You are not logged in.
Calliban,
I grew tired of politicians claiming one thing and then doing something completely different, which is why I voted for President Trump. I don't care if he isn't the smartest person on the planet, because that person is never on the ballot. Quite frankly, he doesn't need to be in order to still be preferable to politicians who deliberately do things to hurt their own people. I care that he doesn't speak and act exactly as Democrats want him to speak and act, either, because he's never going to please people who engage in angry / scared / conniving groupthink.
What I know with certainty is that the other person in the race is either senile or has dementia and the previous Democrat candidate he ran against was a crook. We now know that the entire Russian collusion fraud was the work of her election campaign and our FBI, yet the Democrats ran with that fraud for over 3 years before it was painfully apparent to the American public that they had no evidence to support their increasingly bizarre assertions because there never was any.
The COVID hysteria has been blown out of all proportion to its true destructive potential. I feel terrible that so many have died, but for those who remain amongst the living, they must still provide for themselves and their families. The only way to do that is with a healthy economy. Taking the future away from the young in order to stave off death just a little while longer for the elderly and infirm is neither a wise nor fair course of action. Even if you subscribe to some form of socialism or collectivism, as most Democrats do here in America, where the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, then they still have no case to make. I wager humanity has done more to hurt itself than COVID-19 ever could, and we are still clueless about the origin of the virus. All we have is the personal belief of scientists who have no evidence, who try to pawn off evidence by anecdote or evidence as it relates to some other virus, as somehow being related to this particular virus.
The damage done by the rioting / looting / shooting is quite real. At least 40 to 50 lives and several billions of dollars of additional economic damage have been done by anarchists and socialists who the Democrat politicians openly support. I'm not in favor of anarchy in our streets over temper tantrums about what the Police, in almost all cases, never did. Democrats run 100% of these cities where the rioting occurs and if they can't figure out how to restrain or prevent bad behavior on the part of their Police, then they are at least partly to blame. If a Democrat mayor can order the Police not to enforce the laws at all, then he or she can equally dictate that the Police do not immediately react like Terminators to someone who isn't an immediate lethal threat to the responding Police Officer.
Instead of quelling the riots, the Democrat mayors and governors who refuse to enforce the law created about 10 million New Democrat gun owners, all due to their refusal to permit the Police to enforce our laws. Our mayors and governors stupidly have the authority to tell the Police to sit on their hands and watch the carnage. All the Republicans I know already own firearms, meaning none of us went out and bought any new guns. As a result, these subversive local Democrat politicians work against their own party's stated political goals of disarming their intended victims so they can't fight back against the violent criminal mobs they support.
Rather than climate change, the fires on the West Coast happened because people live within the forests there, which are now packed with electrical wires, propane tanks, motor vehicles, fireworks, cigarettes, and a Democrat-run government that flatly refuses to manage the forest resources their states have been blessed with. California is a beautiful state, but if tens of millions of people are intent on living there amongst the trees and scrub brush, then very careful conservation of the resources is required. The cities there need to be properly cleaned up, meaning the trash / needles / feces removed, homeless or drug addicts moved into shelters and off the streets, and violent criminals incarcerated or re-incarcerated, as required. After they're done with that, then they can devote resources to all the other activities they want to undertake, from addressing climate change.
I'm equally tired of Democrats trying to use every bad event that befalls humanity or America as a political bludgeon to attack their political opponents with or another excuse to seize more power that we, the people, did not grant to them. Democrats either can't or won't articulate why they think their ideas are better, generally a sign that their are ideas aren't any better. If government is doing such a poor job at protecting people or resources, then maybe that's a sign that government wasn't meant to solve all of life's problems.
Former VP Biden said we need to give businesses PPE so they can reopen. Maybe he hasn't noticed, but all the businesses here in Texas are already open and already have masks, gloves, hand sanitizer, Lexan shields, dots to stand on for social distancing, posted signage instructing patrons as to what to do, etc. Therefore, his "big idea", that doesn't materially differ from what we're already doing, is to do what we're already doing. This is the kind of nonsense I'm used to hearing from politicians. So, we're going to do what all of us are already doing, and somehow the end result is going to be different under former VP Biden rather than President Trump. That's just ignorant.
Anyway, it's been an off year for America. Hopefully 2021 is better, no matter who is elected and what course of action we ultimately take.
