mjt328

OK. So you are simply looking at tariffs as "raising taxes" and nothing else. At least now I understand where you are coming from. No need to be rude and condescending. There are many factors that will determine whether a tariff turns out to be positive or negative. It's not just necessarily just going to raise prices for American citizens. For example: If tariffs are used as a temporary negotiating tactic with foreign trade partners (such as Canada) and it ultimately causes both sides to drop/decrease them, it will result in a net positive. U.S. companies will become more competitive in foreign markets, and there will be no price changes for our citizens. If tariffs encourage manufacturers to open plants in the U.S., this is also a positive by creating jobs for American citizens. There will be no price changes for our citizens, because those products will now be made here in our country. It happened in my hometown during Trump's first term, when his tariffs caused the re-opening of our local steel plant. Depending on the market for the product, foreign companies will sometimes find they cannot raise prices and remain competitive. So they simply eat the tariff. This results in more tax revenue for the U.S., while there is no change in prices for American citizens. In some cases, our inability to manufacture products in the U.S. is a serious national security issue. We found this out during Covid, when it was revealed that much of our medical equipment and drugs are manufactured in China. Not good if we ever went to war with them. As I originally stated, only time will tell how the tariff issue works out.

Where did anyone say he was raising taxes? I'm very confused where you got that. Some of the tax cuts Trump has been talking about include: - No tax on tips - No tax on overtime - No tax on social security benefits - Eliminating income tax for everyone making $150K per year and under

Part of the plan is to: - Reduce government size and lower the national debt - Reduce taxes for working Americans - Bring back jobs and manufacturing capability to the U.S. - Energy independence from other countries - Negotiate better trade deals with foreign governments These aren't things that can just be done overnight, with a snap of the fingers. It's a process and balancing act. For instance, significantly reducing taxes will give the economy a spark. But if it's done without also cutting government spending, we just make the deficit worse. Much of the tariff stuff is about posturing and leverage. What is being put in place today won't necessarily be in place tomorrow, a month from now, or a year from now. It's all about the endgame. And our "allies" getting angry? Give me a break. Most of these countries totally rely on the U.S. for military protection, expect us to supply 90% of foreign aid to the free world, and have economies heavily dependent on exports to the U.S. They have already been hitting us with massive tariffs for decades. But as soon as we do anything in the self-interest of our citizens, they scream unfair.

The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. The Constitution lays out three separate/equal branches of government. The Constitution gives full power of the Executive Branch and the Military to the President. The Constitution's only check on that power is that the Senate must give consent to his appointments. Right now, the President is simply not being allowed to use the powers granted to him to him by the Constitution. District judges are issuing injunctions, saying he doesn't have authority that he clearly does under the supreme law of the land. - They are arguing he cannot control how the departments within the EB operate. - They are arguing he cannot control how the departments within the EB are spending their money. - They are arguing he cannot eliminate departments within the EB... even those originally formed by executive order and not legislation. - They are arguing he cannot even fire people within the EB. - They are arguing members of the EB can act independently and ignore/defy his orders without consequence. Congress is also reluctant to backup anything he does with legislation, because they utilize the EB as a massive money laundering operation.

Great question! Here is one of thousands of videos you can find online of January 6 protesters being orderly let into the capital by security guards, waiting in line and calmly taking pictures when they got inside. https://rumble.com/v10578j-flashback-police-let-protesters-into-the-capital-without-a-fight.html Now obviously this does not represent everyone who was there. Regardless of how January 6 started, it became violent and out of control. Anyone who broke down doors, smashed windows, vandalized property, attacked police, etc. deserved to be prosecuted for their actions. But when you examine all the evidence in context, it simply does not support the idea of a pre-planned attempt at overthrowing the government. It just doesn't. In terms of the pardons, I think every case needs to be examined fully before passing judgment. I'll be honest to say that I haven't taken the time to do that. The question doesn't always come down to simple innocence or guilt. Another factor is how harsh the sentencing was. Is the punishment being handed down within reason? For example, does someone deserve to be put in prison several years for vandalism? If someone was convicted for attacking a police officer, are we talking about a single punch to the face? Or are we talking about assault with a deadly weapon? Does this person have a prior record of violence?

