The Next President is...

[HeloDude]

1 hour ago, SpeedOfHeat said:

....right on cue, response #3, whataboutism.  lol

Saying that Trump will fire people for poor performance when Biden doesn’t is showing a ‘contrast’ between the two, not “whataboutism”.  You’ve been off whatever game you’d had lately…everything ok?

[ViperMan]

6 hours ago, SpeedOfHeat said:

Trump supporters only have 4 fallback responses to every single post:

1)        “TDS”

2)        “Fake news”

3)        Whataboutism

4)        Some version of the “lesser of 2 evils” argument

Every response fits one of those categories.  

It’s true that the John Kelly quotes are secondhand.  Believe him or not, it doesn’t matter.  Personally, I ask which is more likely:  That Kelly had a distinguished 46-yr career in the Marines, became Head of Homeland Security, was hired as WH Chief of Staff, and then all-of-a-sudden, decided to become a liar and traitor?  OR…..that Trump is simply a shitty person and an idiot?

But again, it doesn’t matter.  You can dismiss the quotes as unverifiable.  What’s not in question is the long list of people, in addition to Kelly, that all echo his comments.  Pence, Mattis, Milley, Bolton, Tillerson, Barr, Esper, etc.  Even Trump’s current VP pick was a Never Trump’er who called him an idiot.  Again, what is more likely?  All those guys are lying?  Gen Maddog Mattis, (revered among Marines....like a living Robin Olds for us......) suddenly got a case of “TDS?”  OR…..could it be…..wait for it……that Trump is a shitty person and an idiot?

People are acting like Trump’s second term will be the same as his first.  I hear that all the time.  If they’re referencing the end, when he lost, they’re spot-on.  If he loses, it will be nearly identical.  You’re already seeing unfounded claims of voter fraud and building hysteria that “tHe fIX Is iN.”  …..Strange how the “Stop the Steal” folks had 4 years to figure out how to stop the steal again, and apparently couldn’t do a thing to foil the democratic pentaverate’s evil plan.  Weird.  But I digress…

If he wins, however, it will be much different.  In his first term, people took comfort in having the “adults in the room."  But imagine how different the next administration would look.  It’s not 2017 or 2018 anymore.  Everyone knows the rules of the Trump game now:  Unquestioning loyalty and bootlicking, or you’re fired.  That’s it.

Put on the red MAGA hat and smile and feed into his ego ......or pack your $hit.  No sane person of dignity, conviction, or genuine motives will be around him.  And worse still, people looking to exploit the US and/or take advantage of Trump know exactly how to do it:  Praise and flattery and adoration.  Compliment him, especially about petty nonsense like crowd size or his golf game. 

Someone asked about Beta males.  Ha.  The joke’s on you.  You’re about to vote for the biggest Beta ever.

I tend to see the opposite, honestly.

Day one, you had an extremely odd reaction from CNN with the naval-gazing over who had the "most attended inauguration" in history. It was clearly meant to be "stumping" by the incoming administration, and it stood out to me that CNN commentators were so hyper-focused on this mundane detail. I still remember how peculiar it seemed. Little did I realize how it would be a harbinger of things to come. In hindsight, looking back, it was obvious from the start that there was a never-ending attempt to discredit him at every opportunity.

Here's one about the "very fine people" business. Look at the entire video, and tell me this isn't someone who is very thoughtful in his analysis. Who is taking a clear-eyed and practical look at the situation. Here it is with all of it's context:

ALL of the stuff about Charlottesville WAS fake news. It IS propaganda. It is right there for you to see it if you are willing to take the scales off of your eyes. Nearly every bit of this has been boiled down into a shorthand used by the likes of NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, NYT, and many others to condemn him as a racist. The only part you ever hear talked about has been stripped of ALL context. Said another way - it's been lied about from the start. If he's so racist, why is he doing better with blacks this time around? What do they know that you don't? Or are you smarter than they are?

