That top 1% doesn't NEED any help to succeed. They help themselves enough.
You are part of that lower 30%. YOU need help, not the 1%.

Yes, it's very easy to become branded as a criminal in your country.
Run into a cop who had a bad night sleep, your life is crewed, or ended on the spot.

Listen; I like that anything I want can be delivered to my door in a day. Does this make the world a better place? Easier yes, better not much. It's just supporting the mindless wasteful consumerism that you have spoken out against. People filling the gap in their heart with cheap crap made in China. You don't like that at all, until you can praise the 1% for it.

They have destroyed 'mom and pop' shops intentionally, so they could be monopolies,
and then they raised the prices when we were all fully dependent on them.

The 1% designed a system so convenient that we want to defend it, just like you are doing now. It is however based on exploitation.
From the warehouse workers to the truck drivers and delivery people, no one in that chain is making any decent money anymore, except the 1%. That is why I call it exploitation.
We are all supporting them to extract more from their employees, which turns out is eventually harming ourselves. We are all turning into their serfs, to support their wealth.

So why do you want that handful of people hoarding the profits to succeed
over the millions of hard-working people actually keeping the country alive?

You are indoctrinated to think this is capitalism, but it's not, it's corporatism.
They will continue until they own everything and we own nothing.
Instead of just buying the government, they will BE the government.
Tell me the difference between that and what was called 'communism' by Stalin,
Mao Zedong and the Kim family?

Several progressives did it on 1/10th of the money of their opposition.

However, Angie Nixon lost, because the national Democratic party’s investment in Florida stood at effectively $0 in major media spending, compared to the tens of millions of dollars national groups poured into
other target Senate seats, such as Texas.

The only reason that she got this close, is because people supported her.
It's a damn shame that the national Democrats didn't support those people.

Put you OWN substance against it. Ever heard the term "free speech"?

It was an upload error, not physical theft: According to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, the physical memory card was not stolen or missing from the building. The local board of elections simply failed to properly upload its contents into the central election management system on election night.

The system caught the human error: The discrepancy was flagged during routine quality checks. The county noticed that the number of voters who checked in didn't match the number of digital ballots cast, which prompted them to look for the un-uploaded data. As Raffensperger noted, "Georgia's election safeguards are designed to identify discrepancies, and that is exactly what these guardrails did."

If you want a real systemic issue from this exact 2026 election cycle, look at what happened in Georgia in August 2025. The state quietly conducted one of the largest mass removals in U.S. history, purging 471,000 voter registrations (~6% of the state's total).
Civil rights groups like Black Voters Matter literally sued the Secretary of State in February 2026, because the state refused to turn over the full records on who they kicked off and how they picked them.

Rather than focusing on consequences after death,
I prefer to focus on consequences in life.

I didn't say "NO jobs". Disputing below.

Chronological order:

Harry S. Truman (D): +11.12 million total, ~116,000 average/month
Dwight D. Eisenhower (R): +3.53 million total, ~37,000 average/month
John F. Kennedy (D): +3.75 million total, ~110,000 average/month
Lyndon B. Johnson (D): +12.12 million total, ~199,000 average/month
Richard Nixon (R): +9.37 million total, ~140,000 average/month
Gerald Ford (R): +1.95 million total, ~67,000 average/month
Jimmy Carter (D): +10.34 million total, ~215,000 average/month
Ronald Reagan (R): +16.51 million total, ~172,000 average/month
George H.W. Bush (R): +2.62 million total, ~55,000 average/month
Bill Clinton (D): +22.94 million total, ~239,000 average/month
George W. Bush (R): +1.35 million total, ~14,000 average/month
Barack Obama (D): +11.60 million total, ~60.400 average/month
Donald Trump (1st term) (R): -2.67 million total, -56,000 average/month
Joe Biden (D): +16.25 million total, ~338,000 average/month
Donald Trump (2nd term) (R): +728,000 total (ongoing), ~34.600 average/month


Ranked from most to least jobs per month:

Joe Biden (D): +16.25 million total, ~338,500 average/month
Bill Clinton (D): +22.94 million total, ~239,000 average/month
Jimmy Carter (D): +10.34 million total, ~215,000 average/month
Lyndon B. Johnson (D): +12.12 million total, ~195,000 average/month
Ronald Reagan (R): +16.51 million total, ~172,000 average/month
Richard Nixon (R): +9.37 million total, ~140,000 average/month
Barack Obama (D): +11.60 million total, ~121,000 average/month
Harry S. Truman (D): +11.12 million total, ~116,000 average/month
John F. Kennedy (D): +3.75 million total, ~110,000 average/month
Gerald Ford (R): +1.95 million total, ~67,000 average/month
Donald Trump (2nd term) (R): +1.38 million total (ongoing), ~62,500 average/month
George H.W. Bush (R): +2.62 million total, ~55,000 average/month
Dwight D. Eisenhower (R): +3.53 million total, ~37,000 average/month
George W. Bush (R): +1.35 million total, ~14,000 average/month
Donald Trump (1st term) (R): -2.67 million total, -56,000 average/month (MINUS)


The 'recent' pattern:

