I did have a chance to watch the whole video now.

Well, certainly he has never been the most verbally articulate of presidents...

But he responded to questions appropriately..the only real gaffe was saying 1960 instead of 1860 in reference to the Civil War.

And he successfully organized a coalition to stop Russia in Ukraine and the economy is looking solid: got out of the inflation spiral without going into a recession, unemployment is still low, growth forecast is looking up.

We're not going to give him any credit for that?

To me, he's done a good job, whether it's through his own qualities or picking good people (likely a combination of both--I certainly believe he has made unique contributions in foreign policy and getting major legislation passed). And I'll have to see clear mental decline before I make a risky bet on someone else. Especially in the Trump era...

Well I hope there is not a Democratic debate.

bbauska wrote:Well I hope there is not a Democratic debate.

Would it be more painful or less painful to watch than the Republican debates?

Considering that the debates are not much on either side... I think they would both be about the same.

A debate is to show the merits of a position and contrast your position over your opponents.

Debates in today's political world are not that however. It is a weak stance meant to not polarize and segment the least amount of support. That is exactly why I want a politician to voice and stand for their beliefs, letting the chips fall where they may.

Anything less is cowardice. You might as well just hide in the basement. (Intentional jab at the POTUS)

"Debates in today's political world are not that however. It is a weak stance meant to not polarize and segment the least amount of support. That is exactly why I want a politician to voice and stand for their beliefs, letting the chips fall where they may.

Anything less is cowardice. You might as well just hide in the basement. (Intentional jab at the POTUS)."

It's a nice thought but that kind of of lack of forthrightness is essential to being a politician. I wouldn't want to be a politician and have to be evasive/ambiguous so they don't lose voters by having a concrete position that will drive away single-issue (or at least a high degree of importance for that voter) voters on that issue from voting for them, but if you're going to be a pol you have to play that game. Otherwise you lose; it's as simple as that.

Wow! More agreement between Freeman and I.

If only Hamas and the Israelis get along so well.