What about the "Hunter Biden laptop"? Was that fake? Because many in our government with security clearances well-above mine and yours said it was "fake," and news about it was legitimately censored in direct violation of the 1st amendment. Turns out it wasn't fake, and our government compelled technology companies to censor information that was deemed "too dangerous" for you to know about. Now, do you still trust all those people? It was an actual attempt by our "betters" to leverage the inherent trust placed in them into a certain acceptable view of the world. Or is there perhaps something you don't understand about the state of things? Is there maybe something about the way politics works behind the curtain that you're not allowed to see? The signatories of that letter are basically a who's who of the people that are in charge of our little-understood global order and foreign policy. Maybe Trump is a threat to that order?

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000175-4393-d7aa-af77-579f9b330000

I suppose all of those people are discredited in your mind now? Or were they right? Was the Hunter laptop fake news? Or was it real? Your answer says a lot about how you process facts and the value you place on truth.

Your appeal to "what is more likely" is simply motivated reasoning and cherry-picking facts. That you wield a lot of important-sounding names makes you feel good and as if you have an actual argument, but you haven't presented anything. You take comfort and security in the fact that you place names like Mattis, Kelly, and others in your "quiver" of arrows you lean on, but they are merely people just like Trump. People who were in political office I might add. But I guess that's not a radar contact that's covered by your el strobe right now?

You should try arguing with facts. You should look at the entire context. You should attempt to strip the emotion from your worldview and approach this with fresh eyes. Your TDS is showing.

At this point, I want Trump to be President so all you infants can have your latent psychotic break, get past it, have your cathartic cry session, and we can all hopefully move on. I'm tired of the craziness.

Edited October 25, 2024 by ViperMan

[Day Man]

42 minutes ago, ViperMan said:

very thoughtful

i know right

[BashiChuni]

kamala can't even win a primary in her own party and some of you betas gonna vote her for President.

worst presidential nominee in the last 60 years easily.

[ClearedHot]

 SOH's Mom dealing with a Trump sign.

 

 

[M2]

1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:

 SOH's Mom dealing with a Trump sign.

 

I was sure she was going to kick the sign when she walked away!

 

[kaputt]

The tolerant left strikes again. 

[Lord Ratner]

On 10/24/2024 at 1:57 PM, SpeedOfHeat said:

Trump supporters only have 4 fallback responses to every single post:

1)        “TDS”

2)        “Fake news”

3)        Whataboutism

4)        Some version of the “lesser of 2 evils” argument

Every response fits one of those categories.  

It’s true that the John Kelly quotes are secondhand.  Believe him or not, it doesn’t matter.  Personally, I ask which is more likely:  That Kelly had a distinguished 46-yr career in the Marines, became Head of Homeland Security, was hired as WH Chief of Staff, and then all-of-a-sudden, decided to become a liar and traitor?  OR…..that Trump is simply a shitty person and an idiot?

But again, it doesn’t matter.  You can dismiss the quotes as unverifiable.  What’s not in question is the long list of people, in addition to Kelly, that all echo his comments.  Pence, Mattis, Milley, Bolton, Tillerson, Barr, Esper, etc.  Even Trump’s current VP pick was a Never Trump’er who called him an idiot.  Again, what is more likely?  All those guys are lying?  Gen Maddog Mattis, (revered among Marines....like a living Robin Olds for us......) suddenly got a case of “TDS?”  OR…..could it be…..wait for it……that Trump is a shitty person and an idiot?

People are acting like Trump’s second term will be the same as his first.  I hear that all the time.  If they’re referencing the end, when he lost, they’re spot-on.  If he loses, it will be nearly identical.  You’re already seeing unfounded claims of voter fraud and building hysteria that “tHe fIX Is iN.”  …..Strange how the “Stop the Steal” folks had 4 years to figure out how to stop the steal again, and apparently couldn’t do a thing to foil the democratic pentaverate’s evil plan.  Weird.  But I digress…

If he wins, however, it will be much different.  In his first term, people took comfort in having the “adults in the room."  But imagine how different the next administration would look.  It’s not 2017 or 2018 anymore.  Everyone knows the rules of the Trump game now:  Unquestioning loyalty and bootlicking, or you’re fired.  That’s it.