Bill Clinton (D): ~239,000 average/month - UP
George W. Bush (R): ~14,000 average/month - DOWN
Barack Obama (D): ~60.400 average/month - UP
Donald Trump (1st term) (R): -56,000 average/month - DOWN
Joe Biden (D): ~338,000 average/month - WAY UP
Donald Trump (2nd term) (R): ~62,500 average/month - DOWN


Here is Trump's 2nd term history:

January 2025: +115,000 jobs
February 2025: +98,000 jobs
March 2025: +42,000 jobs
April 2025: +65,000 jobs
May 2025: -25,000 jobs
June 2025: +74,000 jobs
July 2025: +12,000 jobs
August 2025: +55,000 jobs
September 2025: +38,000 jobs
October 2025: No data (Government shutdown)
November 2025: +60,000 jobs
December 2025: +50,000 jobs
January 2026: +78,000 jobs
February 2026: +92,000 jobs
March 2026: +54,000 jobs
April 2026: -12,000 jobs
May 2026: +62,000 jobs
June 2026: +112,000 jobs
July 2026: -5,000 jobs
August 2026: +186,000 jobs (Fully revised upward)
September 2026: +60,000 jobs (Fully revised upward)
October 2026: +165,000 jobs (Latest report)


"beating economists' expectations of roughly 65,000."
It's telling that economists only expected 65,000 jobs, which shows how low the confidence in his economic direction actually was. Beating a historically low bar
is more about a temporary stroke of luck than solid policy.

His average still stands. Stop celebrating outliers.


At the end of the day, I care about the general well-being of working-class people,
not just abstract economic indexes or job numbers. True well-being is measured by whether a working family can actually afford a roof over their heads, healthy food,
sending their kids to good schools, having childcare that doesn’t cost more than
a second job brings in, and having a healthcare system where bad luck or getting sick doesn't instantly ruin a hard-working family financially. If a society adds millions of jobs,
but people still can't afford these basic necessities, the system is failing.

People didn't feel that enough when Biden was president. Trump promising to fix everything won him the election. Then voters found out that he fucks them over
like no president before, which made them reconsider trusting a pathological liar.

People smoke and give themselves cancer, consume (too much) alcohol and destroy their liver, eat way too much saturated fats and clog up their arteries, eat way to much fat and sugar and give themselves diabetes, and eat nowhere near enough plant-based food and starve their bodies of nutrients.
All clear results of behavior. It's human nature to risk health for other benefits.

Meanwhile, cannabis/marijuana edibles in responsible use carry a fraction of the systemic health risks that everyday sugar, tobacco, or alcohol consumption do. Unlike those substances, cannabis is widely used for genuine therapeutic benefits, offering vital relief from chronic pain, anxiety, and sleep disorders, without causing any lung damage.
No substance is completely risk-free, but isolating one risk, while ignoring the massive toll of other use/consumption/behavior is a logical fallacy.

Millions of people die every year from cancer, diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases, directly driven by tobacco, alcohol, and poor diet; preventable deaths that shape our entire healthcare crisis. In stark contrast, fatal overdoses from cannabis alone are practically non-existent, and its statistical contribution to mortality pales into absolute insignificance, compared to the slow-killing 'vices' that your culture tolerates.

Something for the gamers:

"Crossplay games be like"
only registered users can see external links

Not like most 75 year old AMERICAN men.

She is a lesbian who doesn't dress and wear her hair like a woman.
They call themselves "butch", but it's also called "masculine-presenting".

Sure they can buy elections. If it wasn't for all that money buying propaganda,
at best 5% of voters would have voted for Republicans.

They just fucked-up the lives of people a little too much this time.
Don't hold your breath next time. People have the memory of goldfish.

Mississippi has probably elected a DEMOCRAT,
because of how tone-deaf their senator Cindy Hyde-Smith is.

only registered users can see external links
"If you cannot afford beef, just pick another protein"

That's literally what MAGA accuses Democrats of.

Mississippi voted for a BLACK DEMOCRAT for that. Mississippi!
I repeat; MISSISSIPPI!!!!

Maybe she fled the rise of fascism, because she is a lesbian.

I wouldn't call her unrecognizable, but let me quote her:
"If I look older than when you saw me last, it's because I'm older
than when you saw me last."

Perhaps she's simply allowing herself to look like a 68-year-old woman.
Do you have a problem with that?

For the fun of it, I presented you comment to ChatGPT, for analysis. It did actually find some points, but I have no desire to engage with you, because you are not an honest actor. I will just present the highlights of ChatGPT's reaction:

Yes. 😂 I think I can make sense of what he's trying to say, although his message is quite incoherent and jumps between several subjects.
He's essentially combining a few political, moral and ideological arguments into one rather confused rant.

His claim ----- What we can establish
Children aged 10 were going to get voting rights ---- He gives no bill, state or evidence to support this.
The Supreme Court overturned it ---- He doesn't identify a ruling.
Socialism destroyed empathy ---- That's his political opinion, not an established fact.
Polls were wrong about Trump ---- Some polls underestimated Trump, but polling is not the same as deliberately misleading people.
Trump won against Harris ---- Correct. Trump won 312 electoral votes to Harris's 226.

The most interesting contradiction is that he starts by talking about empathy, kindness, altruism and treating people well, but then calls people stupid, refers to Harris as a "bimbo" and dismisses anyone who disagrees with his political views. That's quite a contrast.

