Last Night's Debate Was a Flop

It's the one thing I dislike the most about Trump, even though I support him and will vote for him. I know what his positions are, and I have a good idea what the country will look like if he goes back to the White House for another four years.

But all too often he simply misses golden opportunities to convey certain messages Americans need to hear. Especially those who are independent or undecided voters.

The debate last night was mediocre at best. I don't think it served to do much to change the course or move any needles. For either candidate, by the way. This was not really a debate for Democrats or Republicans who have already made up their minds. This debate was for those who are still on the fence.

To be fair, this debate was more for those voters who are mostly on the fence about Harris more than Trump. People already know who Donald Trump is and they have the past four years when he was president to go on. They have heard the messages, seen the interviews, and watched the rallies.

Trump is far from a mystery.

But that leads me to asking what in the hell was on the mind of ABC when they asked the questions? Especially the ones they asked Harris. It's not a mystery that the Kamala Harris front and center today is not the same Kamala Harris we saw for the past 3 1/2 years, and I think ABC should have dug more into that.

What the American people wanted to know was, "What is that you want to say to the American people to separate yourself from...yourself, and the positions you held for so long, and what changed your mind? Are these a change of heart that you are truly committed to now, or did you simply change your positions for political reasons? If you felt, before the nomination, that your positions may be unpopular and perhaps make you unelectable considering how radical some of them were, how can we now be assured you don't still hold these positions personally while stating different positions publicly?"

On top of that, she kept saying, "We're going to do this," and "We're going to do that." But when did ABC challenge her on those statements and ask, "Where were you for the past 3 1/2 years when all of these problems you say are problems happened under your watch alongside Biden?"

Why did they not challenge her about lying to the American people about President Biden's health? Because isn't that an important thing to consider? If you are fit to be Commander in Chief, shouldn't you be able to recognize a grave threat that comes from within the White House itself that poses danger to American lives and the state of the country?

If you would hide that, what else might you hide?

ABC could have and should have challenged her on the "record." For example, they could have asked her about one of the key concerns on most American's minds. Inflation. They could have challenged her on her claims of price gouging which everyone knows was not the reason inflation happened. They could have asked her how she plans to tackle inflation differently than Biden has.

And why did ABC not put her to task more on the border? Another key issue of concern to voters across both aisles. Why did they not press her harder on the disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal which cost American lives and left billions of dollars worth of American military equipment on the ground and in the hands of the Taliban? Why not push her more on what happened and what her thoughts were on the breakdown of communication between her and Putin and Zelinsky that resulted in Putin invading Ukraine anyway?

They didn't ask her much about the economy. And when she made the claim several times that Trump's plans would cost American's $4,000 more a year to afford, why didn't they remind her of the additional $11,000 Americans must spend annually to pay for inflation, and what impact she feels that has had?

Needless to say, many opportunities were lost here. But on both sides. ABC missed the opportunity to give us a better picture of what can only be classified as, "The new and improved Kamala Harris." But Trump missed many opportunities as well to clearly state his differences and convey a stronger message to rebuke many of Harris' claims and position shifts.

Overall, neither candidate did well in my opinion. Still, I think Trump won it. But not on substance. He won it simply because there are fewer questions we need to have answered by Trump than need to be answered by Harris. Harris was the focus here. And we didn't really learn much about her at all. For that reason, I contend she lost, because the things the independents and undecideds wanted to know were simply all questions left unanswered.

She delivered talking points and campaign slogans rather than offer solutions or explanations of her sudden change in ideology on myriad issues.

Fox News has offered an invite for a second debate in October. I think both candidates need to agree to it, because I think both candidates did not accomplish their goal on this one.

Like what I write about or the way I write about it? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them.

© 2024 Jim Bauer

The End of the Harris Honeymoon and the Boost of the Kennedy Shift

Let's face it. Kamala Harris may be doing well in the polls against former president, Donald Trump. But are her chances of winning the presidency as good as the media would have us believe? I mean, take into account that she hasn't made any real appearances other than from scripted rallies she can read from a teleprompter at, and she hasn't had any interviews.

There is a good reason for that, and that's because the media is trying to separate Kamala Harris from Kamala Harris.

Wait. What? I know that sounds like a weird thing to say. But think about it. Here we have a vice president, who is now the Democrat nominee for president, who was perhaps the most disliked vice president in American history. How do you change that? 

You pretend like Kamala Harris is now something she wasn't before. You paint a new picture.

They are trying hard to separate her from her very far left liberal positions she held in the past. "That was then, this is now. This is a new and improved Kamala Harris, folks." Only, it's all smoke and mirrors. And if they can keep her on script and reading from a teleprompter, they can avoid the usual word salads she is well known for.

Folks, she hasn't forgotten the recipe for a blockbuster word salad. When someone else is writing the words for her, all she has to do is read them. But eventually she's going to be on her own. Off script with no teleprompter to guide her.

And it will all come back to us. Every muddled word that gets turned into nonsensical gibberish will make a remarkable comeback. It's impossible to avoid. And I think some of that will come back, front and center, on September 10th when the debate happens between her and Donald Trump.

I seriously doubt she will be able to get through that without at least some word salad and inappropriate placement of cackling. Besides, as I have said before, if the right questions are asked (and I have my doubts they will be), how is she going to explain inflation and the border? When she starts going on about price gouging, is anyone going to call her out on that and set the record straight? And if they do, will she be able to respond to it in a way that makes any sense?

I think what happens is that when the real Kamala Harris goes before the people and has to be herself, it's going to be her fall. Because that's a moment when the opportunity to pretend goes away. They can hide her from us (the media and the Democrat party), but she can't hide from herself.

Take into account another very interesting twist happening right now, and that's the possibility that Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. might drop out of the race and, get this, endorse Donald Trump.

That's a rather interesting development considering that RFKJr. staying in the race actually helps Harris' odds of winning. If he jumps out and goes to Trump's side, the tables turn according to recent polling and Trump wins without question. It effectively erases any lead Harris currently has.

If you trust the polls in any event. But that's for another day.

It is also something that makes some sense, if you think about it. I am not going to say that RFKJr.'s positions align with Trump. But there are some similarities. And Trump has even said he'd absolutely consider a cabinet position for RFKJr. if he should come to Trump's side.

The fact is, and RFKJr. knows this full well, that while he can make a case to get at least 5% of the vote, he will never be elected president. It is clear he has not supported what the Democrats are doing and has been a strong voice against the Biden administration, and I think is no fan of Kamala Harris.

His move to the other side would be a logical one, all things considered.

Granted, it doesn't mean all of Kennedy's supporters will rush to vote for Donald Trump. But his strongest supporters just might, and I would contend that pool of supporters is large enough to dramatically turn the tables.

At the end of the day, I think what hurts Kamala Harris' chances the most, really, are the issues. And she's simply not winning on those. Her short-term boost will have to eventually come up against the reality that when it comes to the issues of most concern to the American people, the administration she was part of simply did not deliver the goods. She supported, endorsed and praised the very policies that greatly failed the American people.

