posted
A President H. Clinton!!?? If there is any improvement between 2016 and now, I don't see it. If the alternative is a reincarnation of one of the Castro brothers, maybe, otherwise, NO. She doesn't have baggage, she has a baggage car.
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
By that measurement, Mr. Harris, Trump has the mv Ever Given filled to its Plimsol Line.
I think between us we both gave each of them a good stump speech line.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Response from my long standing friend who simply did not vote for President, but voted "down ballot", during '08 when Hillary lost the nomination to Obama:
quote:No, it's too late for that. Need to look at next generation if not Joe.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by George Harris: A President H. Clinton!!?? If there is any improvement between 2016 and now, I don’t see it. If the alternative is a reincarnation of one of the Castro brothers, maybe, otherwise, NO. She doesn’t have baggage, she has a baggage car.
A whole trainful of them, FWICS. If you want what’s happening now to have happened in 2017, just imagine a Hillary presidency then.
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lest anyone forgot, Trump donated his presidential salary to various causes. And using one’s office to enrich oneself is not the same as having higher or lower net worth between entering and exiting office.
And the left has tried to make all sorts of Trump “baggage” surface, but always comes up short. It seems that some people here do not understand just how malevolent the left actually is.
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I sincerely hope that Joe reads this Brett Stephens column appearing today in The Times
Fair Use:
The view that the Biden presidency is flailing — and failing — has now moved from the opinion pages to the news pages, from right-wing criticism to Beltway conventional wisdom.
Herewith, some suggestions for change:
1. The president needs a new team, starting with a new chief of staff.
2. The president needs to focus on American needs, not liberal wishes.
3. The president should remember that he won as a moderate and a unifier.
4. The president also won office as a trusted steward of American power.
5. And yes, the president should announce he isn’t running for re-election.
Even those here who supported other candidates during '20 cannot relish a failed presidency. As Americans, we need strong leadership from that big house with 1600 on the door. Then, as Americans, those of us who believe someone else can do a better job, we vote for them come November 2024.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
How much can Joe do, given Ukraine isn't a member of NATO? And how are liberal wishes (voting rights,equality,health care, etc.) NOT what Americans need? How is drinking clean water and not having bridges collapse under you not what Americans need? Do Americans not want seniors to have their eyewear, dental and hearing paid by Medicare? Remarkably, a sizeable number of Republicans voted against those things. Does the Republican Party think the American People want nothing done, except to ban books and teach partial history?
Posts: 516 | From: Richmond VA USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Talking points galore, and red herrings all. How are any of those the responsibility of the federal government to allegedly provide?
One thing that is lost on the Ukraine dilemma is the false notion that it must belong to one bloc or the other. Why can it not be purely sovereign and independent?
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
Any mention of passenger rail? NADA; and mention of anything rail? NADA, however, Joe did take a blast at the ocean shipping companies for perceived "price gouging". Lest we note, such are by and large foreign flagged.
But I'm sorry, I don't need to hear the "same old litany" on "build back better". Maybe Joe will get "some piece" of it to sign, but he'd best not expect anything more.
I must say, it was special to see the shades of Sky Blue and Yellow in the chamber, and I'm pleased to have seen that Joe did let loose on Putin, and the apparent show of unity in support of the Ukranian people.
Finally, and I know Messrs. Harris and Helfner will disagree, but the Republican rebuttal delivered by Gov. Kim Reynolds (R-IA) was just more "same old, same old" as well.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
After supporting Putin all this time, I doubt that any support for Ukraine out of this administration is more than for show. The EU of course will be more substantive since they want another client state for their empire.
Insofar as the repetitiveness of the rebuttal from the other wing of the Uniparty, the fact that none of it is ever delivered on wears on the electorate, I must agree.
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Helfner, your immediate remark of the "Uniparty" reminded me of an Economics professor I had at University of Illinois, where he often said "who do you want; tweedledum or tweedledee". Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
"One thing that is lost on the Ukraine dilemma is the false notion that it must belong to one bloc or the other. Why can it not be purely sovereign and independent?"
It can. One side is trying to force its will on Ukraine. One. The other is helping to defeat that outside force. Ukraine has wanted to join NATO for years, but NATO has refused. And as one who has spent considerable time in Ukraine, I can tell you most Ukranians dont want to be dominated by the other. Most are virulently anti-Putin, however, and enjoy voting in elections and having other rights.
