And, it is true, Trump is a narcissist and he allowed that to cloud his judgement. He thought he could do anything and there would be no appreciable consequences. Welp! that ain't so. I will hasten to add that most, probably all, very successful people are narcissists, some worse than others. Being a narcissist allows people to do things that benefit themselves and they strive to promote and advance themselves without regard to others. Now, that does not have to mean they deliberately impact/hurt other people, not on purpose anyway. But they roll through life seeking that next plateau of success and after a while, after being victorious time and time again, they begin to believe they are invincible. Simply put: they believe their own headlines.

This trait manifested itself perfectly this election cycle. Trump said to himself, all I have to do is go on the campaign trail and bingo! another victory.

Already the TDS suffering pro-Ukrainian bloggers are high-fiving and celebrating. They think the dems will now end the wrongful war against Iran and stand with Ukraine against Putin. I wouldn't hold my breath on the latter.

(11-04-2026 02:40 PM)Tech80 Wrote:  And, it is true, Trump is a narcissist and he allowed that to cloud his judgement. He thought he could do anything and there would be no appreciable consequences. Welp! that ain't so. I will hasten to add that most, probably all, very successful people are narcissists, some worse than others. Being a narcissist allows people to do things that benefit themselves and they strive to promote and advance themselves without regard to others. Now, that does not have to mean they deliberately impact/hurt other people, not on purpose anyway. But they roll through life seeking that next plateau of success and after a while, after being victorious time and time again, they begin to believe they are invincible. Simply put: they believe their own headlines.

This trait manifested itself perfectly this election cycle. Trump said to himself, all I have to do is go on the campaign trail and bingo! another victory.

Already the TDS suffering pro-Ukrainian bloggers are high-fiving and celebrating. They think the dems will now end the wrongful war against Iran and stand with Ukraine against Putin. I wouldn't hold my breath on the latter.

Congress can't unilaterally end the Iran War. They can refuse to authorize defense spending on certain conditions to make it harder for us to wage war, but since the President is the Commander in Chief, only he can end it.

Ukraine is another matter. I think what we'll see there is a push to remove any funding that is currently going to Russia or Belarus. But I doubt you'll see a ton more authorized funds going to Ukraine.

That is what makes these next couple years tricky. The biggest thing congress can do is control the purse. Make it harder for Trump to fund his vanity projects etc, but they won't be able to pass any laws without his signature.

For the record, I always vote for divided governments whenever possible. I think its when American Democracy is at its best. Forces two sides to work together.

Ukraine struck Putin's biggest nuclear bomber base, Engels II, again. It sits about 500 miles from Ukraine with well within range of their regular drones. Ukraine sent a swarm of drones, their large ones which are propeller-driven, they carry a 250-pound warhead. Their top speed is about 130 mph so it takes close to 4 hours to travel the distance. The Russians have radar sites scattered about and the swarm was detected in time for the Russians to get their bombers airborne to avoid destruction. But the base suffered heavy damage. A cruise missile storage warehouse was hit and resulted in a huge explosion, shattering windows in houses and buildings up to 6 miles away. Two inoperable bombers left sitting on the tarmac were destroyed. Apparently, they were being used to cannibalize for spare parts in an effort to keep other bombers operable.

Russia is NOT a nuclear war threat, not to the US anyway. What bombers they have left, their old Bear Bomber and the aged Backfire Bomber have always been a joke to us, and now with most of the fleet barely operational, our interceptor screen would shoot them all down before they could reach target range. BTW, the Russians no longer have any nuclear bombs, the old version which requires gravity. They do have cruise missiles capable of delivering nukes, but those warheads are small and their effective range is less than 400-450 miles. Russia's ICBM arsenal, including their biggest one named "Satan II" was considered a threat but the last time Russia tested one it blew up on the launch pad vaporizing that base and killing a reported 500+ personnel. This happened last year on a remote site in Siberia.

Meanwhile over in the Pacific region...

The US is getting serious about being a major deterrent to China's expansion plans. We have now permanently stationed three new fighter squadrons on a Japanese island near Okinawa. These are a squadron each of F-22 Raptors, F-35s, and the brand-new F-15 Eagles, F-15E (I think). Additionally, Japan has beefed up its air force base on Okinawa with a squadron of F-35s and have donated three squadrons of older F-16 Falcons to Vietnam with some enhancements to come. Japan also has an operational carrier, with F-35s, first such fixed-wing carrier for Japan since the end of WWII. They still operate a helicopter carrier with specialized attack-helicopters and now drones as well.