The bottom line is that this race is far from over, and while the media is painting the picture of fear and unrest in the Trump campaign, I think the reality is that Trump's only getting started, the American people will not be so easily duped by Harris' "new look," and regardless of what the polls have said to the contrary, Trump's real lead never wavered a bit when Harris stepped to the front.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them.

© 2024 Jim Bauer

Doesn't Nikki Haley Get It That It's Over?

The only thing keeping Nikki Haley in the GOP race to the nomination is the air that she breathes and a tenacious false hope that something, anything happens to suddenly thrust her into the lead. 

That's not going to happen, of course. We're just three days away from the South Carolina primary, the state where she once served as governor, and it's apparent and clear she will not win. She won't even come close.

Trump has a commanding 62% of support according to polls.

I give her credit for not backing down. That takes gumption. But I do wonder what her real motivation is. I mean, on the one hand you could say she truly believes she's the better choice for America on the Republican side than Trump. But if that were true, wouldn't the voters understand that? Wouldn't her campaign be successfully selling that?

When does she get the picture that the race has largely already been decided? And wouldn't it be better to just throw in the towel and offer her support to the presumptive winner? 

The key here, I think, is that when it comes to the Republican race as a whole, it's not about Trump. It's about Biden. We all know that is the guy who ultimately needs to be defeated at the end of the day. The country cannot survive another four years of Biden's disastrous policies, and we also can't survive the potential and real possibility that Kamala Harris becomes president.

Because we know full well, come death or the 25th amendment, that's coming. And while Biden is bad news, Kamala Harris is worse news. She's less fit to be president than Joe Biden is.

There are some suggesting that what Nikki Haley is doing is simply setting herself up for a strong run in 2028. And that may be her aim, here. At the same time, I don't think one does that by bashing Trump. If Trump wins in 2024, and I think he will, he could possibly gain even more support than he has now. Especially if his second term is successful. 

I believe it would be a highly successful presidency.

The candidate who stands the best chance of getting the nomination in 2028 is no doubt going to be a Trump candidate. While all of the former contenders in the early days of the race gave Trump a hard time, no one has been more critical of and harder on Trump than Nikki Haley.

And that will hurt her, I think.

Either way, she has already publicly announced that she expects to lose the South Carolina primary, but that she will not be dropping out, and believes she can still win the nomination. It's a bold prediction for her to assert considering she hasn't won anything at all yet. And it's highly likely she won't win a single primary.

The only way she gets the nomination is if it's given to her. And that's not happening either.

Like I said, I give her credit for her fortitude and ambition. But the race is over. It's been over. She's like the marathon runner still on the first block days after the second to last runner has already crossed the finish line. 

Even if she sticks it out to the end, the gain is for her own personal satisfaction, but serves no purpose for anyone else.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page. You can also follow me on X @jimbauer601.

More and More, the Reasons to Question 2020 Grows Stronger

"Jim, don't you ever worry about looking like a fool for believing that the 2020 election was stolen?"

No. I don't. The thing is, for anyone who has followed any of my commentary on the issue, I have never said I believe that the election was stolen. What I have said is that I strongly suspect that the election was stolen.

"Why can't you just accept your loss and move on?"

Believe me. I would like to. In past elections I have done just that. Moved on. What makes 2020 hard to move on from are the details. I am an analytical guy. Things, for me, have to add up. Things have to make sense.

It should matter to someone on the other side of the aisle when I say, "This is the only election I have ever questioned in my lifetime." I am not questioning the election because Trump lost. I am not questioning the election because Biden won. I am questioning the election because there are too many details that simply form the question in my mind that lead me to strongly suspect something may not have been right, here.

My statement that this is the only election I have ever questioned matters because, as I have also said many times in the past, I am an American first before all else. Sure, I may be considered to be a staunch conservative Republican. But that's not something that is going to make me turn my back on my country.

Our system of electing presidents, of electing anyone, is an important part of the foundation of who we are as a country. As a people.

It needs to work for the people.

I can look back at any of the earlier elections I have seen in my lifetime and understand the wins and losses and can find reasons why they were wins or losses, even if I desired a different result. Most recently, the two Obama wins were obvious to me why they happened.

John McCain and Mitt Romney were less than desirable candidates who had no appeal and ran horrible campaigns.

Even when it came to George H.W. Bush, it was clear why he wasn't given a second term. He was not Ronald Reagan, for one. And his presidency did not deliver the results. Bill Clinton was the better choice in the eyes of the American people and his win made sense.

Whether or not Bill Clinton was better in terms of his policies can be open for debate. At the same time, even I can admit that four more years of George H.W. Bush would have left us in a worse situation than what we were left with after two terms of Bill Clinton.

It's obvious.

Which brings me back around to 2020. Did I want Trump to win? Of course I did. But not because he was a Republican. Not because he was my guy. I wanted him to win because I genuinely believe he did the work of the American people and was able to achieve righting the slightly listing ship that Obama left us with.

Biden was not the better choice. We didn't need an alternative like we did when George H.W. Bush ran for reelection. Or even back when Jimmy Carter was president for that matter. When we look at the two terms each of Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and George W. Bush, it makes sense why they were all given two terms.

Trump should have been given two terms looking at his presidency—again, we didn't need an alternative.

I think in order to understand where the strong suspicion of a stolen election comes from, you have to start at the beginning. The idea of a stolen election, in other words, did not come from one day in November of 2020 and the result it presented.

It came from the four or five years leading up to the 2020 election and all of the things that happened during that time.

Trump talked a lot during his campaign in 2016 about the Deep State and about the Establishment. Things that, at another time, perhaps could have been overlooked as just fodder for powerful speeches. Only, you began to see it. Early on it wasn't as clear. But when the Republican party first considered denying Trump's nomination and looking for ways to deny it, it was the beginning of a head scratching moment.

Wait a minute. If the Republican voters decided Trump was their guy, WHY deny it? Why deny his nomination?

Ultimately, he was nominated, of course. But the question I think took its roots there. For anyone today who questions the election, that's where the question started to form. We may not have known it then. But we know it now.

Then there were the four years of accusations that the Russian's were colluded with. There was the denial by the Democrats of Trump's legitimacy as the President. There was the non-stop news cycle lambasting and ridiculing Trump at every turn. 

There were the impeachments.

All of these things were founding the question. They (the deep state and the establishment) wanted him out. And they were working very hard to find any way they could to do it.

And then the election happened, and Trump was out.

But, and this was a very big but here, how did it happen? When some people packed it in the night before as the results dragged on into the wee hours of the morning, Trump was winning. He almost had the election wrapped up. It was down to five states, and he was winning in all of them.

Until, that is, everyone woke up in the morning, and only after the mail-in ballots, a hot area of contention, were counted. Biden won. 

For many, without a doubt, it was of course a victory. But at the same time, and not only just on the Republican side, and not just with Trump supporters, it was a bit of a surprise. It was an absolute turnaround. 