Offline
The drugs he is on cause delirium as he is striking out Trump Halts Covid-19 Relief Aid Talks Until After Election
Its got to be all the democrats fault that he ended up sick and will deign that he went running for the kitchen sink for help....
Offline
SpaceNut,
Nancy Pelosi already said that there will be no deal on COVID-19 relief until after the election, long before President Trump gave up on trying to cut a deal before the election.
You should get your information from better sources:
UNBELIEVABLE Nancy Pelosi Interview Proves Two-Party Political Theater!
Jimmy Dore's no fan of President Trump.
Offline
Clearly not caring about anyone but himself....Top White House security official Crede Bailey hospitalized with COVID-19
Count is still growing for the infected that did not heed the virus....
Offline
SpaceNut,
Every bit of the Russian collusion fraud will now be declassified, as will former Secretary of State Clinton's E-mails. Tell GW he has some more light reading to look forward to.
Offline
Watching the YouTube recording of the US Vice Presidential debate. Performance is orders of magnitude better. Individuals who know how to debate, and know the issues. I'm still hearing blatant lies from both sides, and both candidates still drone on long after their time is up. But one individual on Facebook (an American) asked if we could cancel all future Presidential debates, and just have Vice Presidential ones.
Offline
For RobertDyck re #1806
I try to stay out of the chat topics. However, I liked your post for several reasons, and appreciate your taking the time to look at the debate.
In a spirit of reciprocity, I'd be willing to look at a debate in Canada that you feel deserves a wider audience.
Following up on your report of the comment from the Facebook inquiry ... I would like to toss out this suggestion ... Match up Kamala Harris with Donald Trump.
Now ** that ** would be an event to watch.
And the moderator would need to be someone with the persona of an NFL (football) umpire ... I can't think of anyone in the American Media who has what it would take.
(th)
Offline
Oh, I'm not sure you want to subject yourself to Canadian politics right now. In the 1990s the Liberal Party of Canada was not an extreme left-wing party, was not "liberal" in the sense that Republicans use the word. The Liberal Party was moderate, more equivalent to moderate Democrat. But under the current Prime Minister, it's moved too far to the left. Back story: for the 2015 federal election, the Liberal Party took the deliberate strategy of trying to get everyone who opposed Stephen Harper and his Conservatives to vote for their party. So they made promises to seduce voters from the NDP and Green parties. NDP is blatantly socialist, very much tax-and-spend. They went into deficit with a promise to balance the budget for 2019, and return to surplus in 2020. At the end of February 2019 the Finance Minister announced they had a $3 billion surplus for the first 11 months of the fiscal year. That's such a puny surplus that it's basically just balanced, but it means they were on track for a balanced budget for 2019, and surplus for 2020. All they had to do was do nothing, stay the course, and they would have fulfilled that key election promise. But election was scheduled for October 2019, so the budget of 2019 (which came out in March) included a lot of new spending promises. Liberals tried to hold onto NDP and Green voters. But of course voters for those parties were always going to vote for candidates from their own parties. Once Stephen Harper and his Conservatives were gone, they weren't going to vote Liberal again. Liberals got re-elected in 2019, but only won a minority.
In a country with more than two political parties, it's possible that no party will gain 50% or more of the seats in the House. When that happens, they have to get at least one other party to vote for their bills. And Canada has a Parliamentary system. There's no such thing as impeachment, but they can hold a confidence vote. When a new session of Parliament starts, there's a Speech from the Throne, and Parliament votes on that speech. That's considered a confidence vote. The annual budget is a confidence vote, and there's usually a fiscal update half way through the year, also a confidence vote. Other than that, any member of Parliament can introduce motion to vote confidence. If the majority of the House votes non-confidence, then that forces an election. According to the Canadian constitution a term of the federal government is 5 years. But at any time the Prime Minister can ask the Governor General to hold an election early. An election cannot be delayed beyond 5 years, but can be called early. And if Parliament votes non-confidence, that forces an election. To make it more complicated, if a Prime Minister loses confidence of Parliament "soon after an election", the Governor General will ask the leader of the official Opposition if he/she can form a coalition that will hold the confidence of Parliament. This effectively fires the Prime Minister, and the leader of the opposite party becomes Prime Minister without an election. This has only happened once in Canadian history, but it has happened. In 2008, Stephen Harper almost did it to himself, but managed to whine to the Governor General to weasel out of it. The definition of "soon" is left to the discretion of the Governor General, but in 2008 Stephen Harper screwed up before Parliament sat the first day following the election. You can't get more "soon" than that. And to make it even more complicated, Stephen Harper's Conservatives passed a "fixed election dates" law that makes a term 4 years instead of 5. But nothing prevents an early election anyway; either the Prime Minister could ask the Governor General or Parliament voting non-confidence.