The US also entered in an agreement with the Philippines to build and jointly man a missile base on an island below that nation that sits next to one of the passages China needs to send ships into the Pacific Ocean. This will make every passage China, and Russia from its ports in eastern Russia, needs to pass into the Pacific Ocean covered by allied missile bases. They are armed with the very latest anti-ship American missiles and protected by an array of anti-missile and anti-aircraft weapons.

Australia continues building up its military too. Recently an important port and naval base has been expanded and its defenses improved with the addition of American-built missiles. This port/navy base is an important cog in the US/allies logistics and repair/maintenance base for ships and aircraft. In the event of a war with China this base will be critical serving as a supply base for US air force and navy assets. Australia launched two new frigates and have assigned them duty in protecting this base. New Zealand also just launched a new frigate, and it will also patrol the region around this base. It is outfitted with the very latest anti-submarine detection and weapon systems.

China's economy has been tanking this year. Unemployment and inflation have been rampant and as a consequence the Chicoms have fallen behind in "keeping up with the Joneses." They cannot match all the defense spending our allies have been doing in the Pacific region. Hopefully, this will make China behave itself and not start trouble.

India, unfortunately, continues to be undependable as an ally against China and Russia. India is not exactly "friends" with any country due largely to the tension between itself and China, ongoing border disputes. But under Prime Minister Modi India has put up barriers toward agreements to engage in an alliance with the US, Japan, etc. in the event China starts a war. Most pundits say that India will try to remain neutral if China starts a war in the Pacific region. India presently has the third largest/most powerful military in the world, behind the US and China. India continues open trade with both Russia and China.

Marco Rubio is stepping down as Sec. of State. This has been expected as he has to distance himself from the Trump/Vance foreign policies. Rubio will seek the GOP nomination for POTUS in 2028.

It appears Pete Hegseth may be on his way out soon. House is expected to impeach him in the lame duck session, and pressure is growing on Trump to feed him to the Wolves. (Preferably Red Wolves, the best kind of Wolf)

There was a rumor for a while that Marsha Blackburn would appoint him to take over her vacant senate seat if chips hit the fan, but Blackburn only barely won the Governor's Mansion in Tennessee herself, and she has now said she won't do that.

Meanwhile, as expected we are starting to see GOP hopefuls for the Presidential Nomination in 2 years begin to step away from Trump. Rubio as mentioned previously is gone. DeSantis has made a lot of comments that appear well...Sane. Even JD Vance released a statement that half hinted this is Trump's fault. This will be an interesting battle, because Trump will still want to essentially try and appoint his own potential successor and he still has enough support that whoever he gives his backing too will get a bunch of support from hard line GOP voters.

One potential name that is off the Table is Ted Cruz, who now finds himself stranded as a Republican Senator in a State with Democratic Leadership, and he won't risk having a Democrat appointed in his place. (There's a ton of issues ahead for Texas as Greg Abbott took a lot of power away from the state legislature during his tenure, and now that power falls into Dem hands with a divided legilsature)

Also, I don't know if its going to mean anything, but Dems won so many State Legislatures on Tuesday that there's now enough that if all of them signed on to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact they could essentially take the electoral college out of play and turn the Presidential election into a popular vote contest.

(11-06-2026 12:38 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  (There's a ton of issues ahead for Texas as Greg Abbott took a lot of power away from the state legislature during his tenure, and now that power falls into Dem hands with a divided legilsature)

You've brought up an off-topic thought of mine going into political science I guess. I really wish state governments didn't emulate the federal government's presidential system. The federal system was arguably designed to move slowly, requiring broad consensus across both the legislative and executive branches to pass legislation. Moreover it seems that legislatures at both the federal and state levels have increasingly surrendered their power to the executive, creating an almost unchecked executive authority. Holding these semi-autocratic executives accountable through elections happens once every four years, and the alternative of a successful impeachment and removal is extraordinarily difficult and rare.