When you looked at the results and saw that Donald Trump had gained voters—he received 11 million more votes in 2020 than in 2016—and Biden received the most votes ever in American history in an election, the growing question was getting some more juice.

Was Trump just that unpopular that he drove voters out to vote against him in record numbers? And there were the rallies to consider. While Trump was attracting throngs of people to them during his reelection campaign, Biden hardly campaigned at all.

There were the flags, and the hats, and the yard signs. 5 to 1 in support of Trump for President. You could see Trump supporters everywhere. You could hear them in breakrooms and in kitchens at gatherings across America. 

"I support Trump."

And yet, just like that, Biden claimed the victory. I think more people questioned what happened than the media would ever have us believe. But the results were in and that was that, and we were supposed to just lie down and accept it despite all of the questions. 

Questions, by the way that seemed only to deepen after the events that occurred on January 6th and the way it was portrayed, and the silencing of anyone who laid claim to the idea that something wasn't right. From shadow bans to outright bans on social media for even the suggestion that 2020 was stolen to the process beginning of also taking down anyone who made the claim. From investigations of wrongdoing to financially bankrupting anyone speaking out against 2020—the deep state and the establishment seemed hell bent on ending the question.

"Just accept the result," was the message being sent. "Or else."

You add in all of the events that have occurred against Trump up to now, and for a good many people it just adds fuel to the question, making it a much stronger one. Why are they trying so hard to get him out of the picture?

What does he know? What is his threat? And if he is to be believed by them to be as unpopular as "they" will have us believe they think he is, what do "they" have to worry about? If 81 million people said, "Biden's the guy and Trump is done," what's the threat? Why not just let him campaign and let the American people decide?

After all, he's unpopular, right? He lost, right? For good reason, right? People think he's dangerous, right? People even think he is ridiculous, as ridiculous as his claims of a stolen election, right?

Yet now he is winning. Much like he probably was in 2020. Much like I think many Americans were sure he'd get two terms.

Which brings us to all of the indictments and all of the other civil cases brought against him. The efforts to keep him off ballots. The unprecedented nature of all of these things, and it just begs the question harder. 

Did he actually lose the election?

Because if he did actually lose it, why are they trying so hard to drive that point home? Shouldn't it be obvious to the American people like it was obvious in every election before it? Why would it be necessary to try to send him to jail if the voice of the American people seems so clear in their minds? And how could it be that Trump is more popular than ever with such a strong chance of actually winning in 2024 if he was a liar who made such a horrendous false accusation back in 2020?

I think the answer is pretty clear. The infamous question of whether or not the election was stolen is a valid one to ask, and there is a strong indication that they, the deep state and the establishment, know there's a reason to ask it.

Like the way I write and the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook to keep up with all the latest writings wherever I may write them. Want to support The Springboard and enjoy a fantastic 4.35% interest rate on your savings? Check out Ally Bank to see how they can assist you in building wealth and getting more bang for your buck.

Trump's Support Only Grows Despite Denials

I am sometimes, or I should say often times, confused by how some people's minds work. And that's not meant to be an insult in any way. It is simply an observation that I think some people's minds simply aren't functioning properly.

Take this statement we hear all too often, "Trump is losing support."

Huh?

I mean, to believe that one would have to completely have their head buried literally in the sand. It is demonstrably untrue. I know many people want to believe it, of course. Facts are hard for some people to swallow and even harder for some people to accept.

Trump is GAINING support. And in droves.

Granted, you do have to take polls with a grain of salt most of the time. They just aren't necessarily reliable. At the same time, when they begin to show a pattern, you have to take them more seriously. At least on the surface.

Trump is winning.

What is more telling here is where the polls generally come from and the way most polls are weighted to favor Democrats. If these polls show Trump in the lead, it means more than when it showed Hillary Clinton was in the lead. 

BECAUSE the polls are weighted to favor Democrats.

And because the polls are weighted to favor Democrats, when X number of people say they are supporting Trump for president, it means that the number of people actually supporting Trump for president are much higher.

In other words, the polls may well be weighted to favor Democrats, but there comes a time when that extra weighting gets crushed by reality and the reality becomes more and more evident in the results.

President Biden's approval ratings across every single issue important to Americans are in the tank. Americans are not happy with what he's doing. It's clear as a bell. You can't hide it because the reality is just too strong right now.

You couple that with what the polls are showing regarding Trump winning in key swing states, that's telling. You match this information up with how strong his support among Republicans is, that's telling. You look at where Trump is fairing regarding his own approval on key issues, that's telling too.

Americans are overwhelmingly agreeing Trump is better equipped to deal with the economy. He is seen as the one who can fix the border crisis and deal with the crime issues. He is seen as the one who can better manage the current wars happening around the world.

Across the board, and among nearly every demographic, Trump is gaining support. He is also gaining the confidence of the American people.

Also telling is the growing, and I mean growing number of Americans who are now saying they believe something was not right about the 2020 election and are questioning what happened and who was really behind January 6th. There is also a growing number of Americans unhappy with the indictments and constant negative media reporting about Trump—they are rightly asking the question, how bad is this guy, really?

In other words, they are seeing through the smoke and mirrors and less than ever are buying into every story being told.

Still, some people refuse to believe it. They refuse to accept it. 

But Trump IS gaining support. Believe it or not. Accept it or not. The truth cannot be made into an untruth. 

In 2016 Trump got 63 million votes. In 2020 he got 74 million votes. That means 17.5% more people voted for him in 2020 than did in 2016. He gained support. He still lost, if we believe the results, but nonetheless, the argument could not be made that he lost support.

He had 8% of the black vote in 2016. He had 10% in 2020. It is estimated he has 11%-13% of it now. He gained black voters.

He is also polling well among women, college students and Hispanics. He is gaining support. 

This is not to say that his winning in the general come November is a shoo-in. I want to be very clear about that. And it is not to say we can necessarily trust the polls either. I am simply saying that Trump is stronger than ever and is just getting stronger, and no matter how many people want to deny it or not believe it, the reality is telling a much different story, and the polls can't bury the truth any more than the media is able to right now.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them.

Time To End the Circus on the Next Choice for Speaker

There are days when I swear, I am but a mere witness to a circus and that bothers me. Because right now a lot of the circus seems to be on my side of the political aisle. And I mean that with all sincerity. Hey look, I have said it many times before and I will say it again, just because I am a republican doesn't mean I am going to overlook reality like the other side does and dismiss what I can see with my own damn eyes!

I supported McCarthy for the speakership when the question came around last time and urged my fellow republicans to simply show strength and rally around the guy—even if they have some reservations. Which, to be fair, we're going to have with just about anyone. No one is a perfect candidate no matter what they are running for. 

The thing for me was about the optics of it all. Take optics for what they are, but the truth is that's exactly what the media wanted everyone to see. Instability, infighting, disarray, discombobulation and lack of direction.