Put on the red MAGA hat and smile and feed into his ego ......or pack your $hit.  No sane person of dignity, conviction, or genuine motives will be around him.  And worse still, people looking to exploit the US and/or take advantage of Trump know exactly how to do it:  Praise and flattery and adoration.  Compliment him, especially about petty nonsense like crowd size or his golf game. 

Someone asked about Beta males.  Ha.  The joke’s on you.  You’re about to vote for the biggest Beta ever.

You children just pick a few dissected quotes from a few posters here and act like everyone is saying the same thing. Go back and find any posts from me where I am denying the things you say we are all denying. You won't find them. Has it occurred to you at any point that the reason you keep falling back on the same stupid arguments is because you don't have anything approaching a policy prescription for America? 

 

We all get it, you're aghast at what a terrible person Trump is. The difference is some of us consider him not particularly worse than the people who have been occupying Washington for decades. And it's hilarious that you would list generals, who I consider to be the most pathetic group in America right now, as some sort of evidence. This generation of generals have distinguished themselves in nothing other than their ability to eat the most shit and disregard their own virtue to assure promotion in an organization that hasn't accomplished anything for decades.

 

I don't like Trump. I didn't like him in 2016. Does it matter, what I have before me are two choices and two very different visions for America. I would love a different candidate representing the more conservative vision for America, but I didn't get one. Doesn't change the fact that if I have to choose between what Donald Trump did when he was in office and what Harris did while she was in office, that question is so simple that it boggles my mind you are even here defending the opposition.

 

But you aren't defending the opposition, are you? You're doing the same thing Harris is doing: everything in her power to focus on Trump's admittedly awful personality instead of her obviously awful track record.

 

I'm not voting for anybody for president this year because I've decided philosophically that I'm against presidents over the age of 65 beginning their first term. I'm in Texas, so I can do that and hope that there will be some statistical change that can be recognized and hopefully get us better candidates in the future. But if I was in a swing state, I would be voting for Trump.

 

If you are unable to understand how someone can vote for someone they don't consider to be moral, then I have to wonder what type of drugs you are taking that make you think your candidates are moral. That's the more interesting conversation here.

Edited October 25, 2024 by Lord Ratner

[Lord Ratner]

Oh, and JD Vance changes everything. Considering how many whacked out leftist internet trolls are trying to actually assassinate Donald Trump now, there's a halfway decent chance Vance becomes the president sometime in the next 4 years. That possibility is more than enough for me to vote for Trump, while still hoping that it doesn't happen of course.

[Ebony zer]

39 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

I'm not voting for anybody for president this year because I've decided philosophically that I'm against presidents over the age of 65 beginning their first term. I'm in Texas, so I can do that and hope hope that there will be some statistical change that can be recognized and hopefully get us better candidates in the future. But if I was in a swing state, I would be voting for Trump.

I would encourage to still vote even if Texas is likely to go to Trump. The last 2 Republican Presidents have won the electoral college but not the popular vote. As long as that continues to happen you're going to hear appeals from the Democrats to abolish the electoral college. 

[Lord Ratner]

1 hour ago, Ebony zer said:

I would encourage to still vote even if Texas is likely to go to Trump. The last 2 Republican Presidents have won the electoral college but not the popular vote. As long as that continues to happen you're going to hear appeals from the Democrats to abolish the electoral college. 

The electoral college is going nowhere. They'll find something else to complain about, I assure you.

[raimius]

There are actually more than two presidential candidates.  Vote for whoever you think is best.

[Lord Ratner]

1 hour ago, raimius said:

There are actually more than two presidential candidates.  Vote for whoever you think is best.

Chase Oliver (and the libertarian party) is a joke, and Jill Stein is a fossilized joke. 