Posts: 449 | From: St. Albans, Vermont | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Lest anyone forgot, Trump donated his presidential salary to various causes. And using one’s office to enrich oneself is not the same as having higher or lower net worth between entering and exiting office.
And the left has tried to make all sorts of Trump “baggage” surface, but always comes up short. It seems that some people here do not understand just how malevolent the left actually is."
Many in this country virulently oppose the orange clown, and many, including myself (i lean to the right), are not "left". Many of us are independents or even conservative. (I have many friends who worked for Pres Reagan who despise trump) But funny how many trumpers classify anyone who doesnt support their God as "left".
Posts: 449 | From: St. Albans, Vermont | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Try to keep invective out of this please, even though this forum happens to be unmoderated. Thanks.
Incidentally, it has been my experience that those who characterize supporters of Trump as POTUS as worshiping a supposed god-king are invariably left-wing. Particularly at this point in the country's history.
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:One thing that is lost on the Ukraine dilemma is the false notion that it must belong to one bloc or the other. Why can it not be purely sovereign and independent?
It can. One side is trying to force its will on Ukraine. One. The other is helping to defeat that outside force. Ukraine has wanted to join NATO for years, but NATO has refused. And as one who has spent considerable time in Ukraine, I can tell you most Ukranians dont want to be dominated by the other. Most are virulently anti-Putin, however, and enjoy voting in elections and having other rights.
What would joining NATO have to do with it? I suppose the notion of independence went over your head here, as well as the other point about Putin using the fact that the promise to Yeltsin to not have any former Soviet-bloc countries join NATO was broken in the same year it was made as his point of demagoguery with respect to his military actions. And of course he demagogues over the Bosnian debacle to this day.
And it's not just NATO; Ukrainian membership in the EU would wipe out its sovereignty.
So I was quoted, but got no answer.
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Mr. Helfner, your immediate remark of the "Uniparty" reminded me of an Economics professor I had at University of Illinois, where he often said "who do you want; tweedledum or tweedledee".
That was much my father's viewpoint when I was young. Both parties at the time (1950's and before) were a mish mash of conservatives and liberals with flavorings off both extremes and some middle grounders. His viewpoint was that we needed something more on the order of the Liberal and Conservative Parties as in Britian. With that, clear choices could be made that would get the attention of the government. As it was, in the South at least up till that time we voted Democrat because in the 1860's those that shot at us and then robbed everything that wasn't nailed down for 10 to 20 years thereafter all identified as Republican. This was done despite it meant voting for some truly sleazy characters and a political party being taken over by leftists in the rest of the country because in congress seniority meant everything much more than now. (Gets back to, Why did I not like Al Gore Jr.? Even without disagreeing with much of what he has done and his absolute hypocrisy concerning things environmental, it was because I knew well about the activities of Daddy Gore.) At least by now we have begun to get more to a Conservative and a Liberal party.
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don’t know what any of that means, but I am aware of the 45 communist goals for the USA that originally appeared in The Naked Communist. Goal #15, Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States, clearly means that both the major parties were targets for the Marxists. And going back to the aftermath of the Civil War, just remember that the Democrats were also still a major party of the North, and that is where the Marxist faction arose and dispersed through the whole nation.
As for the UK, the Conservative Party proved that they themselves were also targets of the Marxists more than the Labour Party; David Cameron pushing the law referred to as 2013 c. 30 unabashedly took the lead for those politicians referred to as “Red Tories”.
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting Journal report stating half the voters, party affiliation notwithstanding, hold that Joe will not seek a second term.
Fair Use:
quote:A new Wall Street Journal poll found that 52% of Americans don’t think Mr. Biden will run for re-election in two years, while 29% do expect him to pursue a second term. Nineteen percent are undecided about his future. Among Democrats, 41% said they think Mr. Biden will run again, while 32% said they didn’t think he would. The poll found 26% of those Democrats unsure.
Obviously, as the originator of this topic, I hold that Joe will not complete his term, and that he will resign after delivering the '23 SOTU message. Possibly his announcement will be part of such.