Since October 2019 our federal government has been minority. The Conservative party has tried to force a non-confidence vote several times, but so far at least one of the minor parties have voted confidence in the Liberals. In order to get the NDP to support them, Liberals have adopted NDP policies. That means they've gone far left-wing. Liberal voters like me are getting upset because they're too left-wing.
And... environmentalists expected Liberals to implement extreme policies. Liberals have attempted a balanced approach, giving some concessions to environmentalists but allowing industry to continue. But environmentalists don't accept compromise, they want everything! Groups of protesters have blocked construction and created great disruptions. The Liberal government refused to take strong action. When protesters block projects approved by the Liberals, the government refused to send police. Those protesters are voters that Liberals expected to be their base. So pandering too much to NDP and Green party voters has gotten them in trouble.
Up here half the TV stations on cable are American stations. We see American politics all the time. And most of Canada's trade is with America. Most Canadians are familiar with American politics. In my case, I lived in the US a couple times. Both times my employer sponsored me for a temporary work visa only, not a green card, so I had to move back to Canada when the contract expired. But are you really willing to get into our mess?
Offline
For RobertDyck re #1808
Thanks for your lengthy and thoughtful (and helpful) reply .... In past years, I've watched British "Prime Minister's Questions" each week on CSPAN, but I've cut back a bit since the "ORDER ORDER' Speaker retired. "John Bercow" was (and is) a remarkable individual who received (and deserved) respect in the US.
for some reason, CSPAN does not (or at least DID not) seem to cover Canada as frequently. On the other hand, CSPAN ** does ** cover Canada at times.
Your post is too long for me to digest right now. I'll have to get back to it.
***
While it flashes through my mind .... is there any chance your Large Ship project could fit into any of the political scenarios unfolding up your way?
If you were to see it as a United Nations undertaking, led by Canada with its remarkable favorable global rating, then there might be some interest in marshaling the outsources you need to go from early vision to architectural drawings.
A quick re-scan of your post gives me reason to doubt this is possible << sigh >>.
(th)
Last edited by tahanson43206 (2020-10-08 11:04:41)
Offline
When the Mars Society first formed, relations with Russia were good. Boris Yeltsin was President of Russia. Many in the Mars Society suggested using the Russian rocket Energia for a Mars Direct mission. Even Dr Zubrin himself suggested it in his first edition of "The Case for Mars". It would take 3 Energia rockets instead of 2 Ares, but that was far less expensive than developing Ares. Robert Zubrin's book cited a Stanford University estimate of the price of Energia. But I asked if anyone had actually asked the Russians. No one responded. So I did. I got an answer; yes, in February 2001 it was available. And through some work, I got a price estimate. But US Congress wanted an American rocket. But in the early 2000s they weren't willing to fund development, so no progress.
At one point I got frustrated, suggested Canada lead an international mission to Mars. I suggested the mission plan be based on Mars Direct, but using Russia's big rocket. Asked a couple Canadian astronauts to support the idea. One of them became president of the Canadian Space Agency, then got elected to be a federal Member of Parliament. I even suggested that if Russia has a problem working with the US, then we could do it without the US. That would be Canada, Russia, ESA, Japan, and anyone else who might be interested. (India, Brazil?). But Canadian Parliament wasn't interested; it didn't go anywhere.
Marc Garneau was the former astronaut who became CSA president. He pitched the idea of a Mars rover similar to Spirit or Opportunity. He expected a partner to launch it (NASA, Russia, ESA), Canada would build the rover including a multi-segment drill for core samples. And partners would contribute science instruments to analyze those samples. But Parliament wasn't willing to fund even that. I spoke to some MPs to try to push Mr Garneau's plan, it would have required increasing CSA's budget by CAD$150 million. They weren't willing to pay for that.
I tried to find a way to fund Canadian participation in that human mission to Mars, at a reasonable price that Parliament could afford, but they wouldn't even listen.