[di1630]

It’s not hard.

2016-2020 was better than 2021-present unless you are a trans/illegal border crosser/indebted student/Taliban/woman unable to figure out birth control/welfare recipient/guy who wants to compete in women’s sports/person wants to get paid not to work.

Who’d I miss?

Choice is easy to vote for Trump despite him being a dickhead on Twitter.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[BashiChuni]

6 hours ago, Ebony zer said:

As long as that continues to happen you're going to hear appeals from the Democrats to abolish the electoral college. 

ironically the REAL threats to democracy are all on the left

[Smokin]

On 10/24/2024 at 11:57 AM, SpeedOfHeat said:

…..that Trump is simply a shitty person and an idiot?

I don't think I've heard anyone on here, or anywhere else for that matter, saying that Trump is a 'good person'.  I would never invite him into my home, but that's true of almost all politicians.  He's had multiple wives and apparently cheated on all of them.  He's clearly an egomaniac.  But an idiot?  I realize he inherited a bunch of money, but you still don't get to where he is by being an idiot.  Any claim that he's an idiot is not grounded in reality.  I can't think of a President in US history that is/was an idiot.

Harris on the other hand is clearly a 'shitty person' AND an idiot.  Any time she's asked a tough question she does that stupid hackle and then proceeds to string together a sentence that is less coherent than the crackhead on the corner in LA.  If you think she got to where she is today by any qualities than her genitalia and melanin, I'd like to try whatever you're smoking.  She was offered a job with the DA before she passed the bar, which is absurdly unusual and clearly was paved by a patron, which has continued throughout her life.  After she failed the bar, the job offer was not pulled.  The majority of lawyers (including every single of dozens of lawyers I know) pass the bar on the first try, which means she dumber than the average lawyer.  Average is shockingly dumb, so since she is below average than it is reasonable to think that she is in fact an idiot.

The problem is we have very limited choices.  99% of politicians give the other 1% a bad name.  We are stuck with voting for the person that advocates the polices that are closest to what we want.  Trump's policies are not what I would like to see, but they are better than Harris'.

[arg]

We are looking at two turds and have to decide which one is the cleanest 

[dream big]

3 hours ago, Smokin said:

 I can't think of a President in US history that is/was an idiot.

I don’t know, I always thought Biden was pretty dumb. I’ve always thought he was kind of an idiot and crackpot going back to 2007-2008. It makes sense, if you were one of his or Kamala’s handlers part of the deep state swamp cesspool, wouldn’t you also want two blithering idiots that are easy to control? 

[gearhog]

20 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

I'm not voting for anybody for president this year because I've decided philosophically that I'm against presidents over the age of 65 beginning their first term. I'm in Texas, so I can do that and hope that there will be some statistical change that can be recognized and hopefully get us better candidates in the future. But if I was in a swing state, I would be voting for Trump.

20 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Oh, and JD Vance changes everything. Considering how many whacked out leftist internet trolls are trying to actually assassinate Donald Trump now, there's a halfway decent chance Vance becomes the president sometime in the next 4 years. That possibility is more than enough for me to vote for Trump, while still hoping that it doesn't happen of course.

Good post, but I don't understand your arbitrary hangup on age 65. Why not 69? Age is an immutable characteristic, even moreso than race or gender, that isn't necessarily and indicator in itself of future performance. Biden and Trump are roughly the same age, but why the cognitive disparity?  Not one person will ever notice, nor even consider your reason for not voting for President.

Here's an analogy: When we went through pilot training, it was challenging (probably more for you). We had a deeply seated personal interest in the outcome. It meant everything. One day the FLT/CC said, "Here's the drop." Would you have even considered saying:

- "I don't like the choices. They all suck. I'm not filling out the dream sheet."

- "Not interested. The C-130/KC-135/B-52 are too old."

- "I trust all my classmates will make the right decision for me."

- "If I don't fill out a dream sheet, the AF will understand that I'm not happy, and give me better opportunities in the future."