Now if somehow this Ukranian war can end with other than a Ukrainian surrender and removal of the Zelensky government, i.e. the Russian forces just go home (for a society with a declining population base and an inability to attract immigrants, males of reproductive age become a scarce commodity), Joe could get a lift in both the popularity polls and a desire to "see it through", I could possibly come to hold a differing view.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
WOW, did The Journal ever spell it out today on the Editorial page:
Fair Use:
The reality is that we have to live with Mr. Biden for three more years as President. And please stop writing letters imploring us to demand that Mr. Biden resign. Do you really want Vice President Kamala Harris in the Oval Office? She was chosen as a bow to identity politics to unite the Democratic Party in the election campaign, not for her ability to fill the President’s shoes. In the last 14 months she has failed to demonstrate even the minimum knowledge or capacity for the job. We are fated to make the best of the President we have.
I'm willing to "Hear The Journal out" regarding their position of "the President we have". Nothing has suggested that a "President Harris" has the background to lead a World Power as a "navigation" is sought from likely the greatest international crisis since November '62.
Kamala was to be a "caretaker president" who would lay wreaths, light Christmas trees, roll Easter Eggs, and "pardon turkeys". That is what Joe was to be - a chance to "bring us together" by proposing nothing controversial (I don't consider helping those who were hurt by COVID "controversial") and hopefully no major crises to address. How mistaken I was.
Finally, allow me to "stick up for Joe" with his "for God's sake...." remark. Nowhere did he imply that Putin should be overthrown by a revolution (didn't we just live through that on January 6?), he just implied that the Russian people do so at the polls.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by irishchieftain: And no, we did not "live through that on January 6" 2021.
Amen!!! I am totally sick and tired of hearing about this totally imaginary attempted overthrow of the government where the only fatality was an unarmed woman shot by a capital policeman. If we were going to have riots over an irrational police killing this would be the real one to have.
About the only thing scarier than a President Kamala would be a president Nancy or if anything worse, Hillary.
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
A couple of “insurrectionists” were acquitted this week; one was charged with trying to obstruct the electoral vote count, which would have carried a twenty-year prison sentence.
Not a single person charged with actual violent insurrection thus far, but all with minor offenses. The January 6 commission is thus far showing itself to be like a Soviet troika.
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
"What goes around comes around" If anyone EVER has done things worthy of impeachment, it is several members of the current selection of embarrassing incompetents at the top of the current federal government. We have had more than enough after four years of "We are going to impeach Donald Trump because he has (fill in the blank with whatever the most recent flavor of the month uproar.)" If there has ever in the entire history of the country anyone more deserving, I can't think of them.
Hopefully in this next round of elections we can get both enough people who have been burned by acts of the current administration and enough of the cemetery residents stay planted.
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Gallup poll of six days ago paints their 41 percent approval rating for Biden as “steady” albeit “underwater” and “subpar”. (Who could they be polling to get numbers that high?)
The bigger news from that poll, though:
Only 16 percent of Americans think the USA is going in the right direction; 83 percent definitely think it to be going in the wrong direction. The decline in the first number is attributed to Democrats; the Republicans and independents were already low.
Congress’ approval rating is a mere 18 percent. (The split is 30% approval Democrats, 5% Republicans and, allegedly, 19% independents.)
Also, apparently, Biden has not had majority-level approval on Gallup since June 2021.
Biden’s visit to Uvalde, TX post-tragedy has had mixed reporting but generally is perceived as having been negatively received by locals.
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Helfner, your immediate made me wonder; what if "Amtrak Joe" decided he wanted to be "a man of the people" and decided to take his namesake to Uvalde?
Digging out my April 24, 1960 SP Timetable, the Sunset made a conditional stop at Uvalde. The companion train, The Argonaut, had been whacked by that date; such likely made a regular stop there.
But during the Amtrak era, Uvalde has never been any kind of stop for the Sunset. Of interest, "driving around in the Googlemobile" shows that the tracks are well to the North of the Downtown area.
Finally though, to conclude on the title of this topic, I think the only unlikely event to alter my prediction of Joe's resignation announced during and occurring shortly after the March '23 SOTU, would be something happening in Ukraine that could be spun as a "victory". That probably would mean Putin packs up and goes home.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Mr. Helfner, your immediate made me wonder; what if "Amtrak Joe" decided he wanted to be "a man of the people" and decided to take his namesake to Uvalde?
Digging out my April 24, 1960 SP Timetable, the Sunset made a conditional stop at Uvalde. The companion train, The Argonaut, had been whacked by that date; such likely made a regular stop there.
But during the Amtrak era, Uvalde has never been any kind of stop for the Sunset. Of interest, "driving around in the Googlemobile" shows that the tracks are well to the North of the Downtown area.