I understand your need to see Donald Trump as the greatest villain of our time. So I doubt anything I say or the mountains of evidence I show you will convince you otherwise. But here is all I will leave you with: - Countless politicians through our country's history have challenged election results, and/or accused the other side of cheating. - Our political process allows for challenging election results, which is why a certification is done in the first place. - Political protests occasionally become violent. This is wrong. But it also isn't unique to one side. Many want to hang their hat on the fact that Clinton verbally conceded, and Trump continued to challenge the results until the day Biden took office. OK fine. But at the end of the day, he absolutely did leave the White House peacefully and allowed Biden to complete his four years as President. There was a peaceful transition of power. Clinton also later said she regretted conceding, called Trump an illegitimate president, and encouraged Biden not to concede the 2024 election under any circumstances. Her party also spent years trying to investigate and remove Trump from office, saying Russia interfered with the election. As I stated in my first reply. Violent offenders on January 6 deserved to be prosecuted. What they did was wrong. But the ridiculous overreaction by Democrats to that single event (while simultaneously ignoring anything similar their own party has done) is one of the reasons the majority of voters have a hard time taking them serious anymore.

Due to the salary cap, you can't pay every player on the team their market worth. Some good players need to be let go in free agency, and replaced with younger talent on rookie contracts. Brandon Beane's job is figuring out how important each player/position is to the team's success, and factor that into how easy it is to find their replacement. For instance, signing Greg Rousseau to an extension was pretty much essential (even if he's not an elite pass rusher), considering how important Edge Rusher is to our defense and how difficult it's been for us to find players on Groot's level. Christian Benford is harder to justify a huge contract, when our coaching staff seems to find good/serviceable DBs with relative ease. James Cook is easily the most productive RB we've had during the Josh Allen era. But how much of that is due to his skillset, and how much is due to the development of our O-Line? We don't seem to count on him in short yardage, and prefer Ty Johnson on passing downs. Ray Davis is waiting in the wings. Does anyone really feel our offense takes a huge step backwards without Cook? I personally feel like we can win the AFC East without him. And he obviously wasn't the piece that helped us get past the Chiefs into the Super Bowl.

Insurrection suggests there was a plot to violently overthrow the government. The "Stop the Steal" event was designed to protest voter fraud (whether you believe it existed or not). The majority of people were there hoping they could speak before Congress and convince the lawmakers to delay (not completely stop) certifying the election, until their concerns about fraud were fully investigated and addressed. Video has shown that things started very peaceful. Before the riot broke out, crowds were even let into the capital by security, where the people casually walked in single-file lines, smiling and snapping photos on their phones. Obviously things got violent and out of control. Which is unacceptable, and people deservedly went to prison for it. That doesn't mean it was originally intended to be that way. Nor does it mean that everyone who was there should have been punished. If the protesters had been planning all along to go into the capital, kill a bunch of politicians and hang Mike Pence on the steps (as many are suggesting), they would clearly have been armed. The fact they just grabbed or used items around them, should tell you it wasn't planned in advance. And you wouldn't have seen grandmas with signs shuffling around beforehand, taking pictures like tourists. Disrupting the peaceful transition of power is also a pretty broad statement. Lots of candidates protest the elections they lose, and accuse the other side of cheating. Hillary Clinton and the Democrats did so four years earlier. Here is a link from NBC (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/despite-objections-congress-certifies-donald-trump-s-election-n704026) about the certification, showing how many blamed Russian interference and voter suppression for losing the 2016 election. Here is another link from CNN (https://www.cnn.com/2017/01/19/politics/trump-inauguration-protests-womens-march/index.html) showing the riots and protests that happened on inauguration day when Trump was being sworn in.