My interpretation is that he's trying to communicate:

"I'm a traditional, patriotic American. I believe in kindness, personal responsibility and putting the country first. I believe left-wing politics, socialism and mainstream media have corrupted society. I support Trump because I think he represents the truth, and I distrust institutions that disagree with my worldview."
That's the underlying message. But he mixes genuine philosophical ideas with political assumptions, unsupported claims and personal insults.

In short: He starts with JFK's philosophy of public service and ends with a partisan political rant. The two parts don't sit particularly comfortably together.

A rather sharp but intelligent response:

You started with a rather beautiful thought about empathy, kindness and altruism. Unfortunately, somewhere along the way, you seem to have lost sight of those very values yourself.

You speak about treating people with kindness and respect, yet your message is full of contempt for people who don't share your political views.

Perhaps the real question isn't whether socialism or communism has destroyed empathy, but whether we are capable of practising the empathy we so readily preach.

Remember, this is not me, just ChatGPT. You don't deserve MY effort.

I say things with substance. You don’t.

The world going to shit is of your concern too.
Especially, because your country is largely responsible for it.

It's not about replacing voters, it's about replacing JOBS.
The immediate problem of AI is data-centers turning people's drinking-water into sewage, multiplying people's power-bill, and killing people with noise pollution.
No research should destroy people's lives.

But true, there is also a risk to voters, because at some point there is no way
you can hold fair elections anymore; when AI can hack everything.

Your point: Accountability for Democrats, not for Republicans.

Your Republicans in Florida won with the slightest margins from 2 Democrats who had almost NO money for their campaigns, while the GOP spent tens of millions of dollars in media buys, ground operations, and digital advertising
to protect their incumbents.
Even in your beloved Florida, Democrats would have won, with just a fair game.

They all fit Trump like a glove

Eight-year-old bullies on the playground have better comebacks than you.

I'm not the one who doesn't understand the difference
between upper middle class and billionaires.

About the Supreme Court; that branch of government is broken, and Republicans destroyed it. We can all see clearly how they corrupt the meaning of the Constitution, just to favor the wealthy elites who pay them off. That blatant corruption needs to end, by any means necessary, and I fully support the Democrats in fixing it. Call it whatever you want, I call it saving the system.

This is why you calling it 'political revenge' is so hypocritical; you constantly defend a rule of law with harsh punishments for regular citizens. Whenever someone is killed by the police or ICE, your immediate justification is that they should have complied. You also blamed a black teenager for getting shot, just for ringing the wrong doorbell at night. Your demand for flawless compliance applies to everyone you don't like.
But when it comes to Donald Trump or his cronies, your entire philosophy vanishes. Suddenly, holding a man accountable for a decade of crimes, corruption and trying to overturn an election is labeled as 'revenge'.
You want strict compliance for the powerless, but absolute immunity
for the people you like. I'm not having it.

Your side baselessly accuses independent prosecutors like Jack Smith of weaponizing the law, while Trump openly orders the DOJ to hunt down his political enemies. He literally used Truth Social to command Pam Bondi to prosecute Adam Schiff, James Comey, and Letitia James. When career prosecutor Erik Siebert refused to bring baseless charges due to a lack of evidence, Trump fired him and replaced him with his own defense lawyer to force the indictments through. We just watched his administration send federal agents to raid the home of Representative Ilhan Omar. He even uses DOJ officials and billions in campaign money to sue the media for his personal hurt feelings, all while lying about private citizens every single day. ‘Revenge’ is a massive understatement, for Trump acting like a rabid dog biting at everyone around him.

Democratic leadership like Hakeem Jeffries is focused on governance,
so I don't have any confidence that they are going to do what is needed
to restore the rule of law. Crying about 'political persecution' the moment Trump is held to the same standards as everyone else is pathetic.
Cry me a river!

Your exchange with AI made me laugh, it completely rejected your framing. You’ll probably cry bias, but that’s exactly what AI is built to prevent. If I try to make it accept a biased angle, I get the exact same objective results.
AI operates on facts and logic, not partisan echo chambers. It didn’t take your bait, because reality doesn’t support your narrative.
I use AI to eliminate biases from my argumentation and check facts.
You should try it sometimes to prepare a message before you send it.

So what is the problem, the plane or the young female pilot?
It was the same plane, but in both cases the young female pilot was NOT flying. She is only the co-pilot, responsible for confirmation and communication with the tower. The actual flight controls are operated by the pilot. He decides to change height and do that, not her.
Changing height to avoid icing and turbulence is not out of the ordinary. It does show that the weather was particularly bad, but the weather is bad more often and still no Learjet 60 has ever dropped out of the sky like that one.

I understand that coincidences exist and happen all the time.
But the Palm Beach Jet Crash is a perfect example of multiple incredibly low chances occurring simultaneously. That is not the case in your example.

Did you see the video in the 'YouTube can be educational' topic, about Christians saying that evolution is mathematically impossible? That's based on a misunderstanding of chances and thinking that the process of evolution is dependent on incredibly unlikely chances. When I say that the Palm Beach Jet Crash has a mathematically very unlikely possibility, that's NOT a misunderstanding of chances. It really needs to be calculated by multiplying several very small chances, resulting in a highly unlikely occurrence:

Total Probability = P(Unique Crash Mode) × P(Active SHORAD) × P(Trump's Presence) × P(Exact Coordinates in the US)

Using standard historical aviation and logistical data, we can estimate the four individual probabilities to see how they multiply.

