Fat is a type of crazy

I just completed this quiz. My Score 30/100 My Time 166 seconds  

I just completed this quiz. My Score 50/100 My Time 169 seconds  

I just completed this quiz. My Score 80/100 My Time 61 seconds  

Delete

Trump did too. Even when he was supposedly working it was probably watching Fox News or sending tweets about nonsense. Or having experts try to communicate complicated issues with him in one page summaries so he'll at least have a look.

It's funny how Trump supporters on this site thing the Madison Square rally was such a big success. Watched a bit - most speakers were so horrible and lame including the ex President. But the Trump supporters love that stuff. Not sure about undecideds - time will tell.

Maybe it will remind people we don't need a silly old duffer as president be it Biden or Trump. Biden has done a good job on most things but most see he's a bit old now and it ain't Kamala.

3 hours of Trump. Call me rushing to judgement based on past experience where 5 minutes starts to do your head in but no thanks.

You would have to brain dead or a massive Trump supporter to sit through that. Not saying they are the same.

No. I think Americans underestimate how much wealth is out there and tax can increase a bit without much affect for the very rich or acting as a disincentive to invest in the economy - but the voters can decide. Saying proposed tax increases is a slippery slope to further increases is just words - unless you can show a pattern of such broken promises on tax increases by the left - the only one I remember on tax was the famous broken promise by Bush senior. Can you point to this Kamala policy about men in girls showers? The current policies are not soft on crime or promote mass immigration but up to you if you believe that.

But who is advocating socialism beyond the economic idea of maybe tax the very rich a bit more - something that won't affect most voters including I assume yourself - and providing a few more services to the rest. Maybe the odd social policy that are mostly non controversial. So how does that require authoritarianism. If your talking about a more formal definition of socialism than it's irrelevant as neither party is advocating for it.

It would be tough if there is no transition i.e. those 59 still get it at 60 - maybe those at 55 get it at 61 etc Couldn't see that noted.

Democrats are pretty normal compared to parties around the world. They compete in elections - accept the outcome - 99 per cent of policies are pretty stock standard. Yes the far left of the party get a bit too progressive for some but normally whats behind it is trying to be inclusive and accept people as they want to be which in of itself is not so bad surely. But most Democrats are not far left. The cult is clearly those who are willing to ignore what they see - someone who can't accept election outcomes - almost universally panned by high achievers and those with excellent reputations who worked with him - someone who's policies such as new tariffs are almost universally panned - someone who says the enemy within are a bigger threat than the worlds dictators.

There's a lot more to it than simply saying that report came out and is correct. It seems odd that the actions happened before the curfew during a protest that was peaceful at the time and right at the time of Trump and friends walk. The two views is that it was cleared to complete fencing in daylight - even though it was completed mainly at night - the second that it was done to protect Trump during his walk - the latter stated by the Justice Departments own lawyers. This Washington Post report is interesting https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/06/24/trump-ig-report-lafayette-square/ - you'll need to provide your email to see it - as is the Wikipedia page I have posted that has lots of detail beyond your report. The broader issue is Trump's apparent opinions on what actions to take during such protests including the use of active troops by invocation of the Insurrection Act - the section on Law and Order on the Wikipedia page is interesting. Though the report you provide is interesting it appears it is not appropriate to go on a victory lap of debunking such claims as some suggest based on that report alone .

If you are referring to my post I never said the reporter was gassed. The link talks about the use of tear gas on the day. For other information you require you can find out the details in the link.