Anyone who committed assault or vandalism on January 6 deserved to be prosecuted. Anyone who was let into the capital by security guards, damaged nothing and hurt nobody - they should not have been criminally charged. Calling it an insurrection is just silly. The people who did it weren't even armed, unless you count flag poles and pepper spray. If people want to boycott Tesla because of Elon Musk's politics, then go right ahead. They have every right. If people want to set the vehicles on fire or cause property damage, they deserve to go to prison.

Exactly. Everyone criticized the Rams moves for years, because they were supposedly mortgaging their future. Seven straight years without a first round pick. But at the end of the day, they won a Super Bowl with all of those aggressive moves. And thanks to their excellent drafting, they got themselves back into postseason contention within 1-2 years. The reality is the NFL Draft is an inexact science. Not a crap-shoot. The quality of prospect gradually decreases as the picks go by. You have a better shot landing an elite player in the Top 5 than picking the end of the first round. Guys in the second round are way more successful on average than prospects in the sixth/seventh. If Beane was better at finding those top guys in the 20s, then I would be all for staying put. But history shows us that our top picks turn into Keon Coleman, Dalton Kincaid and Kaiir Elam. If we need to package multiple players of that caliber to get a shot at a future All-Pro, then maybe that's the strategy we need to be taking.

Edmunds, Ford, Elam and Kincaid were very small trade-ups, which only required a mid-round selection to go up a few picks. Not really that aggressive in my opinion. Every GM in the league makes these kinds of moves. As I mentioned in another thread, Beane has only made three extremely bold moves since becoming the Bills GM. Allen, Diggs and Von Miller. One big draft move. One big player for pick trade. One big free agent signing. If Beane isn't going to be aggressive in moving up, then he needs to do a better job finding those late gems in drafts. As the years go by, I'm becoming less confident he can do that.

Of course Beane wants to win the Super Bowl. Everybody in the organization wants win the Super Bowl. Ralph Wilson also wanted to win the Super Bowl. But was he willing to hire the absolute best GM available, provide that individual with full control of the franchise, and give him all the financial resources possible in order to make the team the best it could possibly be? The answer is no. He wasn't even willing to sell the naming rights to the stadium. My point is that when Beane was first hired, he was willing to risk everything to move up for Josh Allen. Because he literally had nothing to lose. If he didn't land the right QB, his time here was going to be short anyway. Now that the Bills are an established winner, he doesn't seem to be willing to take that kind of risk anymore. A lot of people (including me) believe this team absolutely needs more elite/game breaking players. Not just an endless supply of solid/ok players. But to get a crack at one of the better prospects in the draft, you probably need to get aggressive and move into the Top 10 picks. Instead, Beane likes to play it safe. Make sure he's got a full stockpile of picks every season. As long as he's hitting on 3-4 starting level players each year, the Bills roster remains in about the same place.

That's where our GM and scouting department need to earn their money. Just like when Beane was first hired back in 2017. Everything came down to him finally finding the Bills a franchise QB. It didn't matter we were drafting down in the 20s that year. It didn't matter how risky the prospects were. It didn't matter how many other GMs failed before him. Beane's job was to find us a quarterback immediately.... or find himself on the unemployment line in a few years. Thankfully, he was successful in that assignment. Since around 2020-2021, Beane's new job has been to find the missing piece (or pieces) to win us a Super Bowl. And as of right now, he has failed to do that. The team has been spinning it's wheels for five seasons and counting. People want to say that finding elite prospects is hard. And I don't care. Finding a franchise QB is much harder. The main reason Beane won the lottery in landing Josh Allen was because he knew his job depended on it. So he confidently identified a target and then aggressively moved up to get him. I don't see or sense that level of confidence or aggression from our front office anymore. Which tells me Beane is comfortable in just winning the AFC East and staying off the hot seat.

The difference between elite players and solid players really IS consistency. Greg Rousseau has had some amazing games during his career where he's been just as good as Myles Garrett. But Garrett plays at that very high level for 13-14 games a season. Rousseau only plays at that level 3-4 times a season.