I think few would notice and even fewer would care. It would be middle of the night three times a week, whoopie!
quote:Finally though, to conclude on the title of this topic, I think the only unlikely event to alter my prediction of Joe's resignation announced during and occurring shortly after the March '23 SOTU, would be something happening in Ukraine that could be spun as a "victory". That probably would mean Putin packs up and goes home.
Not sure anyone is gullible enough to swallow any claim Biden would make toward assisting Ukraine in victory. And if he does resign? That would mean president Kamala. I can see her winning an ineptitude, incompetence and unpopularity contest with Biden but not much else.
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
But Mr. Harris, she knows how to lay wreaths, roll Easter eggs, and pardon turkeys; so let's afford her some credit!
Now knowing she would get "trounced" by any Republican in '24, Kamala would likely choose not to run simply to become a "sacrificial lamb".
"We the people" are "mixed" towards VP's who succeed a sitting POTUS. On that point, ask TR, Coolidge, Truman, and LBJ. But then, how many of those tried to run for their second term (TR tried with a third party). Of course, ask same of Tyler, Fillmore, Johnson, Arthur, and Ford about their success in that arena.
Finally, I must ask who the Democrats have on their bench? All told, whoever is elected in '24 will be a Republican - and will also have majorities within the Legislature and Judiciary. So sit back, relax, and enjoy eight years of Republican party rule.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Finally, I must ask who the Democrats have on their bench? All told, whoever is elected in '24 will be a Republican - and will also have majorities within the Legislature and Judiciary. So sit back, relax, and enjoy eight years of Republican party rule.
You nailed it right there. Actually I felt the same way in 2020. Unbelievable that Biden was the best they could do. And by six million votes? Count me a skeptic. As my son who is an auditor is concerned, unless you have something to hide, you do not fear being audited. Their policy is take one excuse of inconvenience for whatever reason, and the second time an excuse is given, go in with the level of suspicion turned to max. However, I will say that no one had ever seen turnout like 2020. Our precinct had over an 85% turnout, which probably close to all that could actually make it, and this being in Mississippi where all involved would have been truly astounded if it had not gone Republican. (For comparison, in a recent county judge race, the turnout was barely over 5%, but then there was almost no campaigning, either.)
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, Joe did provide us with a "hand of 4NT". Those here who play Bridge knoweth of what I sayeth.
Beyond that, based upon performance to date, the Notable Scholars will place Joe in the Fourth Quartile when they next rate the presidents.
But "on the flip", I'm not about to buy my Sister's line that The Donald was one of our five greatest presidents.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: But "on the flip", I'm not about to buy my Sister's line that The Donald was one of our five greatest presidents.
I do.
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
The Scholars ratings are 1) Lincoln, 2) Washington, 3) FDR, 4) TR, 5) Ike.
I said to my Sister: "OK Barbara, you want Trump in those five, who gets displaced?"
"Washington; he owned slaves".
Of course, that would do nothing for her perceived "travesty", as Obama would become #11 - still in the first Quartile.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, that's scholars and so-called presidential historians. No need to guess which ideology they favor, particularly when they rate FDR so highly, have Truman before Jefferson and put Obama in tenth place.
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree with you, Mr. Helfner; the Scholars have overrated Obama. In time, they will recognize his Foreign Policy blunders like his premature withdrawal of US Forces from Iraq, "the Syrian Red Line", and his inability to muster the Congressional strength to enact meaningful gun control legislation after Sandy Hook. Even likely Fourth Quartile Joe will realize the same fate post-Uvalde.
Now so far as FDR, we are addressing a president who led us through the most severe economic situation our country ever faced, then through the most savage and ruinous war in over six thousand years of recorded history, I think he deserves #2.
I sincerely hope that no one here will question that Lincoln was our greatest President, for even if presently under attack by certain political forces, we have a United States today.
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
The Scholars ratings are 1) Lincoln, 2) Washington, 3) FDR, 4) TR, 5) Ike.
I said to my Sister: "OK Barbara, you want Trump in those five, who gets displaced?"
"Washington; he owned slaves".
Of course, that would do nothing for her perceived "travesty", as Obama would become #11 - still in the first Quartile.