And the months long McCarthy fight did more than provide for enough of that, and even with the now ousting of McCarthy we're still giving the media the same fodder for more bad optics.

Nonetheless, I can also understand some of the arguments in favor of McCarthy's losing the gavel. I'm an honest guy, like I keep saying. Was the decision a bit hasty in my opinion? Sure. Regardless of anyone's opinion overall the reality is that it just adds to the narrative that the republican party is disorganized and unfocused.

But that's for another day.

The two top contenders in the mix right now are Rep. John Scalise (R-LA) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), and so far, it appears Scalise may have slightly more support than Jordan does. Personally, I think Scalise may be the better choice right now, but honestly, I think either would make a good speaker. Jordan in the past, for example, has shown deep interest in getting to the bottom of a lot of important questions, and he's been a bull in Congress in my opinion.

At the same time, I also believe that Scalise has more admiration and respect from the other side and that makes him slightly more suited to the position. Because not only does he need to rally the caucus, he needs to be able to reach across the aisle and be able to bring sensible judgement and ideas to the table working with the president.

Granted, regardless of whatever respect he has from either side, getting the 218 votes he needs to become speaker is no easy task. Especially if the republicans can't make up their minds what they want or need to do. And right now, they are having a really tough time with that.

Throw into the mix the Trump card. It's not the first time his name has come up of course. It did as well when McCarthy was fighting for the spot. His name is in the mix yet again, with at least a couple members supporting the idea, and the infamous Marjorie Taylor Greene saying she won't support anyone other than Trump for speaker.

Trump even went on to post on social media a picture of him holding the speaker's gavel without any text to accompany it, and publicly stated when asked whether he'd consider the role if asked, "All I can say is we will do whatever is best for the country, republican party and the people."

By the way, Trump will never be speaker. At least not in my opinion. For one thing if the battle for Scalise and Jordan are a climb up a very steep mountain, the feat for Trump would be one of astronomical proportion the likes of which we have never seen or may never likely ever see again.

It is, by all measures, simply anecdotal. But again, it adds to the circus even though I might support Trump to land the role—although I am not sure I agree that it would be good for the country, the republican party or the people. And that's not me discounting Trump's leadership capabilities. It's just me being realistic.

And, at the same time, reaffirming my position that what we need right now in the role of speaker is someone who can be less divisive and rally the troops and be able to cross party lines. I think that person is Scalise. Jordan would have difficulty doing that in my opinion, and certainly Trump would not be able to do that.

In fact, going one step further, I think Trump in the role of speaker would also damage some of his chances in 2024 as well as distract him from his own campaign. As I have said many times, the focus needs to be on 2024 and on how we defeat President Biden. And that's as tough a road, despite that it shouldn't be, based on Biden's complete failure of a presidency, as Scalise's ascendency to the speakership. But we're in a very weird time right now and the media's not giving things to us straight and many Americans either don't care or are actually listening to what the media is telling them.

Either way, what I am hopeful for is that we can be swift in our election of a new speaker and keep the infighting to a bare minimum, showing strength and solidarity to the American people who very badly right now need to see a republican party better able to come together.

We need to end the circus. It's gone on long enough and it's gone beyond the clown show. We're in near ridiculous territory.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on YouTube or on my Facebook page to keep up with all the latest Springboard stuff from here, HubPages and other places where I ply my wares and share my thoughts.

Is America Slowly Becoming Lost?

It is unfortunate that it has to be said, but it just seems like our political environment right now is just in a shambles. And it's not just a left or right thing. It's the entire thing. From a completely dysfunctional administration in the Biden/Harris presidency, from democrats who deny all things real and a media that supports false narratives and fails to report the news accurately, or even with honesty or integrity.

From the upper leadership on the republican side such as Mitch McConnell having frozen in front of the camera several times, clearly too old to continue to serve the American people nor the party effectively, from guys like Fetterman wearing jump suits to work.

From a complete landscape of old and tired people like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi not offering anything new to the American public, simply vying for power and support from within, to an entire landscape of political rivalry unlike anything we have seen before.

Even when it comes to voters, is anyone being honest anymore? Does anyone really care about the health of the nation and the direction we go? Is our vote about doing what's right or simply winning? And how much is anyone really paying attention to what's really going on? How many of us really care? 

And now, of course, we have the ouster of Speaker McCarthy further exacerbating at least the appearance of dysfunction.

Look, at the end of the day we have to get back to the old understanding that there has to be compromise. That we all can't have things completely our way and that for the common good we have to be able to at least find common ground and have the ability to accept that we can only ultimately meet somewhere in the middle.

Even looking back at Biden's first day in office, why could he not have taken some time to carefully examine what went right about Trump's policies and keep the ones that worked in effect? For the good of the people? Instead, he simply dismissed everything, wiped the slate clean and here we are now feeling the awful pains of that terrible decision.

Trump actually did examine some of Obama's policies, and he kept many of them in place while rearranging or only slightly altering others—but of course he removed things that clearly were not working.

Many presidents in the past have done it this way as well, including Obama.

Beyond all of this there's just no accountability. There are no checks and balances. We have a media absent from letting us know what's really going on and truly wanting to dig deep into the issues we all face.

The media is doing nothing to advance the peace or prosperity of the people of the country. Or to advance anyone's understanding of what's right or wrong or why. It's not giving anyone the ability to think outside of their own biases and actually formulate working, sensible opinions on where we are and where we need to go, and who is responsible for advancing our cause or setting it back.

In an odd way it may be part of where Trump's appeal stems from—from all sides by the way—despite outward appearances we are led to believe. And that's that while all of the establishment is fighting a miserable battle, trying to win that thing, this thing, or the other thing, he's simply reaching out to the American people from the outside looking in and letting us know it's a disaster and telling us why.

We need change. And we need it badly. Not only from our elected officials, but from the American people as well. And from the media. We need to get back to that United We Stand, Divided We Fall culture that once permeated the collective American psyche.

We need to be able to recognize the pitfalls of all of this dysfunction and honestly call it out for what it is, rather than simply take political sides through all of it just because. 

How many times have we heard so many people complain, "The two-party system is broken," only to fall heavily to one side or the other, and then defend their side even when they are clearly wrong? Sure, I am a conservative republican. But not to sound like a broken record, I am an American first and foremost above all other things.

Do I side with my side more often than the other side? Yes. Is it because of bias? I'd like to believe it is not. I'd like to believe that I simply have the ability to be honest about what either side is doing and make a judgement based on how I feel about it rather than how I think I should feel about it.

The problem we face, and I have repeated this several times, is that unless we recognize the dysfunction and begin the process of weeding out our bad apples, from both sides, we may not ever be able to get back to any sense of normal. We may not be able to save ourselves from the disaster we are ultimately creating, fostering, or allowing to continue.

Was ousting McCarthy the right decision? Maybe. Maybe not. Should Pelosi have faced stark criticism and disdain from her own party all the while she was Speaker and mucking up the place? Maybe. Should older elected officials like Feinstein (before she passed away) or Mitch McConnell pass their batons on let fresh voices in? Probably.

