GaryPinC

No I did not need the media to tell me that the Biden decline was showing signs even when he took office. All you needed to see was how limited his availability was, how structured and limited the questioning was, how quickly the rope could be pulled, and with all that there was still the gaffes and drifting issues, though those became more obvious later in the administration. I still feel Dem leadership set him up for that Trump debate as a sink or swim moment. All the conditions (no notes, "helpers", etc.) were totally counter to how he was handled up to that point and allowed them the excuse to pull the plug on him. And let's be clear. Biden is not a "vegetable". It's not an all or none event, it comes on slowly. Just like is happening with Trump now. There are certain periods where it will accelerate, then slow while continually progressing. As far as the media "lying", I'd rather see his wife, administration, doctors and others held accountable before the media. They were essentially guilty of fraud in multiple actions. Sadly for the Dems, Harris should have ascended to the Presidential role and ironically may have had a better chance in the election. Did the media swallow and trumpet the excuses? Absolutely. Did the media lie, at times during the admin? I'm sure, but find the most blatant times to make an example, because it will tie up too many resources to have a complete witch hunt. Focus instead on the administration. I certainly was not happy with the situation, but there is precedent. Edith Wilson, Dolly Madison and Martha Washington. Does that make it ok? No, and I'm hopeful laws and/or the constitution changes to prevent this ever again. It needs oversight. Do you realize Trump's decline is starting to show and in different ways than Biden but still occuring? Or will you continue to play the hypocrite? Wait till he hits 80 but it will progress before then.

The beginning of Trump's mental decline. This is one example of many small ones: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/columnist/2025/05/04/trump-interview-abc-time-mental-decline/83391080007/ During an April 30 interview with NewsNation, Trump was asked by Stephen A. Smith about his war against Harvard University. The president proceeded to describe imaginary riots in Harlem: “Well, I say this. We had riots in Harlem, in Harlem, and frankly if you look at what’s gone on – and people from Harlem went up and they protested, Stephen, and they protested very strongly against Harvard. They happened to be on my side.” Trump might like to call it the weave. Maybe fans like you agree, the rest of us know it's an excuse for his age showing. Especially those of us with parents around Trump's age. I'm saying it's not significant yet, but it's there and it will get worse and manifest in different ways than Biden's did. Are you going to be pissed off if his administration lies, covers up and makes excuses? Or are you going to continue on the path to deniability just like you're doing now? I get what you're saying bias vs propaganda/lies. Why do you then proceed to quote mostly unaccountable X quotes when you post here instead of higher quality sourcing?

Honestly, a lot of it comes down to inflammatory language and factual content that hopefully elucidates counterpoints to the main story. So, I'll usually browse MSN (not MSNBC!) and yahoo news which pull content from all over. Fox News, Newsweek, NY post, Wash examiner, Post, WSJ, BBC, some of the links here which seldom pan out less than extreme, but still I look at more facts behind the argument and how inflammatory the sentences are. I'll check out CNN infrequently but they are way biased most of the time. Fox News is always interesting to me because they can offer inflammatory opinions and are seldom shy about it but they can put a lot of facts to their stories. Extreme left and right sources for a laugh and to check their fact content. Really I should utilize one of these pay news apps that tries to limit bias but I'm too old and cheap. I do consider it more seriously now though. It's disappointing so few sources report all the facts and I don't mind overt opinions or bias as per Fox News but try and acknowledge other realities for the people or situation involved.

That's true it hasn't happened to a significant effect with Trump yet. And the MSM didn't completely ignore Biden, they would make excuses for it, and I expect right wing sources to follow a similar playbook as Trump progresses down this road. Why do I say that? Easiest examples are their irresponsibility magnifying 2020 "steal" garbage Trump used to line his pockets, as well as J6 short term. But I find it highly ironic and somewhat disingenuous you try and limit "right wing" to Fox News, one of the best sources. How often do you actually post their content compared to all the X and more questionable right wing sources? I can't get too involved with this board because eventually the willful ignorance bothers me too much, but you seem to post quite prolifically and the times I do check it out seems like your source is seldom never Fox News. What percent of your sources on here would you say come from Fox News?

