, Section 122, Tariff Act of 1930, Section 338 (19 U.S.C. § 1338), International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977, etc.


Too funny! You are incompetently stupid. The President can wage war indefinitely. Why haven't you bothered to read the War Powers Act before stupidly citing it to support what you have been ordered to regurgitate by the people who do your thinking for you? The President merely has to inform Congress of what he is doing, and he has done so.

Has Congress ordered the attacks to cease? Have they? If they have not, then you have some 'splain'n to do, Lucy.


See? I knew it. You think Trump is Congress. You think that Trump can become Congress by "stamping his name" all over things ... whatever that means. Let's not pretend that you have any clue about what you speak. You gibber.


Is that how you think it works in the US? If I claim the Pentagon as my own, is it therefore mine? Your perspective is fuqked.


My claim: The President is not Congress
Your claim: The President is Congress

You're a moron.


... because it wouldn't reflect well on you being raked over the coals by someone without a brain.


Too funny. You might want to try. Let me know if you need any help. I'm here for you.

You realize that in the verbeage and the verbose style you use you make it very obvious what main account for which this is a sockpuppet, don't you.

Sure, on this site it is nothing but words but I am not the one making this personal and I am happy enough to let the assembled reason out for themselves who the "moron" is.

You are never going to win a fight of ideas with me going at it like this. You have to shape your thoughts around facts and present them in a way that substantiates that your points are fact based, not simply your opinion on the subject.

You have a nice night tonight and a good day tomorrow. Put the sockpuppet away for a while and go out in the sunshine. I'll be playing poker at the firehouse so I won't be here till evening anyway so unless I stop by in the morning before I head out I won't be here for you to throw your peobbles at.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

ay that, though. A rational, dispassionate adult, however, would not be able to help but see the anti-American bias from Al Jazeera and the BBC that serves as life-giving manna from heaven to the likes of you.


The Socialist Party of America? ... or the Social Democrats of America?



OK. Make a coherent argument. The ball is in your court.

OK, I will. I am a card carrying registered Republican and when I worked in politics over 40 years ago I helped get Republicans elected to statewide and county offices as a job. I made a living at it. I also held a very minor elected office myself.

When I worked in law enforcement for 25 years I served my community well. I was decorated a baker's dozen times for doing so.

What did you ever do for your country or community? You ever serve in ANY capacity?