State governments should be able to operate more efficiently and remain more directly representative of their constituents. IMO, a parliamentary system would be better to accomplish these goals. Having the executive come from the legislature gives it better democratic legitimacy and efficiency, as its authority derives from elected legislators and they would avoid the seperation-of-powers gridlock. Also the legislature can hold the executive accountable at any time through a simple vote of no confidence, not a convulated impeachment process.

A parliamentary system at the state level would also probably encourage greater public interest and participation in legislative elections, making state government more responsive to the people it represents.

(11-06-2026 12:38 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Also, I don't know if its going to mean anything, but Dems won so many State Legislatures on Tuesday that there's now enough that if all of them signed on to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact they could essentially take the electoral college out of play and turn the Presidential election into a popular vote contest.

That would be huge news if it happened and it would no doubt go to the Supreme Court who I think would find it unconstitutional due to the Compact Clause.

"No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State...

However with the Democrats now controlling congress, could they vote simply in favor of it and give it its "consent of congress" needed before the next presidential election? That would override any need of the Supreme court to look at it. I'm no law expert though.

"Old Buff"

We are all used to seeing B-52s operating out of Barksdale, the 8th Air Force Bomber Wing. The US built 640 B-52s dating back to 1948. The last "new" B-52 was built in 1962, meaning every Buff you see is at least 64 years old...well, the fuselage is, and the wings, and for the most part its eight engines too. But just about everything else is newer, a lot newer in many cases.

The latest version is the B-52J model, being updated, upgraded and improved. We will have 76 of the newest bombers expected to serve as a primary heavy bomber into the 2050's at least. The 76 number is not a coincidence, the AF planned it this way to honor the "Spirit of '76."

These latest J models will carry 12 cruise missiles, 6 each under the two wings in a rotary launcher, and another 8-missile rotary launcher in the belly, where conventional bombs and gravity-dependent nukes were once carried. The belly rotary will have an array of missiles, expected to be 4 decoys, and 4 specially programmed missiles depending on the mission. In some missions, depending on the availability of radar jamming planes, the B-52J may carry only two decoys and two other warheads. What is this decoy? It's a cruise missile that will be sent ahead of the bomber(s) and it will send off signals making enemy radar think it is a B-52. It will then veer away being tracked by enemy radar and inviting missile attacks, while the real bombers continue on their mission. All of the cruise missiles can carry nuke warheads, meaning 76 B-52s can carry a grand total of 1,368 nukes.

The "J" model is getting 8 brand new Rolls Royce engines which do NOT produce the characteristic black smoke trail. And brand-new electronics, radar systems, and targeting computers will make the B-52J the MOST ADVANCED bomber in the world, at least for another 20-25 years.

Presently, and for the next 5 years, most of the Buffs you will still see are the B-52H, as 2031 is the target date to convert the whole fleet to the "J" model.

(11-06-2026 06:15 AM)dawgonit Wrote:  

(11-06-2026 12:38 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  (There's a ton of issues ahead for Texas as Greg Abbott took a lot of power away from the state legislature during his tenure, and now that power falls into Dem hands with a divided legilsature)

You've brought up an off-topic thought of mine going into political science I guess. I really wish state governments didn't emulate the federal government's presidential system. The federal system was arguably designed to move slowly, requiring broad consensus across both the legislative and executive branches to pass legislation. Moreover it seems that legislatures at both the federal and state levels have increasingly surrendered their power to the executive, creating an almost unchecked executive authority. Holding these semi-autocratic executives accountable through elections happens once every four years, and the alternative of a successful impeachment and removal is extraordinarily difficult and rare.

State governments should be able to operate more efficiently and remain more directly representative of their constituents. IMO, a parliamentary system would be better to accomplish these goals. Having the executive come from the legislature gives it better democratic legitimacy and efficiency, as its authority derives from elected legislators and they would avoid the seperation-of-powers gridlock. Also the legislature can hold the executive accountable at any time through a simple vote of no confidence, not a convulated impeachment process.

A parliamentary system at the state level would also probably encourage greater public interest and participation in legislative elections, making state government more responsive to the people it represents.

(11-06-2026 12:38 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Also, I don't know if its going to mean anything, but Dems won so many State Legislatures on Tuesday that there's now enough that if all of them signed on to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact they could essentially take the electoral college out of play and turn the Presidential election into a popular vote contest.