Congress has to approve/recognize it as an acceptable gift to the US.

I get that, and I feel it's unfortunate you've come to look at it that way. It's certainly easy to do. For me, any news source takes certain facts about a story and ignores others to try and shape their biased version of the truth. The good ones on either side include the most facts and hopefully spin a less biased story. I definitely have to hunt more for decent right biased stories but overall I consider Fox News a go to right biased source. But even good sources can have highly biased stories, it's easy to tell by the amount of infammatory words and wording.

You're right, and they all seem equally important. The bribe/gift is the only one spelled out in the constitution though. Repubs certainly can vote based on security and costs though.

Sure, why aren't they? I don't know but perhaps he doesn't have enough support for doing this in his own party? And that silence speaks loudly to me about what the truth of the situation is. Thanks for the insights, very cool. 👍

I would say I can, why do you think I can't look at how both sides project their bias? Each side of the biased media behaving the same depending on which party is in the white house. Why do you feel like only legacy media matters here? Fox, Breitbart, Washington Times, New York Post, Daily Wire, NewsMax? Why do you think we exclude these sources? Let's look at your argument. If Fox News covers up and/or makes excuses for Trump's obvious decline like the mainstream liberal media did for much of Biden's term, why is that different? Same MO. This time around the mainstream media would trumpet every mistake and gaffe just like right wing media did during Biden's term. They already are. What's the difference that is so critical to you?

Cool, thanks! I hadn't considered the helicopter and any others. My greater question is can the President fly a non-government approved (personal, private or charter) plane for personal reasons? I just imagine during office he can't, because of security reasons.

I don't follow a particular media that closely, tbh. I do gather from both sided biased media. But personal, yes. I try and discuss with both sides and understand. We seem to have lost that as a country so it's important to me to make the effort. While I certainly have biases left or right depending on the issue, I consider myself independent. Seeing both extremes on here only pointing fingers at the other side then wallowing in hypocrisy when the impropriety takes place on their side is laughable but sad. Real change needs to first acknowledge the BS of both sides, no matter how fervently you support one. Right wing for sure, left wing will scream it from the mountain tops, opposite of but paralleling what happened with Biden.

The Constitution states Congress must approve this gift by a foreign country or it's not allowed. This defines acceptance of foreign gifts while serving in a government capacity. Is there some reason you feel this doesn't apply or should not be the case? Anyone please feel free to answer. Is POTUS allowed to fly on anything other than AF-1 whether official or personal flights? I'm curious because I would guess while in office he always flies AF-1 for security reasons.

Yes, I have. Just not at PPP. Let's see if you are any better if Trump's mind is completely shot before the end of it's turn. Because it's always pots calling kettles black with both sides here.

Let's be real. No one over 80 should be President. That means 76 is the election cutoff. Even most Octagenarians displaying solid mental acuity are prone to critical thinking lapses which is why scammers are effective. Alternatively, you could consider a medical evaluation but it would have to be a neutrally selected panel and with a standard of testing and reporting. Speaking of that, I want some accountability on his physician who was lying through his teeth and/or willfully not conducting appropriate cognitive tests. Too easy to hide behind HIPAA. Lastly, Jill Biden deserves some accountability focus for her unethical behavior. Who was making the decisions? The one who is still trying to trot him out now. It's disturbing to me she won't usher him off into retirement in his fading years.

India wants to be respected as a world superpower so downplaying the US role is to be expected. We're in general agreement about the plane. Can you or anyone please explain how accepting this 400 million gift without congressional approval DOESN'T violate the US constitution ?