When you are a young/rebuilding team with lots of needs, stockpiling draft picks is a great strategy. When you have been a Super Bowl contender 5 straight seasons and keep falling short, stockpiling draft picks is pointless and wasteful. What you need is the final 1-2 pieces to push you over the top. Not a bunch of back-end roster filler. What good are 10 draft picks (seven of them on Day 3) going to do this roster? They aren't going to start. They won't be playing significant snaps for at least 2-3 seasons. By August, we are going to be crossing our fingers the Bills can sneak half of our draftees onto the practice squad. Brandon Beane is a conservative General Manager. He swings for base hits. Not home runs. And that's a big reason our roster is full of solid starting-caliber players, but lacks difference makers.

Definitely up there with Andre Reed and Stefon Diggs as the best Bills WR of all-time. The other two guys were blessed with Hall of Fame passers. He had Doug Flutie, Rob Johnson and Drew Bledsoe (among others). He was also somewhat late to develop (broke out at age 25), and then faded in his very early 30s.

Shattered rookie records? Let's tone down that narrative a bit. He was 4th in catches and 10th in yards for a rookie Tight End... meaning he didn't break any records, much less shatter them. I'm all for giving a player at least 3 years to develop. But so far, the returns are very underwhelming. That cannot be disputed. He's provided virtually nothing as a Red Zone threat with only 4 touchdowns in his first two seasons. He's provided almost nothing downfield either, with a pretty pathetic 9.6 YPC (which would rank him around 150th in the NFL last year). His hands/reliability haven't been bad, but he did drop the pass that ended our season. Not exactly a great lasting memory going into the offseason.

The Bills have proven they can find and develop good to solid CBs pretty easily. Tre White, Taron Johnson, Levi Wallace, Dane Jackson, Christian Benford. Jamarcus Ingram has looked promising in limited action, and may have a shot landing a starting job this year. Daequan Hardy was very good in preseason last year, and could eventually turn into something. Even Kaiir Elam was solid when he actually got on the field. I'm convinced that if Buffalo was forced to play him more often, he would have proven to be at least a serviceable starter on the outside. No matter how much I like Benford, I really think Beane needs to factor this into contract negotiations. Why sign him to a monster contract, when our coaching staff can seemingly turn Day 3 picks and UDFAs into starting caliber defensive backs? Use the high picks and money on positions that we can't get right (D-Line) and hope to get lucky.

Other teams have figured out how to get past the Chiefs in those prime moments... (Eagles, Bengals, Bucs) Nobody is questioning if the Bills are good. The question is whether the Bills are good ENOUGH.

What really happened during that stretch Weeks 4-5, where the offense and passing game struggled? That is where you can find the answer. At the time, the talk was that we lacked an outside WR that could consistently win 1-on-1 coverage. Then we traded for Amari Cooper. The offense immediately exploded and never looked back. And even though Cooper's stats were almost non-existent, film watchers told me that his value was in drawing away coverage so others could get open. Now I'm being told we don't really need Cooper. Or that he will be easily replaced by Josh Palmer (best season was about 70 catches, 750 yards). I guess we'll see. But I'm certainly not counting on Keon Coleman or Dalton Kincaid making a huge impact.

After 7-8 years into his time here, I'm slowly coming to the conclusion that "Big Baller" Brandon Beane is actually a pretty conservative GM. In all his time with the Bills, he has exactly one big draft move (Josh Allen), one big trade (Stefon Diggs) and one big free agent signing (Von Miller). Sadly, I'm also starting to question his eye for top-level NFL talent. The only positions he consistently scouts well (both in the draft and free agency) are Linebackers, Cornerbacks and Safeties. Which just happens to the be the development strength of the head coach. Everyone he brings in on the D-Line seems to underwhelm. He's had some good moments at WR, but this will be the fourth straight offseason where it's a major team need. Don't forget Beane also struggled to find good players at RB and on the O-Line before Aaron Kromer/Joe Brady, then suddenly both are a strength.