Should the American people demand it? 

The question really becomes, "Who is now in Congress that actually belongs there? Who is now in Congress who is actually doing the work of the People?"

It would be an extremely short list on both sides. And if the American people were paying attention, and perhaps even if the media were doing their jobs, we'd have already cleaned house. It goes back to what I said earlier about the complaint of the two-party system. That we allow the two-party system to decide for us who to vote for instead of making those decisions on our own, based on our own personal analysis of who's running on whatever side.

It's the argument that we need term limits.

Something I tend to agree with now. But what have I have always said is that no one remains in office who is not elected by the people to remain in office. So, we can argue all day long that too many people stay too long, but at the same time we the people continue to return them to their offices election after election after election.

We're in a shambles because few people care and the people "in charge" know it. We're in a shambles because no one who holds any office right now feels any threat that they may not be able to return if they get things wrong. We're in a shambles because almost everyone in Congress is out of touch with the needs of the American people. We're in a shambles because not a single elected official understands how their policies actually affect the average citizen. And because not a single policy affects them. We're in a shambles because like most Americans, the media has picked a side. We're in a shambles because no one bothers to listen anymore, or to deeply think about all of the unintended consequences of what is essentially a feel-good idea that looks good on paper, or is comforting to certain, select ears.

That being said, in all honesty, does that leave us much hope for 2024? I am not sure. Sure, I side with Trump. But even in that camp would I prefer a better alternative? Absolutely. And not for the reasons you may think.

It's the distraction that is the problem. And regardless of whether Biden is reelected or Trump returns to the White House, I think that distraction remains.

But beyond that, there is no real alternative on either side either. Right now we are literally caught between a rock and a hard place. Our only hope is that we are getting to a point where people begin to realize the dire state that we are in and begin to operate in a way that allows us to turn it around.

But again, I also think there comes a critical point at which we will no longer have the ability to do it.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on YouTube or on my Facebook page.

One of the REAL Reason Trump's Skipping the Debates

Normally, and under normal circumstances, I'd lambaste someone for not attending any presidential debate, regardless of the side. While I don't think debates are the end all to be all, I do think that they are important to better understand our candidates and what they are running for or on.

Hell, I watch democrat debates all the time simply because I have always felt that in order to disagree with a democrat candidate, I need to know exactly what it is I disagree with. I don't have that answer if I choose not to tune in simply because I assume I will disagree with everything they have to say.

But I side with Trump on his decision not to participate, and it is not because I also happen to be a Trump supporter.

The question is, what substance would we expect to get out of Trump's participation? What could we learn about his plan for America? What could we learn about his thoughts on Ukraine and issues facing us regarding the border? About taxes. About the economy? About inflation?

The simple answer is, we'd learn nothing at all. Because those questions would not be the types of questions anyone would be interested in asking him. It would all be about the false indictments and bogus impeachments and the make-believe January 6th insurrection.

Not a single question he'd be asked would advance his campaign or offer us a better consideration of what he wants to do or will do if he were to be reelected.

Even when it comes to Fox News debates, no one ever bothers to put a real conservative on the panel. They always opt for the lefter leaning hosts. Chris Wallace in one of the 2020 debates all but tried to throw Trump under the bus and frankly trampled all over him disgustingly.

And that's me saying that despite my very real take-away from those 2020 debates that Trump did an extremely poor job at them. But I have been critical of Trump many times in the past for various antics. But it never wavered my thoughts about his presidency, which I think is important.

I continue to be displeased with some of his antics as I think it detracts from the real issues we face and his real answers as to how we solve them, and as I have said time and time again, sometimes his own antics leave him in a spot to make those antics the focus rather than the substance of his message.

People need to hear his message.

But that goes right back to why he's dismissed himself from the debate stage. Even if he does attend the debates, his message will be moot. Because again, no one will ask him about the message. What Trump would essentially be agreeing to by attending the debates would be to accepting an invitation to a literal non-comedic roasting which would focus entirely on things that matter very little to the American people.

In an odd way you could make a comparison here to a jury trial and the right decision many lawyers often make not to put the accused on the stand. Optics. Or the possibility of bad optics which would do more harm than good in defending their case.

In other words, while the optics of Trump's not attending the debates, in the eyes of some, is bad optics in and of itself, the fact is that if he were to attend, the optics may well likely be much worse.

Part of the problem is what debates have really become. Hosts are chosen essentially by what side the particular media outlet has decided they want to support and advance. And so, the questions themselves are often geared toward driving a particular narrative rather than getting to the heart of the important questions.

Trump has also realized this from the 2020 debates specifically. Even if his performance, by my measure, was horrible, I also had to honestly step away and ask myself, was his performance driven by just Trump being Trump, or was it driven by the manner and types of questions he was being asked?

The media has been rife with so much bias anymore that one might even rightly question whether or not debates are even an important part of the question of who is best to lead. As I said before, I have found them to be helpful in order to better understand where candidates are coming from. But is that really true anymore?

The real question is, does it hurt him? I don't know the answer to that. I will say that so far it doesn't seem to have done any damage at all, and in fact, may even be helping him tremendously. The closest second in the race is Ron DeSantis and by every measure he's so far behind Trump right now that in most cases we'd have already decided he stands no chance.

So, the likelihood that Trump will indeed be the GOP nominee appears to be almost imminent. Which is perhaps another reason Trump has decided to bow out of the debates. It's already been decided and so why bother with the debates at all? Just focus on the campaign and reaching out directly to the people who are interested in his message and be able to freely offer the message he wants to deliver instead of the message the media would rather be heard.

Did you know that The Springboard has a YouTube channel? Check it out for discussions of money, investing, business and other related things. You can also follow The Springboard on his Facebook page.

Evaluating Politics Has to be On the Basis of Honesty and Openness, Not Party Divisions

Let's face it, political discussions are hard. What gets in the way is either denial, defiance, or outright bias. Often times, there's just no winning—but having an open and honest political dialogue is important because so much of what happens in politics has a direct impact on our lives and even our livelihoods. 

What gets in the way as well is often not a matter of reality, but rather personal perspectives. For example, if you have someone who has always earned low wages in a fast-food restaurant or retail store, they are going to tend to view the world in a very different way than someone who is a middle-class earner. 

On top of that, in order for someone to truly evaluate what is happening politically, one has to be able to be honest with themselves, honest about the assessment, and able to step away from one side or the other and do our own homework. Because we also have to know that the media is not going to always tell us the truth any more than our politicians themselves are going to do it.

In other words, we can't even take our guy's word for it. We have to decide for ourselves what is working and what is not, and not separate ideas by political party, but acknowledge ideas by how successful they are or aren't.

I bring this up because of discussions we have about former president Trump and current president Biden and my personal observation that I just don't think anyone is being honest with ourselves about the facts. Granted, I come at this with a little bit of obvious bias. I supported Trump and I dislike Biden, and I am also a conservative republican.

