Truth,

"Honest question, do you think calling a female reporter denotes strength?"

No...it makes him a jerk.

Look how he addressed Zelinksky.

I doubt the reporter is carrying on like everyone else.

Reporters aren't wimpy if they're good at their job.

Laura,

"Who cares why she was called piggy. The POTUS isn't supposed to be calling anyone names."

I never said I agreed with it.

Yeah, it's not standard protocol.

But if a grown adult can't handle a blunt comment from the person in charge, they're in the wrong line of work. Power doesn't slow down for delicate feelings, and the people who hold it know that.

After decades dealing with owners and executives, I saw one thing.

Thin skinned people get chewed up.

Not because anyone is cruel but because that's how the top of the food chain operates.

Some of you liberals sound shocked every time a politician acts like anything other than a guidance counselor.

It comes from living a life so cushioned that normal, everyday bluntness feels like an attack.

I've worked with a handful of decent bosses. The rest? Demanding and absolutely uninterested in your emotional comfort.
That's the real world.

Trump doesn't pull his punches.

Was she called piggy because she was asking too many questions?

Snoofy,

"Oregon has been doing it exclusively by mail for decades, so it clearly scales just fine."

There are eight states using mail-in ballots exclusively. Of those, 6 are solid democrat, 1 is solid republican and 1 is iffy now, but was solid democrat.

A state being "solid" means elections aren't contested. Results aren't verified closely. Ballots aren't recounted. Thinking things are "just fine" has not had the need to be tested and verified. Really, you don't know if things are "just fine" or not.

Eight states running vote by mail isn't remotely the same as rolling it out nationwide. You're talking about millions more uncounted ballots in transit, processed through thousands of different offices, postal hubs, and election boards.

Every additional handoff increases exposure.

Every new location adds another failure point.

Risks are compound.

An election isn't something you run on "good enough." It demands the best, tightest, most controlled processes you can manage. Mail-in ballots aren't that.

Opportunities to lose these uncounted ballots to accidents is an election disaster just waiting to happen.

Acting like 8 states smoothly translates to 50 isn't smart. It's amateur and reckless.

Absentee ballots are necessary and are less risk just due to the smaller number. Some people can't vote any other way.

Snoofy,

"And you're especially not willing to quantify the number of eligible voters who won't be able to vote if their vote by mail is taken away."

Mail in ballots on this scale is new.

Face it. With liberals, its never enough.

Never ever.

They get this, they want that.

They get that, they want something else.

And if they don't get what they what, they cry victim or oppressed.

Anything to prevent people from being accountable and responsible for themselves.

If you want to vote, get your lazy butt to the polls.

Or apply for an absentee ballot if you qualify.

Lazy doesn't qualify.

Snoofy,

I'm talking about risk management, not cost.

You're questioning my accounting knowledge and experience?

That's bold. Let me know when you've spent decades dealing with accounting information systems where accuracy matter.

Dan,

"You've never acknowledged ballots are serialized and watermarked. You've never admitted a returned mail-in ballot not requested is investigated. You've never even addressed the math problem of any minor incidences being offset by similar incidences from the other side."

WAAAY too much to do and keep track of and too many processes and check and balances.

Or...mark your little circle, feed your ballot into the scanner and leave...

You voted and your vote was counted.

Dan,

"Ultimately, every legal voter should be able to choose the way they cast their legal vote."

With voting, the opportunity to vote without hinderance or pressure to vote a particular way, is very important.

Voting out of sight of family members or anyone who might pressure you, is critical for a free election.

Considering the dynamics of home settings and the ease of pressuring members of the family, in person private voting is the only solution.

Providing the option to vote with mail ballots, the leader of a group or family may dictate how they will all vote. That would negate your idea that "every legal voter should be able to choose the way they cast their legal vote". I do agree with you but the dynamics of family may prevent that.

Requiring in person secure private voting is critical for a true democracy.

Setting up early voting is a fair way to give people time to get to the polls.

Then scan the ballot as they leave.

KISS.

"Keep it simple stupid."

Dan,

"Are you just repeating internet gossip?"