"Washington, he owned slaves"?? He was not the only early president to own slaves. As to Lincoln being number one, nope. I am not going to try to revise the list, but I would put Washington as number 1, and probably move Lincoln well down it. Read some of his speeches, and the careful wording of the Emancipation Proclamation such that carefully excluded freeing slaves in Kentucky and Maryland. He was a skilled politician, and despite the "log cabin" promotions, quite a wealthy man by the time he became president. FDR? Not so sure. In many ways he gave away the store to Stalin, but many people in the State Department were deluded as to the realities under Communism. Ike was in many ways president like he was general. He played his cards very close to his chest so that many issues were never publicized. I would put him ahead of FDR. My grandfather always insisted Truman should have been considered much more highly as he was the one dealing with the end of war settlements and issues. I think I would go with 1. Washington, 2. Ike, 3. Trump, or maybe even with Trump as No. 2. Not going to try to go further down the list. Had really not given much thought as to who gets displaced to where. We have had quite a few very good presidents, some of which were dealt very bad hands, and a few total losers, of which I consider the present resident of the White House about the bottom if not the absolute bottom of the pack. As to Obama? He should also be near the bottom. I can think of very little he did at all. As to his Nobel Prize? What was that for? Looking pretty? Saying, hey look at me, I am the first black president of the USA?
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
No wonder Open Discussion has become the most active Forum around here at present. Those here who have taken "experiential rides" on Amtrak have learned such has evolved into, away from several Corridors, a highly inconvenient and unreliable "ride". That we discuss politics with a high degree of maturity and respect means we have something that few if any other sites can claim to have.
As for myself, I don't know how much more of an independent voter there can be. My Presidential record to date is 7R, 7D, and 1I. The Independent - John Anderson - was during '80 when I simply "wasn't ready for Reagan". I was by '84, and happily voted for him at that time.
I will NEVER throw "something mighty precious" away again.
A wonderful long-standing friend, who I'm expected to see this coming weekend, in Social Services (Educator husband) and "doesn't know what a Republican is", once "threw her vote away". This was during '16 when Hillary lost the nomination to Obama. That year, she simply did not vote for President, but of course voted "down ballot". I pray she chooses not to do so again.
I voted for Joe during '20; I did so to "bid 4NT at the Bridge table" (really haven't played since '76) and that Joe would be a "bring us together" unifier. First point; only a "time out" - the countdown has begun to when "he's back" - and I fear full of vengeance.
Now so far as Joe; help the people who have been severely affected by COVID? Of course. Infrastructure? too many politicians have ignored it for too long.
But I didn't sign up for any of the transformative social legislation Joe has proposed. I will not totally dismiss my Evangelical Sister's position that Obama is "calling the plays" on such. All I know is that any of the "sweeping" proposals Joe called for are "dead" and for that I thank the current "Senator Joe from WV". I'm confident that in the remaining nine months (my guess) of Joe's presidency, none of such will again be proposed.
Finally again, Mr. Harris, the Scholars will place Joe in their Fourth Quartile, or otherwise "in the bottom eleven".
Posts: 10373 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
To me one of the scariest things in our process is the low turnout in local or many "down ballot" offices. Tomorrow is the primary in Mississippi for congressional races. The interest and campaigning has been so low that I had to look up the names for the candidates. This is Mississippi Congressional District One. They are: Democrat: ....Hunter Avery ....Dianne Black Republican: ....Trent Kelley (incumbent) ....Mark D. Strauss They are "expecting a low turnout" In the precinct I work we had over 3,000 voters for the 2020 presidential race, which was about an 85% turnout. The most recent, which was a county judge race, we had 145 voters, in other words, less than 5% turnout. For this one? Who knows? But what it says is that if you can get some group to stealthily pull in over 75 people who would not have otherwise have voted, you can get the election to go the way you want in this precinct. Put it another way, if you can get over about 2.5% of the registered voters who would not have bothered to go your way, you can get the election to go your way, regardless of what the majority of the population would want. It this intended to be a plea for compulsive voting? Absolutely not! That would if anything make things worse as now you are dragging in the clueless who could most easily be swayed. It is a plea for people to wake up and get involved and to know what is really happening before they go to vote.
Posts: 2898 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I voted for Joe during ’20; I did so to “bid 4NT at the Bridge table” (really haven't played since ’76) and that Joe would be a “bring us together” unifier …
With all due respect, I am still amazed that anyone still believes that even when Biden made it clear in his campaign rhetoric that he was no such thing, and even when he tried to claim to be such a thing provided no basis other than far-left policies. Biden is exactly the chief executive he claimed he would be.
Posts: 696 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