Offline
For RobertDyck re #1810
SearchTerm:CanadaHistorySpace 2001 to 2020
SearchTerm:CanadianHistorySpace 2001 to 2020
http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php … 46#p172946
I don't see any way around this ... You'll have to run for Prime Minister on a Pro-Space program.
And since the key problem (as I understand it) is the lack of tax income from Canadian citizens and corporations, the only way out of that dilemma is to dramatically increase productivity of Canadian citizens and corporations.
Fortunately, the need for goods and services for the people living on Earth is so great, it will take multiple nations working together to begin to put a dent in the backlog.
(th)
Offline
Robert,
That's been the exact problem we have here in America. Neither major political party wants to compromise on anything. One party in particular is constantly trying to take more of what the other party wants to have and they never receive anything that they actually value in return for what was taken from them or conceded to the other side.
Off the top of my head:
Certain Democrats simply make up lies about opposition candidates, but then the Democrats refuse to hold them accountable for their actions or push what they know to be a false narrative with no basis in reality. Former Secretary of State Clinton immediately comes to mind, along with her enablers who knew full well what was going on- former President Obama, former Vice President Biden, former DNI Clapper, former CIA Director Brennan, former FBI Director Comey, former FBI Director Mueller, former FBI Special Agent Strzok, etc. When the ugly truth finally comes out, the Democrats and Democrat-run media ignore it or keep peddling the same false narrative and pretend that what they didn't wasn't profoundly criminal in nature.
Democrats want to take the guns, but then refuse to fund and support the Police. If you defend yourself in your own home, then they tamper with evidence and try to prosecute you for their crimes or the results of the crimes of their supporters, which they will happily bail out of jail. You can't have it both ways, but that's what Democrats claim they want. Either protect them from violent criminals or they'll do it themselves.
Democrats want to fund abortions, but providing a "get out of basic human biology free" card doesn't cause people to be more selective in who they choose to have children with. If you want to have sex with someone else, then accept that there are consequences for doing that. If you don't want to deal with the consequences, then don't perform the act. Most reasonable people are perfectly willing to accept that their are exceptions for rape. All Republicans I know don't think women should be forced to deal with the consequences of someone who raped them. I don't care one bit if people use contraceptives, either, but I shouldn't be forced to pay for it through government edict. If you can't afford a box of condoms, you have other problems to solve before worrying about having sex with someone, possibly creating a new problem that you can't afford to pay for, and no, it's not everyone else's fault that you're poor when you're out there having sex and, as a natural result, producing children you can't afford to raise.
Democrats want to fund programs to address climate change, but the best examples we have where that's been tried on a massive scale, such as Germany, have been complete and utter failures in reducing CO2 emissions, so whatever they're doing clearly isn't working, unless making electricity unaffordable was the end goal. France has nuclear power and France had CO2-free electricity long before any of the "green fetishists" in Germany even thought about climate change. Nuclear power is expensive, just not as expensive as wind and solar, on account of excessive resource consumption associated with wind and solar, short operational life that dictates frequent replacement, and the fact that there is no grid-scale storage solution in existence, which would only make the solution even more absurdly expensive, all while failing to reduce CO2 emissions.
I'm tired of all the simpleton solutions that are grossly infeasible or don't actually work, non-solutions / non-sequitur solutions, and making the problem even worse solutions that the Democrats have come up with. They need to stop throwing tantrums whenever they don't get their way, stop virtue-signaling to everyone else that they have no virtue, and start coming up with better and more realistic ideas.
Here's an example of climate action plan that would actually work (precisely why we'll never implement it until it's too late):
1. Build 2 new nuclear reactors at sites where old or shut-down reactors already exist- because that land will never be used for anything else.
2. Build small and affordable commuter electric cars that people of ordinary means can drive to work everyday and plug in at night.
3. Don't ship things around the world 3 times to make 1 finished product. Build infrastructure to manufacture products where the products will be consumed at. America doesn't need German or Japanese cars built in Germany or Japan, any more than Germany or Japan need American cars that were built in America. Make local, buy local, recycle local, unless the economics are so lopsided in favor of centralization that it requires a more sophisticated approach.
4. Recycle every scrap of plastic and metal that would otherwise end up in a landfill, useless to humanity for the rest of eternity. If you have to employ more people to recycle what society has to part ways with, then even better, because everyone needs a job.