They don't want to give him credit and/or they're splitting hairs that while Trump brought them together Rubio didn't contribute significantly to the negotiations. Pakistan already thanked Trump, that in itself tells everyone all we need to know. I don't care about the politics, this is yet another situation that should rise above it and uphold the Constitution. That is the most disturbing thing no matter what your politics.

If it's a gift to the US government, why doesn't Congress just approve the acceptance of it? Repubs control both houses. Problem solved. Why is it going to his presidential library after he's out of office instead of staying in service? Especially if we spend big money to get it ready as AF-1? What are the chances it actually stays parked at the Presidential library? Sounds more like a thinly disguised personal bribe at this point. Hope that changes as the Constitution seems clear on this.

Back in 2019 or 20, Darnold was training with Jordan Palmer and Allen. I remember an article where a source discussed the difference between Darnold and Allen. Darnold would repeat a drill several times and move on. Allen would repeat a drill as many times as needed until he mastered it. Allen's base and throwing posture also changed significantly on the field. I'm sure a number of the big-armed inaccurate QB's simply didn't work as hard as Josh Allen at it. Saying a QB does offseason work doesn't speak to the quality of it.

I totally agree with you about Beane's overall drafting being disappointing. If he were a better exec he would target some better d-line scouts. Any exec is going to spin themselves in the most positive light, as is almost anyone, it doesn't mean Allen wasn't Beane's #1 choice and he deserves full marks for it. You may have felt Allen would be great from the beginning, but this casual fan took the time to watch all of Allen's college snaps I could find, and while he had great talent, at other times he made EJ Manuel bad decisions and locked on certain receivers. Talent first-class, decision making, piss-poor. Beane said he put a premium on Allen's leadership, competitiveness, and assessed intelligence and these carried the day in Allen's development as Allen willed and worked his way to better throwing fundamentals and decision making. His talent alone wouldn't have been enough and Beane deserves full marks for recognizing Allen's strength to succeed.

I don't agree WRT manipulating the fans about how much they liked Allen. Giants still had Manning and wanted to grow the ground game to support him. He couldn't knock CLE and NYJ out of their spots, so he was going to have to wait on those picks anyways. Indy wasn't in the QB market and it sounds like Beane had enough Intel from Elway that theirs wouldn't be a QB. He took a chance with Denver. He may have also felt Lamar had a chance to be great, we don't know about that. Also, Beane still had a franchise to construct so he wasn't going to mortgage their future picks too soon. I have no problem taking Beane at his word on their Allen view pre-draft.

Except the placebo effect is real. On paper it shouldn't be (your perception), but its reality is measurable and quantifiable. The opposite analogy for the point you're trying to make. Maybe as an athlete you ignored your emotional state, I did and regret it, because my best performances were when the stakes were the highest and I was totally and desperately invested in winning. It gave me massive focus and fear of mistakes or failing vanished. That's just me and everyone's different so I get what you're trying to say, I would simply conclude that perhaps you should open your mind more and that for some, influencing their mental state increases their performance.

Placebo effect involves an actual treatment of a physical or physiological condition, so for me you are completely mis-using it here. I think you are making the point that the players already had these abilities so the emotional heightening from perceived or actual "insults" is negligible. I would simply say that physiological changes when experiencing strong emotions can change mental focus, increasing it when channeled properly. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01454/full So, some pro athletes find ways to experience strong emotions to find greater focus. This is what is being alluded to. Yes, you're right the athlete already had the ability, but finding ways to maintain maximum mental focus enables maximum and consistent physical performance.

Yep, it's the draft. Reasonably priced but undeveloped talent. I would think where you give something up is in second contracts. I wish someone would ask Beane what he's changing in his approach so we don't have to keep using so much draft capital on DL with such mediocre results.

No, it is undeniable it cost LESS than 2 second round picks. One of the seconds gained us the third round pick.

The problem with Kaiir was there is nothing between his ears. Gotta believe the scouts and coaches learned from that mistake this time.