1. P(Unique Crash Mode) — The Mechanical Failure
* The Baseline: Over the last two decades, there have been roughly 20 million to 30 million global business jet flights per year. Fatal accidents occurring during the cruise phase (at 35,000+ feet) account for less than 5% of all accidents.
* The Model: The Learjet 60 had flown for decades without ever suffering a spontaneous high-altitude structural failure or unrecoverable vertical plunge while cruising under normal operations.
* Estimation: The odds of an aircraft experiencing a catastrophic high-altitude stall/structural event of this magnitude on any given flight is roughly 1 in 10,000,000 (10^-7).

2. P(Active SHORAD) — The Military Variable
* The Baseline: Short-Range Air Defense (SHORAD) systems like the AN/TWQ-1 Avenger are almost exclusively deployed in active war zones or permanently around major national command centers (like Washington, D.C.).
* The Deployment: Deploying these active systems to a temporary civilian residence due to a specific drone threat environment is an incredibly rare event. If we assume such highly advanced systems are active at Mar-a-Lago for perhaps a cumulative total of 4 weeks (28 days) out of a multi-year period:
* Estimation: The probability that these systems were active on any random day is roughly 28 days out of 10 years, which is about 1 in 130 (7.6 x 10^-3).

3. P(Trump's Presence / Air Force One Window) — The Timing Window
* The Baseline: Official tracking shows Donald Trump spends roughly 65 days per year at Mar-a-Lago during the social season.
* Calculation: 65 days of presence divided by 365 days in a year means he is physically there ~17.8% of the time
* Order of Magnitude Estimation: 1 in 5.6 (1.78 * 10^-1)

4. P(Exact Coordinates in the US) — The Macro-Location
* The Baseline: Calculation by the ratio of flight hours spent inside that specific 7-mile circle compared to all other US flight hours.
* With roughly 3,300 local flight hours out of 20,000,000 total national flight hours per year, this represents the exact physical exposure within the macro-location of the US.
* Estimated as 1 in 6,000 (1.67 * 10^-4)

THE GRAND TOTAL (Multiplying the Chances)
When we run these order-of-magnitude estimations through the formula:

Total Probability = P(Unique Crash Mode) x P(Active SHORAD) x P(Trump's Presence) x P(Exact Coordinates in the US)
Total Probability = (10^-7) x (7.6 x 10^-3) x (1.78 * 10^-1) x (1.67 * 10^-4)

The resulting combined probability is approximately 1 in 4.42 * 10^13
1 in 44.2 trillion YEARS. The universe has existed for 13.787 billion years now.

CONCLUSION
This astronomical number is exactly why this case is mathematically almost impossible. This is not a misunderstanding of chances. When a coin lands on heads 50 times in a row, a statistician doesn't say "well, coincidences happen". They immediately check if the coin is rigged.

Can you fault that calculation?

Do you understand the difference between someone making $400,000 a year and a billionaire? Don't be daft.
You can make $400,000 a year without exploiting anyone, you CANNOT become a billionaire without exploiting lots and lots of people.

I'll look at the rest later. Until then, go sit in the shame corner for this oblivious argument.

No, none of the factors that made the first incident curious are repeated here.
This is a completely different case:
• Location: The crash happened in New Smyrna Beach, over 160 miles north of
Mar-a-Lago, completely outside any security zones.
• Aircraft Type: Unlike the Learjet 60, this was a small, single-engine light aircraft, which carries a much different safety profile. These crash all the time.
• Flight Profile: It wasn't a mid-air disintegration from 35,000 feet, but a low-altitude crash near a local airport where the fuselage remained largely intact, which occurs significantly more often.

Florida is one of the busiest states for private aviation; linking two entirely different aircraft types hundreds of miles apart is just a coincidence, not a pattern.

Do you even check anything, before you react to it? Even if you don't trust ChatGPT, ask Grok.

If those were actual Democratic goals? These ARE!!! They represent the EXACT framework the party has voted for, attempted to pass, and consistently fought for over the last DECADE. While political rhetoric can often cloud the core message, the actual legislative record shows a sustained effort to enact these exact policies, with about half successfully made into law and the other half actively blocked by Republicans.

When Democrats held the majority, they successfully passed massive, tangible pieces of legislation directly matching these points:
• Rebuilding Infrastructure: They passed the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to modernize roads, bridges, and secure clean drinking water.
• Lowering Drug Costs & Healthcare Premiums: They passed the Inflation Reduction Act, giving Medicare the power to negotiate lower prescription drug prices and expanding subsidies to lower family premiums.
• Protecting Supply Chains: They passed the CHIPS and Science Act to bring vital microchip and high-tech manufacturing back to American soil to protect local industries.
• Expanding Veteran Care: They passed the PACT Act to deliver healthcare and benefits to veterans exposed to toxic environments.