5. Replant more trees to replace those burnt in fires or consumed by industry.
Trying to do more than 5 things at one time is just diluting precious time and resources. It's not a plan, it's firing a shotgun at the problem and hoping one of the pellets goes straight through the heart of the problem. That's generally an exceptionally bad self defense plan. Any problem that gets incrementally worse over time will be solved through incremental steps, not empty political promises, virtue-signaling, or shaming attempts by media or celebrities.
A celebrity can afford a $50K to $100K electric car. Joe who works at the meat packing plant 5 miles down the road can't afford that, so stop blaming and start coming up with a practical solution. Joe can't walk to work in a blizzard, so he needs a car, and if you want him to drive an electric car, then you're going to make it affordable and convenient for him to buy one. If he can plug his car in at work and he has a warm car to drive him home at night, then we don't have to work very hard to sell the idea to him. It's not his fault he can't afford to buy a $100K car, it's the fault of all the supposedly smart people (who clearly are not very smart) shrieking about there being a problem while doing little to nothing to come up with a practical solution.
Once all electricity is provided by CO2-free sources and electric light motor vehicles have replaced most of the fossil fuel powered ones, then we will address heavier vehicles with more demanding power-to-weight and range requirements. The point is, you have to start somewhere, so start somewhere that doesn't require new technology development or drastic changes to the way people live and work. We're already doing remote work due to the global pandemic and that's saving a lot of fuel as well.
Offline
VP debate was the usual lies, half truths and outlandish what the other side would do if the tables are turned...
The FLY won the debate....
The post by KBD512 for fixing America needs to be discussed I think separately from politics....and its hard to separate
1 nuclear plants on existing sites would mean hauling off the old junk and not building another of the same on the site but build a more economical small units that are built more robustly.
2 The auto manufacturers could be sized for the number of occupants using them rather than thinking that every one needs a huge vehicles but they will not and if they did they would charge a full sized purchase price rather than the much small one that should be...
3 The reason is that it is lopsided at this time but it does not need to be if energy costs and taxation were lower.
4 Right now even with the recycling the companies on american soil are not the ones reusing the materials that we save from the landfills.
5 The wild fires are an example of not grooming the large areas to control the chances of fires by logging and replanting so as to make it less likely for fires to occur.
The average joes jobs are only possible in cities to be so close as to only be 5 miles away...Most folks need to drive 30 minutes to 2 hours one way for the most part along toll roads. The use of a bikes is dangerous along most roads and inner city traffic let alone a motor cycle in the bad weather which happens. The small human powered, electric cars would still need to be made faster and safer for driving in amoung real large vehicles to be practical in use under the conditions plus need to cost less..
Offline
On another note the A plot to kidnap Michigan Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer and put her “on trial” was foiled by undercover agents and informants, the FBI said. The Plot Against Gretchen Whitmer Shows the Danger of Private Militias as Six people have been charged with a plot to kidnap the Michigan governor, Gretchen Whitmer, that involves links to a rightwing militia group, the Federal Bureau of Investigation announced.
Some articles are labeling this as a terror plots while its far from it....
Offline
We need thermal depolymerization. Recycled plastic that's too yellow or brittle to simply be melted and reused. Place plastic in a chamber without oxygen; heat breaks it down into oil and natural gas. The problem is the few companies doing this are selling the oil and natural gas as fuel. I consider that to be an alternate means of disposal, not recycling. We need a single plant that can take recycled plastic in one end, thermal depolymerization will break down to oil and natural gas. 85% of the mass of plastic becomes oil and natural gas, the rest is lost as steam and CO2. That's the energy source that drives the process. But in that same building, while the oil and natural gas are still hot, further process them into plastic. Produce plastic pellets, sold in bulk to companies that manufacture plastic items. So old plastic comes in one end, new plastic out the other. Since the plastic is broken down to oil, then built up again, it literally is new plastic. New plastic made from oil is new plastic; doesn't matter where the oil comes from.
One advantage to this system is it can accept any form of plastic from recycling, and produce whatever is currently in demand. Since plastic is broken down to oil, what comes out doesn't have to be the same plastic.