And none of your classmates would have ever said "Wow, what brave and principled position. This guy is above the fray." The guy who would have gotten the AWACs is going to point and laugh at you.

The choices are what they are, and the likelihood that the process by which we arrive at these alternatives is going to get better in the future is low. Everybody wishes they had a better menu from which to choose. It's just fantasy. Anyway, that analogy was a bit of a reach but I hope you vote, brother. Cheers

Edited October 26, 2024 by gearhog

[Boomer6]

31 minutes ago, gearhog said:

Words

[gearhog]

4 hours ago, Boomer6 said:

LOL. You, however. I think you shouldn't vote.

[Lord Ratner]

5 hours ago, gearhog said:

Age is an immutable characteristic, even moreso than race or gender, that isn't necessarily and indicator in itself of future performance.

Precisely because you can't predict how an individual will age and decline, and the job is too important to risk on something like Biden, I'm using statistical models of cognitive decline, and last I looked the models showed cognitive decline increasing around 75 years old pretty substantially. So, 65. 

5 hours ago, gearhog said:

Not one person will ever notice, nor even consider your reason for not voting for President.

Yeah because there isn't a gigantic industry behind analyzing election results and voter habits... It's all just magic smoke! I've been surveyed no fewer than a dozen times this election alone. 

 

More to the point, I avoid hiring people over 75 whenever possible. I'm not allowed to fly passengers with them (at a much younger age of 65), and I don't find them to be open minded or particularly fun as a group. So why would I vote for them to run the country? They (Boomers) are also the biggest threat to the financial stability of our nation.

 

5 hours ago, gearhog said:

Here's an analogy: When we went through pilot training, it was challenging (probably more for you). We had a deeply seated personal interest in the outcome. It meant everything. One day the FLT/CC said, "Here's the drop." Would you have even considered saying:

- "I don't like the choices. They all suck. I'm not filling out the dream sheet."

- "Not interested. The C-130/KC-135/B-52 are too old."

- "I trust all my classmates will make the right decision for me."

- "If I don't fill out a dream sheet, the AF will understand that I'm not happy, and give me better opportunities in the future."

And none of your classmates would have ever said "Wow, what brave and principled position. This guy is above the fray." The guy who would have gotten the AWACs is going to point and laugh at you.

The choices are what they are, and the likelihood that the process by which we arrive at these alternatives is going to get better in the future is low. Everybody wishes they had a better menu from which to choose. It's just fantasy. Anyway, that analogy was a bit of a reach but I hope you vote, brother. Cheers

Almost everything in this quote is... Silly.

I never once studied in pilot training (other than going to the UTD), so I'm not sure what that does to the rest of the analogy. Nor did it mean everything to me. I turned down one of 3 T-38s for my class because I knew that being a fighter/bomber pilot would mean a *lot* of studying and I don't like studying. 

 

I've recently not filled out preferences if I didn't have a preference. We definitely had students who specifically didn't want to fly the older airplanes because they were old. And the AF doesn't study dream sheets in the hopes of understanding future track select trends. You do know that they track partial ballots, right? 

 

5 hours ago, gearhog said:

And none of your classmates would have ever said "Wow, what brave and principled position. This guy is above the fray." The guy who would have gotten the AWACs is going to point and laugh at you.

Is this why you vote? To feel brave? To gain the admiration of your peers? I don't. I just vote for what I think is best. And while I think Trump winning is better than Kamala winning, I think it would also be good to see reduced turnout for Trump as an indication that despite his victory, he is not the direction the conservatives should go. Your suggestion that these things are not tracked is frankly laughable. 

 

5 hours ago, gearhog said:

Anyway, that analogy was a bit of a reach but I hope you vote, brother. Cheers

Agreed. And I'll be voting, just not for president. 

[gearhog]

For the record, I did say that analogy was bit of a reach. I might need to tweak it a little. In spite of what most here believe, I don't nail it every time. 😄 However...