Mail in ballots, even absentee ballots have a built in inherent risk because they are uncounted ballots being transported.

In small numbers, the risk is less.

Larger numbers of these such as millions is a higher risk and I predict will lead to another catastrophe in a future election.

My own experience with these kind of setups make me my own authority on the matter.

Dan,

Yea...talk about ballots...make Laura's day.

I have errands to run. Wife need get stuff for our vaca.

Dan,

There's no shortage of accusations.

I can't find any information about evidence.

Actual, verifiable, documented evidence.

Dan,

"Interesting. That's your barometer for others, but not for yourself."

I couldn't find anything after looking.

Actually, you're the "show me the links" person, not me.

Rein,

"the decomposing------------------- threatened to have Katie Johnson killed."

That's a huge claim. Show me some evidence, not allegation, evidence.

If you can't produce a source that verifies an actual threat, then you're just repeating internet gossip.

Rein,

"Rep Stansbury: Epstein Files Say Trump Accused Of Raping 13 Yr Old"

The 13-year-old rape allegation against Trump came from a 2016 civil lawsuit filed under the pseudonym "Katie Johnson," a case that was filed multiple times with different lawyers and different versions of the story.

The accuser never appeared publicly, never testified, and never produced corroborating evidence. Her own lawyers eventually withdrew, and the accuser dismissed the lawsuit herself right before the election, citing threats.

No criminal case was ever opened, no verified witnesses ever came forward, and no evidence ever survived basic scrutiny. Even media outlets hostile to Trump ultimately concluded the accusation was unverifiable.

Dan,

"You'd be condemning him if there was a (D) after the name."

Your arguments are getting weaker and weaker.

You've yet to answer my question. If Trump is the anti-Christ, where is the Christ he's in opposition to.

And you'd be defending him and keep him hidden from the press seeing that he's senile, if he had a (D).

Danni,

You're speculating.

Jpw,

"Well I know I got one and I'm shocked, SHOCKED, that billjohnson turned out to be a pedo protector."

It's not that and you know it. You know from my posts I would NOT defend sex trafficking or abusing minors.

What I've been saying is that the decision not to release the Epstein files may have more to do with protecting relationships with other countries, than Trump worrying about himself.

And that raises two questions.

1. What would be the impact on international relations if powerful people in other countries were exposed?
2. Is it America's responsibility to act as the world's morality police?

Lastly, those files were already in DOJ custody during the Biden administration. If there had been something solid implicating Trump, it's hard to imagine that administration just quietly sitting on it.

Rsty,

Or will be if you live long enough.

I am 100% sure I would never have made it to my 70s the path I was on.

Rsty,

"More like you're just a product of your time, eh Bill?"

We all are.

Had nothing to do with kids. It was a adult joke I heard decades ago.

So do gays still refer to it as tricking? That was my question. I see how you would tie them together. I wasnt.

Actually tricks was more aligned with drag queens who had sex for money than than anything about kids.

There was a gay joke that went around in my day that tied trix and tricks into a funny line.

Keep in mind, 50 years ago peopke weren't thinking along those lines. Most people didn't know pedophiles or didnt talk about it.

Just a play on words. That's it.

Alex,

I'm well aware of the contradictions in life.

And the compromising we all have to do. We believe one thing and do another.

Even Paul in Roman's 7:15. "I want to do what is good but I don't. I don't want to do what I know is wrong but I do it anyway'.

The human condition.

I think many Christians understand this conflict and see the necessity for God's grace.

Trump is caught between rocks and hard places that are difficult to navigate.

Better him than me.

I wouldn't have the strength.

Laura,

I didn't word my question well.

Nevermind.

Laura,

"Trix are for kids."

I've mentioned before that I've kept a journal since I was 19, but I've barely read any of it over the years. A few months ago I finally pulled the books out and did some reading.

Back then, if I met a guy and went to his place, I'd write, "I tricked with a guy last night."

Doing research, it appears to still be in the vernacular used by some gays in some regions.

What do you know about it?

Snoofy,

What happened to the Epstein thread?