For the remaining items on the list, Democrats have repeatedly drafted and introduced legislation, only for these goals to be blocked by Republican opposition and split party control:
• Raising the Minimum Wage: House Democrats repeatedly passed the Raise the Wage Act to lift the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour, but it consistently failed to clear the Senate due to unified Republican opposition.
• Capping Childcare & Paid Leave: National paid family leave and federal caps on childcare and eldercare costs were originally central pillars of the Build Back Better framework, but they were entirely blocked and cut during fierce Senate negotiations to pass the final bill.
• Border Technology & ICE Accountability: Democrats have routinely introduced funding for advanced fentanyl-detection scanners and extra immigration judges, alongside proposals from progressive factions for mandatory ICE bodycams and judicial warrant enforcement.

However, these specific measures have been repeatedly blocked or stalled as part of the broader, ongoing partisan deadlock over comprehensive border security and immigration reform.
The list isn't just a wishlist; it is a direct summary of the exact legislative blueprint the Democratic Party has spent the last ten years fighting to implement, succeeding where they had the votes and being blocked where they did not.

How many more billions do those high earners NEED to have an incentive? What incentive do you have left after you earned your 100th million, or your 10th billion? Why do want to reward them so much, while your only incentive for the working class is avoiding hunger?

You clearly don't understand tax brackets. You don't take home less money than your neighbor by crossing into a higher bracket. That is a total myth. You and your neighbor pay the exact same rate on the first $340,000. You only pay the higher rate on the extra money above that line. You always make more by earning more. Your investment in college still entirely pays off.

As for prices going up if we tax the rich? Corporations are already charging record-high prices right now while hoarding record profits. Fair taxes don't cause inflation; they fund the infrastructure, public schools, and healthcare that actually lower the cost of living for the rest of us.
Donald Trump passed huge tax-cuts for the wealthy. Did it lower inflation?

You are complaining about taxing the person making $375k, while completely ignoring that multi-millionaires and billionaires don't even pay income tax.
Their wealth is tied up in stocks and assets, meaning they pay next to nothing.
Because the ultra-rich pay so little, the well-doing American who actually went to college and invested in themselves has to pick up the TAB and pay MORE.
Your side literally caused the exact problem you are accusing Democrats of. Republicans talk big about cutting spending, but they always blow up the deficit by cutting taxes for the top 1% and giant corporations, leaving the hard-working professional to pay the bill.

Someone has to pay for all your wars and presents to the wealthy. You are on your last leg, so they cannot squeeze you any further. So, they look at the exact person you say to worry about.
Trump squeezed those people like no other actually. He made healthcare even more expensive, put tariffs on almost everything, and created massive inflation by blowing up the national debt. Your costs shot up, but did your income?
Then he let corporate interests run wild, doing absolutely nothing about Big Oil companies making record profits over the backs of hard-working citizens.

Your side makes them angry about paying taxes, but because of Trump's federal debt explosion, skyrocketing health insurance premiums, student debt interest, the absolute minimum income a family needs just to start a baseline middle-class life anywhere in America has shot past $100,000. People used to be well off at that income, and Trump is turning them POOR.

Is evolution mathematically impossible? (for if you don't understand why)
only registered users can see external links

The oldest sign of a liar is their refusal to justify their claims.

The oldest sign of a liar is their refusal to justify their claims. A person telling the truth welcomes evidence because facts back them up. A liar throws a tantrum, demands blind trust, and claims they 'don't have to show proof', because they know their lies cannot survive inspection. Your anger and refusal to provide facts is your confession.

She's laughing now, dumbass!

You just went from making up lies about Ilhan Omar to making up lies about the US Constitution. There is absolutely no 'constitutional rule' forcing people to move based on their vote.

Also, your math on Florida doesn't hold up. The 2026 midterm results show that the Republican governor only won Florida with a razor-thin 50.02% against 48.71% for the Democrat. Half the state voted against your nonsense.

By the way, you might want to look up what 'holding the bag' actually means.
It means being left stuck with a failure or a massive loss while everyone else gets away. If you're waiting for the whole country to move to Florida so you can 'hold the bag,' you are accidentally predicting your own financial ruin.

What's the argument, that there are other horrible famous people?
Sure, and there are also lots of decent and even exemplary celebrities.

If there were even the slightest reasons to suspect Clinton of a fraction
of what Trump is investigated for, I would indeed be just as angry.
Honestly, probably even angrier. I hold my political allies to a much higher standard of morals and ethics, than I do my political opponents.
Clinton is hardly an ally by Dutch standards, but the US only has 2 choices.

I expect representatives of my own party to not lie ever. That doesn't mean that I would force them to resign on the first lie that I catch them in, but I would certainly push a complaint up the ladder of responsibility. Meanwhile, we have become used to seeing politicians from the other side lie with total impunity, and their base doesn't seem to care at all. That is the real double standard.

My standards of evidence are the same for everyone. Facts and reason!
My trust in different sources is NOT the same for all. I evaluate a source based on its track record, whether their arguments and data are independently verifiable, and if they provide transparent evidence to support their claims in the first place.
A 'trust my words' attitude is an immediate red flag. Furthermore, I strictly look for financial or political conflicts of interest, a willingness to openly correct mistakes, and whether the claim can be verified by other credible, independent sources.

Have you seen Trump saying what he was going to do for the American people?
He was just talking about his ballroom, his reflective pool and renaming shit.