Offline
SpaceNut,
The trees are gone now. That's an objective fact. So, if you want more trees, then it's time to plant more trees. Simple logic says that's the correct course of action. Complaining about the problem or instituting a government program to fix what government screwed up won't get the job done. Government is not the solution to most problems. If it was, then most problems would be solved by now. They are not, and arguably many of our problems have been made worse by government, ergo more government won't solve anything.
Offline
California, U.S. Forest Service Establish Shared Long-Term Strategy to Manage Forests and Rangelands
So state and federal government agencies are to blame and are the parties that need to manage the forests.....
Why Trump wants to stay in office comes from the shield its provided.
Trump will be slammed with a pile of personal lawsuits once he leaves office. Here are 9 major ones he'll have to face.
Some have been settled in arbitration but thats just a simple way of avoiding the crimes punishment....
Offline
Everyone,
At this point I can't say for with absolute certainty who will ultimately win our 2020 Presidential election, but it looks pretty likely that our next President of the United States will be former Vice President Joe Biden, who will become President-elect and 46th President of the United States of America. As a Republican, I would like to be the first to congratulate our Democrat forum members on their hard-fought and hard-won 2020 Presidential election campaign.
Offline
I do quite agree kbd512 with you on the wishing in what does seem to be the next president a successful term of office.
Offline
Trump’s post-presidency: Stay relevant, make money, avoid indictment as numerous investigators are examining whether Trump improperly inflated assets, evaded taxes and paid off women alleging affairs in violation of campaign finance laws. Women have filed lawsuits accusing him of harassing and assaulting them. Lenders are looking for hundreds of millions of dollars in loans to be repaid.
Of course the crowds are chanting Lock Him Up....
Trump does not plan to concede any time soon, aides and allies indicate
What's Trump's next act after his loss? Would he run in 2024? Some advisers see it as a possibility
Offline
Before the election back in the end of September the fiscal year started with another round of continuing funding at the current levels rather than dealing with the budget for the year and that also did include many other things which should have been dealt with in the senate but was put off until after a Trump win and then they would make things happen. That does not seem to be happening as its business as usual to put forth a bill that is short on all fronts as to what must be done. Senate Republicans unveil $1.4 trillion spending bill to avoid a government shutdown next month — but Democrats are blasting its lack of coronavirus relief funding
Now comes the rhetoric of its the Democrats that are at fault....
Offline
The calls on Trump to concede sound a lot like desperation from opponents who are clearly concerned that his investigations will uncover dirty dealings that will undermine them. The decision on who will be the next president of the USA will be a simple matter of counting electoral college votes on 14th December.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2020-11- … -right-now
Trump does not need to concede anything for that to happen and there is no reason why he should. Nor is there any good reason why he should abandon his investigations into vote fraud. These are important regardless of whether he can flip the vote or not. The American people deserve the assurance that their elections are conducted honestly. There simply isn't any good reason to back down on unearthing illegal ballots and uncovering malpractice. He should keep going and leave no stone unturned. I hope he does.
Last edited by Calliban (2020-11-11 17:17:20)
"Plan and prepare for every possibility, and you will never act. It is nobler to have courage as we stumble into half the things we fear than to analyse every possible obstacle and begin nothing. Great things are achieved by embracing great dangers."
Offline
What is being contested is not the actual count but when counts are to be called for what votes should not count of which an election has very few states that have ever changed the out come of the original counting which has already been rendered.
States control the destiny of voting and not those that are in there running.
Offline
The violence now is coming from Mega supporters After thousands of Trump supporters rally in D.C., violence erupts when night falls. By . ... At 8 p.m., violence broke out five blocks east of the White House between the president’s supporters
President Trump’s supporters had celebrated for hours on Saturday, waving their MAGA flags and blaring “God Bless the U.S.A.” as they gathered in Washington to falsely claim that the election had been stolen from the man they adore. Like any clash both sides pay a price when strong feeling go head to head in protests.
The election is over and Biden Won....
Offline
SpaceNut,
Actually, the videos still show all the violence coming from our regressive left. The media can lie about that until the cows come home, and you can repeat the lie, but it will never make it true. It's funny how that works. If the Democrats have another "win" like they did this time around, then there won't be any Democrats in control of anything, come 2022. Your party didn't flip a single state legislature, lost seats in the House, and gained a single seat in the Senate. The Independents may have been convinced by leftist media to hate Trump, but they weren't convinced to vote for any other Democrats.
Offline