Your contention is that there is gigantic industry around tracking and analyzing election results and voter habits. You've been surveyed a dozen times, likely with the same spam text messages I get. Partial ballots are tracked. Ok. Fine. All of that means absolutely nothing. The proof is in the pudding. The science does not work. If you believe that it does, how would you explain the net result of this industrial sized effort is the US electorate consistently receiving poor quality options? You have a lot of faith in a voter feedback system that yields a presidential candidate with one of the lowest approval ratings in history and receiving zero votes in the primary and another who is a reality TV star who says crazy shit. Where was the science?

I don't like the system, either. But you don't get to choose your choices.

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

Is this why you vote? To feel brave? To gain the admiration of your peers? I don't. I just vote for what I think is best. And while I think Trump winning is better than Kamala winning, I think it would also be good to see reduced turnout for Trump as an indication that despite his victory, he is not the direction the conservatives should go. Your suggestion that these things are not tracked is frankly laughable. 

 

Agreed. And I'll be voting, just not for president. 

Hmmm... now that you mention it, I suppose I do vote to feel somewhat brave. It takes a little courage to commit yourself to a decision that isn't perfect isn't a guarantee, and may have drawbacks. Not making a decision is easy and takes zero courage. "I just vote for what I think is best" and in the very next line say Trump is the better candidate. A few words later, you accuse my position of being laughable. Huh?

Simply put: Voters matter, non-voters do not.

 

Edited October 26, 2024 by gearhog

[SpeedOfHeat]

On 10/24/2024 at 8:35 PM, ViperMan said:

……is fake news.

What about….

…..your TDS

Thank you for proving my point.  

On 10/25/2024 at 11:29 AM, Lord Ratner said:

generals, who I consider to be the most pathetic group in America right now, as some sort of evidence. This generation of generals have distinguished themselves in nothing other than their ability to eat the most shit and disregard their own virtue to assure promotion in an organization that hasn't accomplished anything for decades.

You missed the central point about the contradiction:  If these Generals are such shitheads and “swamp dwellers”….then why did Trump hire them if he “knows the best people.  Great people.”  In fact, he only “hires the best people.”  

The answer, is, he was bullshitting, which he admitted to on the Rogan podcast yesterday:  

Rogan:  “how did you know who to appoint?”  

Trump. “Well, I didn’t.  I didn’t have any experience.  I was there 17 times in Washington, but never stayed over.  But I didn’t know anybody.  I was a New York guy. I was a New York builder andI knew that whole world. But I didn't know the Washington world too well. And all of a sudden, you're supposed to be appointing top people.  It’s the biggest mistake I made.”  

He found out he would have to take recommendations from advisors.  He discovered that there were important reasons why politicians typically got hired.  He mentions that some of his hires were “bad.”  Joe asks how, and he answers “bad or disloyal people.”

So this is a decent example of a core reason that many people are appalled at Trump’s candidacy:  He’s fundamentally too foolish and arrogant to know what he’s getting himself into, so he just tries to make it up as he goes.  …possibly the biggest example of “fake it till ya make it” ever.  

And worst of all, as he fumbles around faking it, he makes decisions based on ego and self-interest.  That’s it.  That’s the lense through which he sees life.

And I know……people will say he was already President and we survived.  That’s true.  And I’m sure many will disagree with me, but I simply think we got lucky.  I do.  He’s in way over his head.  A lot can go wrong in another 4 years.

14 hours ago, Smokin said:

an idiot?  I realize he inherited a bunch of money, but you still don't get to where he is by being an idiot. 

I posted about this before, but I’ll summarize again:  Every  single  time people claim that Trump is smart, it’s by implication.  Just like you did.  “He must be smart, just look at how rich he became” or some such example.  It is absolutely stunning that people don’t recognize him as an idiot.  It is, to me, his most obvious and pronounced trait.  

Instead of implication, try using direct observation:  Just listen to him speak (unscripted).  Does he ever say anything that only a smart person could say?  He rambles.  He rants.  He complains.  He calls his enemies names.  He never says anything that demonstrates knowledge, wisdom, vision, or expertise.  