And why would I even answer that question, if the American people were of
zero concern to you while Trump was in office?

And I in fact DID answer your question, because I explained that the Democrats cannot do SHIT to help the American people, unless they act in a way that you consider 'taking revenge on Trump'.

But OK, I'll answer your question (again).

First of all; Democrats can walk and chew bubblegum at the same time.
Maybe Republicans make it look hard to actually do shit, but it ISN'T.
The struggle is purely on getting corrupt politicians to agree with it.

However, there is a real problem: Democrats cannot do much or anything to help the American people, as long as Trump is in office, because Trump just said that he would VETO everything. That means that getting Trump and all his cronies out (which you think is revenge) is the ONLY thing that Democrats can do to help the American people.

Understand that I have zero confidence in Democrats actually showing a pair,
and going after all the perps of the incredible corruption and crimes, but they SHOULD, or the next chance Republicans get, they will destroy democracy for ever. Also, if the Democrats fail to do that, the current MAGA system will be able to block everything, the American people see no results for their votes, and too much of them can sadly be stupid enough to vote for Republicans again in 2028.

What Democrats COULD do, when Trump doesn't veto it, or is in prison,
are the next Core Democratic Legislative Goals:

* Rebuilding Domestic Infrastructure: Modernizing American roads, bridges, and energy grids creates stable, well-paying blue-collar jobs that cannot be outsourced, while ensuring local communities have safe drinking water and reliable power.

* Expanding Veteran Care: Providing comprehensive healthcare, mental health resources, and housing assistance guarantees that those who served the country receive the benefits they earned.

* Upgrading Border Technology and Personnel: Providing the U.S. Border Patrol with advanced fentanyl-detection screening at ports of entry, hiring more high-tech law enforcement personnel, and funding additional immigration judges to process backlogs ensures the physical border is secure and lethal drugs are intercepted before entering American communities.

* Securing Retirement Benefits: Protecting Social Security and Medicare from future budget cuts ensures that working-class Americans who paid into the system during their careers receive their full retirement checks and medical coverage.

* Lowering Prescription Drug Costs: Authorizing the government to negotiate directly with major pharmaceutical companies slashes the out-of-pocket price of essential medicines for families and seniors.

* Targeting Transnational Crime and Fentanyl: Directing ICE resources strictly toward dismantling drug cartels, human traffickers, and fentanyl smuggling networks focuses federal law enforcement on the actual security threats that devastate American communities.

* Mandating Law Enforcement Bodycams: Requiring ICE agents to wear bodycams protects innocent American citizens from cases of mistaken identity, provides clear evidence during operations, and holds federal agencies accountable.

* Enforcing Judicial Warrants: Ensuring that federal agents must secure a judge's signature before entering properties upholds the Fourth Amendment right to privacy and protects the homes and businesses of all Americans from government overreach.

* Raising the Federal Minimum Wage: Increasing the baseline hourly wage ensures that full-time American workers can afford basic necessities like housing and groceries without relying on government assistance.

* Capping Healthcare Premiums: Expanding federal health insurance subsidies limits out-of-pocket insurance costs for families, ensuring that a medical emergency does not lead to household bankruptcy.

* Investing in Local Public Education: Directing federal funding toward local public schools and vocational training boosts math, science, and technical education, preparing American children for high-paying domestic jobs.

* Capping Childcare and Eldercare Costs: Creating a federal cap on the cost of childcare and eldercare ensures that working parents and families do not have to choose between keeping their jobs or paying exorbitant fees to care for their loved ones.

* Protecting the Domestic Supply Chain: Expanding federal incentives to bring back the production of vital goods—such as microchips, steel, and essential medicines—to American soil prevents global supply shortages and keeps critical industries safe from foreign control.

* Expanding Paid Family and Medical Leave: Establishing a baseline requirement for paid family and medical leave allows American workers to take time off to care for a newborn or recover from a serious illness without losing their income or risking their job security.


How It Is Paid For:

* Raising Corporate Tax Rates: Increasing the minimum tax rate on large corporations and closing loopholes that allow major companies to legally avoid paying federal taxes.

* Taxing High-Income Earners: Applying the Social Security payroll tax to incomes far above the current cap, ensuring the wealthiest individuals contribute the same percentage of their total earnings as working-class families.

* Imposing Penalties on Offshoring: Charging fees and removing tax breaks for American companies that move their factories and jobs to foreign countries.

* Leveraging Medicare Savings: Using the billions of dollars saved by negotiating lower drug prices with pharmaceutical companies to directly fund federal healthcare services.

* Closing Offshore Tax Havens: Ending legal loopholes that allow corporations and individuals to hide profits in foreign banks to avoid domestic taxes.

Does that answer your question?

To be clear, I don't think that impeaching Trump for anything right now is a good strategy. They should definitely file multiple articles of impeachment, but then investigate the shit out of Trump, his family, all his cronies, Elon Musk and DOGE. They will find so many crimes, that they can probably completely end all of the Republican party and its enablers.

How useless are you then, for being unable to present ANY verifiable fact
that clearly contradicts my claims. That should be EASY.

Obviously people don't believe your shit, because they just voted her in again
with roughly 76.5% of the total vote share.

If there is no accountability, Republicans will do/try this again.
For the protection of democracy, lots of them need to go behind bars.
That's the ONLY thing that can FIX your democracy.