But let that not sway you from my general point here.

The thing is, sometimes there are things that are simply undeniable on an intellectual, informed level. When it comes to Trump, many of us can agree there were things he got right and there were things he got wrong. Same thing with Obama to be fair. The same goes for any president or politician we have ever known. 

Let's take gas prices. We cannot deny that gas prices were cheaper when Trump was in office and is more expensive today under Biden. I think, if we are being honest, that there are also key things that one can point to that Obama did regarding policy, things that Trump did regarding policy, and things that Biden did regarding policy that had a very visible impact on what gas prices were in all three administrations and why.

In other words, we normally hold the thought—and fairly accurately—that presidents do not control gas prices. But there are policy decisions presidents can make that do impact prices at the pump to an extent. If gas prices were to have been lower under Trump and then remained lower under Biden after reversing Trump's energy policies on day one of his presidency, then we could safely assume that something other than Trump's policies drove down the price of gas.

Regardless of what side of the aisle one resides on, it should be clear that energy policy had a notable effect on what we pay for gas. Yet on the other side, there are deniers. Their argument is simply that Obama's policies finally kicked in and by the time Trump was out of office, his policies reversed Obama's course.

It's just not the case.

The stock market is another glaring example of one's economic situation over another. And again, just like with gas prices, presidents do not control the stock market. But they can have certain economic policy that either fosters a strong business climate or hinders it. 

Granted, under Obama, the stock market did not do badly. In fact it did rather well. But it really did so, mainly, due to quantitative easing which flooded the economy with money to bolster it because the real underlying economy was faltering. It ended essentially in 2014 although a 4th round came after the Covid thing happened. 

There was no QE, essentially, during Trump's term and there were clear things he did regarding policy that helped to free up business to operate and grow. It bolstered the economy and created spending activity which also, of course, fueled market returns.

Biden's economic policy has not had the same result. Inflation aside, which cannot be entirely blamed on Biden, but certainly the trillions of dollars added to the deficit under two bills and Biden's energy policy contributed greatly to it.

There are simply things you can point to that determine why something happened. And again, we have to be honest about all of that if we want to make informed decisions the next time we have to decide who is right or wrong to get us headed in the right direction. Or to decide whether or not maybe we made a mistake. Or that we missed an important detail in our evaluation.

We cannot deny failure just because it is our side failing any more than we can deny success because it is not our side succeeding. 

When Trump was president, GDP rose. That's a fact. Even after Obama told us 2.5% was the "new normal and we would just have to get used to it." Poverty rates declined under Trump. It's statistically true. Black, Hispanic and women unemployment rates dropped to historical lows under Trump. We can't say that didn't happen. Wages rose considerably under Trump, and we cannot deny that either.

It is not to say Trump was perfect. By no means. But in order to fairly assess his presidency overall, we have to at least acknowledge what he did that worked, and if not entirely give credit to Trump for having done it, but ask ourselves why we are not holding Biden to account for the things he did differently that are not working in the way they did under Trump?

Why would we not say, "Hey, Mr. Biden, what he did in this area worked. Why not keep doing that and instead of focusing on denying what worked and changing course, instead find the things that really didn't work and work on those things?"

Trump's immigration policy worked. In fact, to some extent, Obama's immigration policy was more effective than Biden's as well. Why not keep it? Trump's economic policies mostly worked. Why not keep going with that? Say what you want about Trump's tax cut, his cuts worked much like cuts JFK made and Reagan as well made. Trump's energy policy worked. Why not keep that going as well?

The bottom line is that knowing what's happening and being honest about it serves everyone in pursuing what's best for the country at large. If we can do that, all sides win, and heck, all sides can claim the victory as well.

Both sides have good ideas and bad ideas, and we as the American people are in charge of deciding which ones are good and which ones are bad, and electing people who will do the things that work as opposed to denying them and changing course, which accomplishes nothing.

Is this a call to bring Trump back in 2024? No. Not hardly. It is simply a call to open our eyes, be honest, and listen to both sides, honestly evaluate the results, and elect the next guy to lead us based on the merit of what he offers and on the basis of what the last guy didn't deliver.

If we are able to be honest. America only succeeds if we can honestly evaluate policies that work over which party made the policy, or which side we wish had.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on Twitter at @jimbauer601.

Right or Left, We Have to be Fair in our Analysis

Sometimes when we get deep into our politics, we tend to forget things. Or maybe we just set things aside depending on who is doing the talking—or of course, depending on who is in charge. Both sides are guilty of this, although it happens more on the left.

But the right is not without its faults, and to not call them out from time to time would show a considerable amount of personal bias which I try as much as possible to avoid. Perhaps there is some sense that I have that if I set aside biases when I write my commentary, it adds credibility to some of my points.

I am probably kidding myself, but no matter.

Take two situations we are currently talking about on the right which I think are a bit contradictory to where we might normally stand if it were our side making the decisions. The Ukraine war and the recent trip by Blinken to China.

I must stress I don't like Biden, and I don't like Blinken. I disagree with almost everything that the Biden administration is doing, wants to do, or has already done. But being a person who tries to set aside bias, I have to also make sure to evaluate each opinion I have based on some sort of reference.

What would the republican party have done when Russia invaded Ukraine? Considering our position with Ukraine at the time and our stance that Ukraine should at least be considered for entry into NATO—although not without strong provisions, a position Biden also holds—I think we would have responded in similar fashion.

We would have assisted Ukraine.

Granted, I do hold the belief that had Trump still been the president at the time, Russia would not have invaded in the first place. But that's a what-if scenario. We don't know if that would have absolutely made a difference or not.

Whether or not we, as a party, are fully committed to the idea of policing other nations, we have often acted in a way that polices nations and helps out smaller guys under attack. If Trump had made similar decisions to provide support to Ukraine, I think we, the republicans, would have supported that.

Conversely, it is fair to point out that democrats would have opposed what they now currently support regarding Ukraine.

Biases get in the way of certain judgements sometimes, as I said, on both sides.

My position is clear. I believe Putin is a madman, and I believe Ukraine should not have been invaded, deserve their independence, and also deserve our help. That's despite my overall opinion on Ukraine, which would digress from the aim of this post. It is also despite my opinion that I am not sure Ukraine should be allowed to join NATO at this time.

Enter the visit by Blinken to China to meet with Xi Xing Ping. One issue that came up was whether or not the United States supported an independent Taiwan. Republicans have railed against Biden and Blinken, essentially having said, "The U.S. wants to be abandon the people of Taiwan."

This patently untrue and an unfair accusation by republicans.

Because the United States has had a One China policy for decades. In fact, we have held this position since 1972. Even a year or so ago Biden slipped and almost indicated that our One China policy had changed, which his staffers had to then backtrack and remind the American people that our China policy had not, in fact, changed. We still are for a One China policy.

The decision by Biden and Blinken to maintain that Taiwan not be independent of China is directly in line with the One China policy we have held since 1972. Our position did not change, and Biden is not abandoning a people.