That would be huge news if it happened and it would no doubt go to the Supreme Court who I think would find it unconstitutional due to the Compact Clause.

"No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State...

However with the Democrats now controlling congress, could they vote simply in favor of it and give it its "consent of congress" needed before the next presidential election? That would override any need of the Supreme court to look at it. I'm no law expert though.

I don't think the Compact thing comes to pass. Its worth noting that a lot of the Dems that got elected this cycle were more moderate dems. Especially in State races. When you look at Texas, Georgia, etc the Dems in those states lean farther center than the National Party does. Several Dem winners were people who defected from the GOP to begin with.

Also, I agree that States really should stop running their governments like the Feds, it just doesn't work, but so many sitting Govs are people who see themselves as future Presidents, and want to show their political chops. Arkansas Governor got in hot water earlier this year when she tried to build a prison in a rural conservative area over the will of voters who had voted against it in a referendum. The plan failed when the courts got in the way, and the legislature refused to budget it. So she pulled a play from the Trump playbook and attempted to primary the judge who voted it down and the legislators who stood against her. It backfired and the counties turned blue.

Not enough to win a state as red as Arkansas, but it was enough to get the Legislature to start discussions about limiting the power of the Governor.

(11-06-2026 04:04 PM)Tech80 Wrote:  "Old Buff"

We are all used to seeing B-52s operating out of Barksdale, the 8th Air Force Bomber Wing. The US built 640 B-52s dating back to 1948. The last "new" B-52 was built in 1962, meaning every Buff you see is at least 64 years old...well, the fuselage is, and the wings, and for the most part its eight engines too. But just about everything else is newer, a lot newer in many cases.

The latest version is the B-52J model, being updated, upgraded and improved. We will have 76 of the newest bombers expected to serve as a primary heavy bomber into the 2050's at least. The 76 number is not a coincidence, the AF planned it this way to honor the "Spirit of '76."

These latest J models will carry 12 cruise missiles, 6 each under the two wings in a rotary launcher, and another 8-missile rotary launcher in the belly, where conventional bombs and gravity-dependent nukes were once carried. The belly rotary will have an array of missiles, expected to be 4 decoys, and 4 specially programmed missiles depending on the mission. In some missions, depending on the availability of radar jamming planes, the B-52J may carry only two decoys and two other warheads. What is this decoy? It's a cruise missile that will be sent ahead of the bomber(s) and it will send off signals making enemy radar think it is a B-52. It will then veer away being tracked by enemy radar and inviting missile attacks, while the real bombers continue on their mission. All of the cruise missiles can carry nuke warheads, meaning 76 B-52s can carry a grand total of 1,368 nukes.

The "J" model is getting 8 brand new Rolls Royce engines which do NOT produce the characteristic black smoke trail. And brand-new electronics, radar systems, and targeting computers will make the B-52J the MOST ADVANCED bomber in the world, at least for another 20-25 years.

Presently, and for the next 5 years, most of the Buffs you will still see are the B-52H, as 2031 is the target date to convert the whole fleet to the "J" model.

The B1 bomber is also being updated. The new B1-B Lancer will again be fitted with "pods" to carry nuke cruise missiles. The B1-B will carry 36 cruise missiles, yes, more than the larger B52 can. The nuke pods were removed when the Air Force changed its primary mission to delivering conventional weapons, including the large bunker busters. They can still do that, but now the B1-B can carry an array of cruise missiles, both non-nuke warheads and nukes. We have 45 operational B1 bombers.

The B1-B is also getting new engines and electronic systems.

Election exit polling is fascinating:

1. 87 percent of voters want strong borders, but 6 in 10 thought the current administration had gone too far with deportations and held a negative view of ICE.

2. Roughly 13 percent of voters who identified themselves as republicans, voted for Democrats this election. Only 1 percent of Democrats voted for a Republican candidate

3. 57 percent of Americans trust Democrats more on cultural issues. Yet close to 80 percent of Republican related attack ads were attacking Democrats on cultural issues.

4. Democrats won the Under 30 age bracket by over 40 points.

5. 76 percent of voters are "Angry" about the current direction of the country. Health Care was a major issue. 6 in 10 voters prefer Democratic Health Care policies over that of the Trump Administration.