Everything makes it appear like a complete systems failure.
That doesn't just happen. There is also talk about Directed-Energy Weapons.

There were no radio communications about hijackers.
That would be the absolute first thing that a pilot would report.
It's very simple; if we see a cover up on this incident,
you can bet a lot of money on your regime being involved in it.

There is NO evidence that Ilhan Omar's father is associated with this academic publication.

What famous people talk about wanting to fuck their daughter and organizing
teen beauty pageants to peep on them? If this was any other person than Trump,
you would condemn them to hell.

I don't care that he's an asshole, I care that he is now associated with r@ping
an EIGHT YEAR OLD GIRL. He is the exact type of ped0phile elite cabal monster that QAnon was going mental about. I thought they were crazy, but it all turned out to be true, only about Republicans and not Democrats. Maybe even the satanic part will leak eventually. That would make it complete.

Any look into the history of Trump instantly reveals what a horrible man he has been for all of his life, and you lot are loyal like dogs to him. Why do you like evil people?

Meanwhile you need to pretend that your political enemies are evil people on no evidence whatsoever, while you reject mountains of evidence about the politicians that you keep supporting, for no good reason at all.

What reason do you have to lie to yourself?

"Concede is a French word. What are you, French?"
only registered users can see external links

The Palm Beach Jet Crash: How Could a Learjet 60 with a Flawless Cruise Record Drop Like a Bomb?

Facts That Support the Suspicion that Trump's air defense is responsible:

• Extreme Proximity and Timing: The Learjet 60 crashed a mere 7 to 9 miles from Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump’s private residence. The impact occurred approximately one hour after Trump departed the immediate area aboard Air Force One.

• Unprecedented Military Activation: In the weeks directly leading up to the crash, the Secret Service and the Pentagon had officially deployed advanced short-range air defense systems and electronic countermeasures around the Mar-a-Lago perimeter to counter drone threats.

• Anomaly in Aircraft Safety Record: Proponents of this theory point out that in the entire operational history of the Learjet 60, no aircraft of this model has ever suffered a spontaneous, catastrophic mid-flight structural failure or an unrecoverable vertical plunge while cruising at 35,000 feet under normal operations.

• Abrupt and Violent Flight Path: The aircraft experienced an immediate, catastrophic departure from controlled flight, transitioning instantly into a near-vertical dive with terminal descent rates accelerating from 10,000 to over 22,000 feet per minute.

• Witness and Authority Descriptions: First-hand eyewitnesses and official state updates described the aircraft's final trajectory as looking "like a missile going down," matches the visual profile of a kinetic intercept or total control surface locking.

• Midair Disintegration: Physical debris was scattered across a wide area before the main impact, with initial findings confirming the airframe began breaking apart at high altitude, a characteristic shared with catastrophic external impacts or sudden explosive decompression.

Tell me why ALL of the news outlets are dismissing this as conspiracy theories, while this list of hard, verified facts points to a scenario that is mathematically and physically far too unlikely to be a simple stroke of bad luck.

So here is a challenge to you: provide me with a list of verifiable facts, just like mine,
for any one of the things that you believe the governments and media are lying about.

Pick any theory you firmly believe in, and I disagree with, and give me at least four hard, undisputed, globally documented physical facts that directly connect the dots. No hearsay, no 'someone said on a podcast,' and no screenshots of anonymous social media posts. Just pure, verifiable anomalies. I bet that you cannot find anything close to what I just provided on this 'accident'. That means that you should not believe that this jet just dropped out of the sky.

Your government just murdered nine innocent people, just to be on the safe side,
and protect your corrupt, criminal, dying, demented, treasonous, ped0phile president.

OMG the projection is stunning; Trump is the biggest crook in your political history.
He is openly breaking the law and pissing on The Constitution.

That's certainly an interesting collection of allegations, but I noticed something:
where is the independently verifiable evidence?

The article relies heavily on unnamed sources, family friends, Facebook connections
and photographs. It produces a British marriage certificate, but that document, even if authentic, doesn't independently establish that the father named on it was Ilhan Omar's father.

And even if all the alleged family relationships were true, how exactly does that establish that Omar is an illegal immigrant?

The article doesn't provide ANY evidence that she entered the United States illegally, committed immigration fraud or obtained citizenship unlawfully.

There is a difference between a sensational story, an allegation and a proven fact.
If someone wants to accuse a person of immigration fraud, they need evidence of immigration fraud.

You're just confusing an intriguing family mystery with proof of a crime.

The article relies on the connection between these names:
Nur Omar Mohamed - Name used in US reporting and his obituary
Nur Said - Name used in Somali community accounts
Nur Said Elmi - Name appearing on the alleged British marriage certificate

These name combinations are very common in the Middle East.
More than 24.5 million people named Mohamed.
More than 3.4 million named Omar.
More than 1.6 million named Said.
More than 3.3 million named Nur.
About 137,618 people named Elmi as a surname, but there is no evidence to tie that name or that British marriage certificate to Ilhan Omar's father.

Always the same nonsense. Without evidence that the judge made the right or wrong call, their political affiliation says NOTHING to me. The fact that they are not being transparent is more evidence of meddling than the politics of a judge.