Granted, what we would actually do if China invaded Taiwan, is another question. It is a question even Trump has refused to answer, asserting that making public his position would compromise his negotiating ability with Xi Xing Ping. And that's a sensible answer.

I point these things out because I prefer to operate in a political environment of fairness and real-based analysis of positions and circumstances. I can't blame democrats for getting it wrong if I don't also criticize republicans when they do.

I can have an opinion on One China, for example. But I can't simply change the facts around it because I happen to disagree politically with the other party and the current administration. I also can't, in good faith, change my fundamental position just because the leadership has changed. And I don't also want to engage in blanket disagreement simply because the one at the helm is someone other than I would prefer to be there.

Politics, above all else, should place heavy weight on truth, and we should maintain a level of common sense and common ground. I think it helps to advance discussions and discourse, and I think it provides a level of balance to what gets decided and how we deal with it that is badly needed in this country.

To do anything else is to simply run in place, and in doing that, we get nowhere.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on Twitter @jimbauer601 or on my Facebook page.

A Reconsideration of a Biden Impeachment

There have been several times, throughout Biden's presidency, when calls for impeachment have been made where I have said, impeachment proceedings should be reserved for real and undeniable high crimes and misdemeanors.

In other words, it should not be molested. It should be an important and very serious part of our system of government, and people should trust that when the word "impeachment" is uttered, it actually means something, and all eyes, ears, and attention should be on the seriousness of the charge that brought it about.

The impeachment process, even as far back as Bill Clinton, I think, have been used more as a political weapon than anything else. Although, even though I think the impeachment of Bill Clinton was a huge stretch, it still had more merit than any of the impeachments posed against former president Trump.

They were simply a result of a party desperate to remove a president they did not like. It's not any more complicated than that.

It molested the process and instead of Americans being concerned about real crimes and misdemeanors, it was more of an in your face "hah-hah" moment and "this is what you get" scenario. Far from what the intentions ever were for such a process.

No one was interested in the truth, of course. They just wanted to see Trump gone. They wanted to see his legacy tarnished. They wanted something for the history books. It did not matter that the facts weren't there or that the claims were entirely outside of the realm of what any real impeachment should look like. 

Just for the history books, all that mattered is that it would claim the history that Trump was the first president to be impeached twice during his presidency.

The bottom line here, for me, is that while Biden's presidency has been nothing short of a complete and utter disaster, regardless of whether or not I believe he actually won the election in 2020, there has been nothing I have seen that I would envision would be in the realm of intent of the process to be impeachable.

That is, until now.

It is clear to me that this latest indictment of Trump has nothing to do with criminal activity and everything to do with politics. It has everything to do with an upcoming election, serious questions about Biden's own potential criminal activity being alleged and ultimately distracted from. Moreover, it is an abuse of power and an evil witch hunt to attempt to potentially remove a front-running presidential candidate from the opposing party from being able to run.

What is also worth considering, although I will admit it is a bit of a departure from the crux of this post's main point, is what really happened in November 2019? Does Trump know something? Is it possible he could have the power to find out? Was J6 actually, as many suspect, a staged event coordinated and funded by Soros, Antifa and the democrat party itself as a means to distract from any further questioning that there may have been a stolen election?

Is the indictment of Trump just another means to steal another election yet again?

I think there are serious things happening right now with Joe Biden, or at least his administration (or whoever is actually running the show) at the helm of it. Something like this really does warrant itself as high crimes and misdemeanors if ever there were any to exist. 

It would even make Nixon's pending impeachment, had he not resigned before it actually happened, look like child's play compared. In the case of Nixon, he'd have not only been impeached, he'd have been convicted.

Granted, it is easy to understand that during that time we also had a more united country. Politics was still a deeply entrenched thing, but there was a higher level of respect for the White House as well. The only reason Nixon resigned was because both sides of the aisle would fully participate in the country's best interests and convict him.

His own party could not dismiss what he did and not vote to convict.

It is very difficult for me to imagine, in this highly charged and divided political climate we are living in today, that the democrats would take seriously any impeachment charge or proceeding, regardless of evidence, let alone convict. I believe even the media would be quick to assert that any accusations or case brought against Biden would simply be retaliation by the GOP for the Trump indictment.

As well, can we trust that the American people would stand ready to maintain the integrity of the White House and rally behind an impeachment and conviction and take seriously any charge?

Nonetheless, I do feel that if there ever was a time when serious impeachment considerations should be made, it is now. If we don't go that far, we should at least give very serious consideration to having an honest, open, and thorough investigation.

After all, the highest office in the land does not belong to a political party. It does not belong to one man or woman. It belongs to all of us. The American people. And preserving its integrity and being able to have faith in our government is a higher consideration than any other. 

I think every American should be very concerned about what is happening in our government right now, especially in terms of our elections, how they are handled, how they are determined, and who gets to run, and more importantly whether we want the government deciding for us who can't run.

If the election was indeed stolen in 2020 and now the government is working to omit a potential winning candidate from the opposition party, this is how dictatorships start. 

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on Facebook to keep up with the latest postings wherever I write or follow me on my Twitter page @jimbauer601.

Too Old to Serve? Election 2024

Age is certainly a factor in the next election for president in 2024. Beyond all of the flubs from the Biden administration, which is a complete disaster, and all of the chaos and infighting among republicans right now on the GOP side, the one thing that should be abundantly clear is this.

Joe Biden has not earned reelection and is too old to serve, and likely won't make it through another four year term. Kamala Harris is not fit to be president. And even though I think Trump not only deserved another four years in 2020, even he may be too old to serve.

It's a bit of a slippery slope because what it leaves us with is a "big picture" decision at the polls. Who exactly are we ultimately having to choose to vote for? The person running for president? Or the running mate? And while we have had times in the past when a vice president did become the president for various reasons, it has not always been the best course for America.

Trump seems vibrant and full of life, but that doesn't guarantee nothing will happen.

I do think that Trump still offers the best opportunity to get America back on track. He's become a politician, for sure. But he's still an outsider. He's got bite. He doesn't play like other politicians do. He fights back, gets contentious and pulls no punches. 

I like that.

DeSantis, so far, seems like a strong and clear alternative choice. But I also think that what DeSantis brings to the table is more of the same old politician stuff. He's an establishment guy even if he says he isn't.

He is also much younger which presents an interesting alternative as well. And regardless of what my opinion overall may be about DeSantis vs. Trump, the one thing I do know is that he would still present the better choice over Biden in 2024.

I do wonder, if Trump were to become the nominee, if there could ever be a Trump/DeSantis ticket that could potentially pave the way for a determinable victory for DeSantis in 2028 and beyond, and a victory for the republican party to boot.

The thing is, we're going to also be in this boat again in 2028 necessarily since Trump can't run for a third term no matter what. So, with that in mind, we also have to make sure that in 2024, at least on the GOP side, we have to get this right.

