I’ve been getting grief from several directions — accusing comments that I’ve been (a) soft on Trump, (b) in the bag for Trump, (c) too hard on Trump, and (d) changed my tune on Trump. Each claim is a mystery to me. My practice is rarely to comment directly on day-to-day or week-to-week political issues (here are my nine Trump-related posts in the last five years), and then only when there’s a principled point to make.
My 2016 assessment of then-candidate Trump is still operative, though I’d now tweak the policy numbers a little with 20-20 hindsight:
Just from your 2016 numbers on Trump, I say you were hard on him lol. I didn’t notice him much then and didn’t care for him. Still don’t now.
I find the table a bit weird, but it’s yours. However I question your judgement based on the latest cell “views on diplomacy, war and peace”. He didn’t start new wars, he get two peace treaties that were considered difficult to get. He decreased the American military presence around the world. You give him a 1 for that? Sorry but something doesn’t add up here. Please clarify.
The table is from 2016.
Wonder if you have checked the talk and actions coming out of DC, and it is only the first half day in office for Biden?
They claim to be making lists of people they deem dangerous that should be punished. Billboards up in several states asking people to call FBI if they can identify people who went to Jan 6th rally in DC. FBI claims to have rec’d 150,000 calls. Libertarians are to be targeted?
This video clip is only 1:26 in length. Obama CIA director Brennen today ….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnA-ghhW_WI&feature=emb_logo