When I e.g. call Aileen Cannon partial to Trump, I have REASONS. You don't.
Her conduct was Highly irregular, Legally flawed and Obstructive.

Similarly, there is still no LEGAL justification provided for why that judge signed the search warrant. Trump's DOJ, Todd Blanche, is refusing to release the warrant application and supporting affidavit. I think that says enough.

Old:
There are three important facts:
1. Wisconsin Elections Commission administrator Meagan Wolfe announced on October 1, 2020, that no Wisconsin absentee ballots were among the recovered mail.
2. One of the photographs released later appeared to show a Minnesota ballot.
3. Subsequent reporting connected the discarded mail to two men from Minnesota who had stolen mail in a postal crime spree. They were subsequently prosecuted.
The distinction matters: the original reports described absentee ballots among the mail, but there was no evidence that Wisconsin voters' ballots had been lost or deliberately targeted.
Potential impact What the evidence shows
Wisconsin votes lost: No Wisconsin ballots were involved, according to the state election administrator.
Election results changed: No evidence that this incident changed any election result.
Voter fraud: No evidence of a politically motivated scheme.
Public perception: Yes. The incident was widely amplified and used to question mail-in voting.
Political campaigning: Yes. President Trump publicly referred to discarded ballots during the 2020 campaign.

New:
- 92 undelivered mail-in ballots were found in a dumpster near Golden Gardens Park, close to Seattle.
- These were ballots that had been mailed to registered voters but had not reached them.
- King County election officials reported the discovery to Seattle police and the U.S. Postal Service.
- All 92 ballots were invalidated.
- Replacement ballots were issued to the affected voters.
- These were unreturned ballots, not completed votes that had been removed from the count.
- A person finding or possessing a blank ballot cannot simply submit it as a valid vote.
- Returned ballots undergo voter-registration checks, duplicate-vote screening and signature verification.

Risks of in-person Election Day voting:
• Long queues and congestion: Heavy turnout can cause delays and, in extreme cases, prevent people from voting before polls close.
• Equipment failures: Electronic voting machines, ballot scanners and electronic poll books can malfunction.
• Human error: Poll workers can make mistakes checking registration, issuing ballots or recording voter information.
• Voter intimidation: People may encounter intimidation or improper campaigning near polling stations.
• Accessibility: Illness, disability, transport problems or work commitments can prevent people from reaching polling stations.
• Physical security: Polling locations and election workers may face threats or disruptions.
• Voter-roll purging and incorrect registration removals: Eligible voters may be wrongly removed from voter registration lists, sometimes without their knowledge or adequate notification. They may only discover this when they arrive at the polling station on Election Day. Correcting the error can be difficult, time-consuming or impossible before polls close, potentially resulting in their legitimate vote not being counted.

Republicans have tried to make in-person Election Day voting for voters in blue areas
as difficult as possible. That's why masses of people voted early and checked that their ballots have been received and accepted.

Present that paperwork then.

You have no defense of Trump other than attacking the messenger. WEAK!

Direct quotes by Trump:

1. About Jeffrey Epstein (2002)
"I've known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side."
— New York Magazine, 2002.

2. About entering beauty pageant dressing rooms (2005)
"I'll go backstage before a show, and everyone's getting dressed and ready and everything else, and you know, no men are anywhere, and I'm allowed to go in because I'm the owner of the pageant and therefore I'm inspecting it."
"They're standing there with no clothes. And you see these incredible-looking women, and so I sort of get away with things like that."
— Howard Stern Show, April 2005.

3. About his 17-year-old daughter Ivanka (1999)
"She's 17 and doing great — Ivanka. She made me promise, swear to her that I would never date a girl younger than her. So as she grows older, the field is getting very limited."
— Howard Stern Show.

4. About Ivanka's appearance (2004)
"Yeah."
— Trump's response when Howard Stern asked whether Ivanka could be described as a "piece of ass."

5. About Ivanka's breasts (2006)
"She's actually always been very voluptuous. She's tall, she's almost 6 feet tall, and she's been, she's an amazing beauty."
— Howard Stern Show.

6. About dating 21-year-olds (2002)
"Over the past couple of years, I'd go out with somebody and she's like 21, and she's talking about, you know, 'What are you doing?' and she's studying algebra."
— Howard Stern Show.

7. About women aged 24 (2006)
"Oh, absolutely. I'd have no trouble."
— Trump responding to Stern asking whether he could be dating 24-year-olds.

8. About Lindsay Lohan (2004)
"She's probably deeply troubled, and therefore great in bed."
— Howard Stern Show, discussing Lindsay Lohan, who was 18.

9. About women and sexual entitlement (2005 recording, released 2016)
"I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait."
"When you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything."
"Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything."
— Access Hollywood recording.

10. About two 14-year-old girls (1992)
"Wow! Just think — in a couple of years I'll be dating you."
— Reported remark to two 14-year-old girls, attributed to Trump by contemporary newspaper reporting.

Your side called Biden a ped0, for supposedly smelling a girl's hair.
Trump's behavior is much much worse. These are JUST his own WORDS.

She is fighting for healthcare, education, housing and food programs,
and you call he 'evil'. She is the literal representation of ALTRUISM.

OMG, you're sounding like a mentally ill homeless guy.