If the next four years with Trump, for example, is like the first four years with Trump, and I am not referring to what he did, because I think Trump's presidency was a stellar success, with the media and the democrats out to take him out at every turn, that will only present more of an uphill battle for DeSantis, if he were to be vice president, because he'd be running directly as a Trump candidate.

It's a lot to consider. There are so many moving parts here. We only know we can't afford another four years of Biden and we certainly won't survive a Harris administration. So, it's a big task ahead. I think what we need to do, not just as a party, but as Americans who want to see the country headed back in the right direction, is to really think long and hard about what the best course for America is.

In the end, nothing else matters more.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page or follow me on Twitter at @jimbauer601.

Stop Calling Trump's Claims Lies When We Haven't Investigated the Truth

In reading some of the reporting about Donald Trump's recent CNN Town Hall meeting, which ran 70 minutes long on May 10th, I tend to have trouble with the constant assertion that, when Trump speaks about election fraud or stolen elections, that he is lying.

Maybe he is. Maybe the whole stolen election thing is a complete and utter falsehood. But at the same time, I have long said that there are many questions which have been asked, and you'd think that it would be at least a rather big concern for anyone who has an ounce of patriotism in their blood.

Why haven't we ACTUALLY looked into it?

Instead, all we have done, really, is to turn a blind eye, claim it as fact that it never happened, and leave it at that. Well, that and point fingers at so-called whacky mindless MAGA nuts. Okay, and silence anyone asking the question or suggesting it could have happened.

If there is nothing to hide, and the left wants to assert without question it is in fact a lie, why not use it as an opportunity to have an open and honest investigation to find out if it did in fact happen? Why would it not be paramount to at least try and set the record straight once and for all rather than simply wave a hand and deny it ever happened?

And maybe, just maybe, that's why Trump is still such a threat to the left and continues to be made into a target. Maybe that's why they continually want to shut him down and silence him, and maybe even get an indictment good and solid enough to bar him from being able to run for president ever again.

Because maybe he knows something, and maybe if he once-more has control of the Justice Department, he may have the means to actually prove that the election was indeed stolen.

Why else would they be going after Trump so hard? They (the left) supposedly won the hearts and minds of the American people. They got their way. Trump's out and they're in. So why so much effort and focus on the former president?

I mean, I will grant you, it's more conspiracy theory stuff. But I think it is still something to consider. The effort on the part of the left is just too heavy to deny there might be at least some reason behind it. If Trump posed no threat, they'd just leave him alone to enjoy a happy retirement in Mar-A-Lago and be done with him.

And about that lying thing, something Trump was accused of all throughout his presidency and continues to be accused of now. 

How many times have Trump's words turned out to actually be right?

Too many times to count. Yes. Trump embellishes. He always has. But are those really lies? Maybe we could call them simple tall tales. Okay, fine. He's guilty. But speaking of lies, how many times has Biden been caught in outright, verifiable lies? 

Again, too many times to count.

Why hold a "liar" to account who happens to actually be telling the truth a lot of the time and turn a blind eye to an actual, verifiable and certifiable liar?

The bottom line is that I am simply frustrated sometimes by the manner in which "news" is reported and with the assignment of certain words to suggest a true statement when in fact the statement is actually an opinion. "Trump is lying about election fraud and stolen elections" is not a fact. It is an opinion because there has never been an actual investigation to prove that an election was not stolen. 

So, we can sit here and argue all day about whether or not someone is lying. But until there is verifiable and incontrovertible proof one way or the other, all of it is conjecture. It's conjecture that it was stolen and conjecture that it wasn't.

The word "lie" does not apply here and nor should it.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/jimbauerwrites to find all the things I write about and places I write.

Trump Is NOT An Idiot!

IN NO WAY IS MY INTENT TO BE COMBATIVE HERE, FOLKS. But as I troll around the Internet in the usual places like Twitter and Facebook, there is just the annoying assertion by a good number of people, and on both sides of the aisle (with the bulk of it of course pouring in mostly from the left and the lamestream media) that somehow President Donald J. Trump is an idiot.

This, folks, cannot be farther from the truth.

Look, I have said multiple times that I do wish our president would tone down his Twitter antics a bit. But I have also said that the person Donald Trump is today is the same Donald Trump he was before he became President of the United States.

The thing here that needs to be pointed out, that gets sorely missed by many making this assertion, are the multitude of accomplishments this president has achieved and to point out that what he has done in his first year in office is actually rather historical. If you think it's just the economy he has done well with, you're just not paying close enough attention to what's actually happening in our government, and with this current administration.

He's an idiot? He's not a leader? Really? What planet are you living on?

Now, don't get mad at me for being so blunt here. Just read on and hear me out. Because I think it is important for you to be more than aware of why I think that President Trump is not only not an idiot, but is also a strong leader. Because the truth is that there is more than enough that is positive that's happening in the White House, and unless you are tuned into Fox News, you aren't going to hear the half of it.

• Border crossings are down 70% since Donald Trump took office.
  
• MS-13 gangs are under heavy fire from the Justice Department.
• Deportations of illegal aliens is on the rice, and law enforcement officials in ICE and Border Patrol have been strengthened.

Even if we don't have good immigration reform right now, the fact is that more is being done than has been done in many, many years and across many past administrations to simply enforce existing laws on the books. This should make throngs of American citizens, including legal immigrants, very happy. This means less crime, less drugs entering the country, less burden on the American taxpayer for welfare and other benefits some illegals receive, and more jobs available for legal citizens across the country.

• ISIS has been seriously depleted in their numbers.
• Citizens of Iran are making an uprising in their country with the full support of the administration, and sanctions are WORKING.
• North Korea is quieting down at least a LITTLE BIT, and have even reached out to South Korea in a way they have not before. I think Kim Jong Un is getting the message it might be better not to mess with the U.S. Something they would not have considered in the past administration.

The truth is we have actually seen some stability forming in the Middle East. When you reduce the power of ISIS and build coalitions with other Middle Eastern countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and Israel, it puts more pressure on the bad actors in that region to reconsider what they are doing, and it also empowers the people to push back harder against bad regimes and terrorist groups who make want only to maintain unrest and make the average citizen's lives miserable.

I am not going to say that North Korea having a small part in the Olympics is any sign that Rocket Man still does not have a strong desire to lob missiles and strut his "might" wherever he can. But it is a start. It is also something I am not certain we would have seen had Hillary Clinton won the election.

Now you might have noticed I have said nothing at all so far about the economy. Why? Because it is the obvious accomplishment—even if even that is seriously under reported by the lamestream media. But clearly you have historic lows in both Hispanic and black unemployment, more and more jobs being created, repatriation of overseas money, bonuses and wage increases, and of course an exploding stock market.

And everything I have mentioned herein is just a small slice of what he's accomplished. The bottom line is that if you think that Trump is an idiot or not a leader, you may want to consider your own intelligence and perhaps schedule a psychiatric exam rather quickly. Your mental health may be in jeopardy.