To me this is the most fascinating part of politics, and it just gets more intense every campaign:  The way people convince themselves that their candidate is the polar opposite of what they actually are.  If you read 1984, the chapter about “Doublethink”, ….holy shit….it is profound.

I’ve talked to many Trump supporters who call him brilliant, ….when he’s obviously stupid.  They call him an Alpha male…..a guy with man-tits, a combover, and makeup.  A guy who Harris was able to toy with just by saying people were leaving his rallies early.  They actually think he’s religious… he doesn't know a thing about the Bible or the core tenets of Christianity.  They’ve convinced themselves he cares about people and is selfless, ….. he obviously only cares about himself……

Rogan’s first question was:  “what was it like right after the inauguration, actually being the POTUS?”  And Trump goes into a stream of consciousness about how opulent and luxurious the bedrooms in the White House were.

Mentioning the responsibility, a sense of duty, the trust imparted by the American people, the hope and pressure to do a good job on behalf of American people.  …..anything like that…..  It doesn’t even occur to him.  For nearly 3 hours, the guy talks about himself, complains about criticism towards himself, complains about other people doing “terrible jobs” and “destroying the country,” etc.

Like I said before, he’s faking it.  But even in faking it, he’s not smart enough to fake caring about other people.  It never occurs to him to praise other people or show gratitude or appreciation.  It never occurs to him to mention colleagues, coworkers, friends, his wife, or people that have helped him.  He never speaks of his confidence in Americans as people.  He never even hints that pride and the success of the country are dependent upon other people.  

He just makes nonsense threats that the country will literally “cease to exist” if he’s not elected.  I just find it remarkable that AF pilots, who ostensibly target “Humble, Approachable, Credible” as a measure of good leadership, can doublethink themselves into applying those traits to Trump.

But….as they say, my personal opinions and .50 cents will get you a can of Pepsi at the snack bar. So, I’m going to bow out of this until after the election.  I’m sure many will be happy about that.  But……for all the downvotes and videos of my mom and accusations of TDS, here’s the crazy thing:  If we were in a squadron together, we would get along great.  I know, because many of my closest military bros and lifelong friends are Trump supporters.  We rarely had spirited conversations about politics, but when we did, it never affected or soured the friendship.  More often we’d have conversations about family, flying, tactics, sports, etc.  

The internet is a cesspool.  I’m sure you guys are good solid bros, pilots, officers, and people.  (…..the jury is still out on HeloDude if I’m being completely honest….but maybe.)  

Cheers

[disgruntledemployee]

8 hours ago, gearhog said:

Good post, but I don't understand your arbitrary hangup on age 65. Why not 69? Age is an immutable characteristic, even moreso than race or gender, that isn't necessarily and indicator in itself of future performance. Biden and Trump are roughly the same age, but why the cognitive disparity?  Not one person will ever notice, nor even consider your reason for not voting for President.

Here's an analogy: When we went through pilot training, it was challenging (probably more for you). We had a deeply seated personal interest in the outcome. It meant everything. One day the FLT/CC said, "Here's the drop." Would you have even considered saying:

- "I don't like the choices. They all suck. I'm not filling out the dream sheet."

- "Not interested. The C-130/KC-135/B-52 are too old."

- "I trust all my classmates will make the right decision for me."

- "If I don't fill out a dream sheet, the AF will understand that I'm not happy, and give me better opportunities in the future."

And none of your classmates would have ever said "Wow, what brave and principled position. This guy is above the fray." The guy who would have gotten the AWACs is going to point and laugh at you.

The choices are what they are, and the likelihood that the process by which we arrive at these alternatives is going to get better in the future is low. Everybody wishes they had a better menu from which to choose. It's just fantasy. Anyway, that analogy was a bit of a reach but I hope you vote, brother. Cheers

Which airframe is Trump?  Harris?