It's amazing how sensitive some fans get about criticism of the Bills. We all know how this team performs in the regular season, their great overall record, and how we consistently march into the playoffs as a supposed Super Bowl contender. Five straight years we've been in that same position, and haven't even made it to the Super Bowl. Are we just the unluckiest team in the league, and by doing the same thing and fielding the same kind of players year after year... eventually the law of averages will probably work in our favor? Or is it possible that something on our team (talent, coaching, scheme, etc.) is holding us back from taking the next step?

In my opinion, Brandon Beane and Sean McDermott play into each other's strengths, and amplify each other's weaknesses. Through his coaching career, McDermott has proven to be excellent at developing and getting the most out of his secondary and linebackers. He and Beane are 100% on the same page with those positions, constantly turning late-round picks and mid-level free agents into solid (or even better) starters. Jordan Poyer, Micah Hyde, Matt Milano and Tre White turned into All-Pros. Christian Benford and Terrell Bernard are the latest stand-out starters. Levi Wallace, Dane Jackson, Damar Hamlin, Taylor Rapp were turned into solid contributors. Beane knows exactly what kind of talent our coaching staff needs, and can find it literally anywhere. McDermott has been MUCH less effective with getting the most out of the D-Line. Every year we seem to invest big resources into the pass rush (Von Miller, AJ Epenesa, Greg Rousseau, Boogie Basham, Star Lotulelei, Ed Oliver, Daquon Jones, etc.) But we struggle to get to the QB when it counts, especially in the playoffs. Our run defense goes through very rough patches every single season. Most people believe the D-Line is the piece consistently holding us back from taking the next step. And despite all the draft picks and free agents we have rolled through the halls, nothing seems to work. When you see a talent like Poona Ford sit the bench here, and be very effective everywhere else... When you see Epenesa get drafted and then require an entire physical makeover to get on the field... When you see young talent develop slowly (or not at all), and then become incredibly inconsistent... You just wonder if Beane/McDermott are on the same page with this part of the team. Maybe what our defense really needs is an Aaron Kromer for the D-Line. Our O-Line was in a similar position early in the Beane/McDermott era, always underachieving. Wasted picks like Cody Ford. A revolving door at Right Tackle. Now suddenly everybody we bring into the building seems to be developing great, playing strong on the field, and fitting perfectly into the system. Our running game has taken off, and Josh Allen hardly ever gets sacked.

Overall picture, I agree that Brandon Beane is amongst the top GMs in the NFL. I do agree however that he has struggled badly to land high-impact difference makers, both in the Draft and in Free Agency. This roster continues to be Josh Allen, carrying a ton of above average/average players. My feeling is that both Beane (and Sean McDermott on the coaching side) have settled into a place of complacency. They know what is needed to be generally successful in the NFL. What kind of players they need in the locker room and on the field. And without much competition in the AFC East, they have managed to roll through the regular season strong. Like others, I question if this style has just reached its ceiling. There is only so far Allen can carry a "decent" roster by himself. We need game wreckers elsewhere. Not guys who just fit into the scheme well.

Unfortunately, I have to agree. The Bills are ridiculously predictable with their first pick. Maybe not with the exact player. But at least when it comes to the position we are targeting. 2018 - Obviously were going to trade up for a QB. Everyone knew this 12 months in advance. Got Josh Allen. 2019 - Big hole at DT after Kyle Williams retired. Drafts Ed Oliver. 2020 - Needed a #1 receiver. Traded for Stefon Diggs. 2021 - Needed a pass rusher really bad. Took Groot. 2022 - Giant hole at CB. Took Elam. 2023 - Needed a receiver. All were gone, so he took Dalton Kincaid instead. 2024 - Needed a receiver. Again. This time he landed Keon Coleman. And yes, you are also 100% correct about the reason too. Every draft we seem to have one massive need, a couple smaller needs and the rest is mostly depth/roster filler.