6. Candidate quality was a big issue. Democrats who won in Southern States largely came from Blue Collar recognizable jobs and had no real political experience. Many were republicans who changed parties within the last year. Meanwhile the GOP had some issues. The Ohio Rep who is under investigation for child abuse lost his seat. The Tennessee anti abortion hardliner who paid for his mistress to have a secret abortion, lost. The North Carolina Rep who got in hot water for misdirecting a letter complaining that a school was indoctrinating its kids to be communist to a 10 year-old, lost.

Voters do not see this election as a mandate to Democrats, but instead a rebellion against the political establishment. GOP can absolutely fix things and get a Red Wave in 2 years, if they can recognize where they went wrong and take steps to fix it. 70 percent of voters no longer trust either political party.

On the above...

it's amazing how many people are willfully ignorant. For instance, "the rich don't pay taxes." Wrong. The top 1% pays over 40% of ALL federal taxes collected. Another one, "large corporations don't pay taxes." Wrong. C-corps are the only legal entities that are doubly taxed.

"the country is moving in the wrong direction" Well, that would be true if you hate America and want to see it destroyed. For the rest of us, the country is moving in the right direction. For instance, this October was the best October in 57 years in terms of the economy. Real wages are now enjoying their largest increases (%) in 35 years. The costs of pharmaceuticals are down for the first time ever in all of US history!!! The border is currently secured.

I can summarize the whole matter this way: too many Americans are "willfully ignorant" and the GOP is so naive, so pathetic, so weak...and the other side, the dems and their allies in the media, are so evil, so determined to destroy this nation they cheat, steal, murder, intimidate, buy support, lie, and stop at nothing to gain/keep power. The two main political parties are playing different "games."

On the Iran matter...

Time to cut bait and leave, IMO. Iran knows they have their buddies/supporters in control in Congress and will simply wait for January to get a honey-of-a-deal for them. Obama will probably send them $billions again and a note of apology. Obama? Okay, some other dem, but the point is the same.

Russia and China are now openly thumbing their noses at Trump/the US in regard to Iran and are no longer trying to conceal their aid being shipped in, via the Caspian Sea, and flown in in large cargo planes. Even worse all of Iran's neighbors are begging for forgiveness and seeking to make deals with the Iranian regime to return to their previous "please don't hurt us, we'll gladly pay tribute to the Tehran government."

Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and the UAE are pulling back their military presence in Yemen basically surrendering to the Houthis/Iran. Europe refused to help in this war, I suppose knowing this is how it would all end up.

The plusses...

Not many. Iran has no navy, no air force to speak of and their entire military and its military infrastructure has been decimated. But already Russia, China, North Korea, and India are pledging to help rebuild the Iranian military. As for Iran's nukes and their development program, it too has been decimated. But China has openly pledged to help Iran rebuild that as well. All this operation has done is buy Israel and portions of the world about 3-5 years of not having to fear being nuked by the lunatics in Iran. When Iran gets nukes they will use them, first on Israel and probably also on other neighbors who dared to stand up to them.

The minuses...

Well, I just touched on them. Iran knows they are being protected by some powerful allies like Russia and China, and the Dem Party, and also know that Europe and other "western" nations like Japan and Australia will bow to the knee to appease them.

(Yesterday 08:29 AM)Tech80 Wrote:  On the above...

it's amazing how many people are willfully ignorant. For instance, "the rich don't pay taxes." Wrong. The top 1% pays over 40% of ALL federal taxes collected. Another one, "large corporations don't pay taxes." Wrong. C-corps are the only legal entities that are doubly taxed.

"the country is moving in the wrong direction" Well, that would be true if you hate America and want to see it destroyed. For the rest of us, the country is moving in the right direction. For instance, this October was the best October in 57 years in terms of the economy. Real wages are now enjoying their largest increases (%) in 35 years. The costs of pharmaceuticals are down for the first time ever in all of US history!!! The border is currently secured.

I can summarize the whole matter this way: too many Americans are "willfully ignorant" and the GOP is so naive, so pathetic, so weak...and the other side, the dems and their allies in the media, are so evil, so determined to destroy this nation they cheat, steal, murder, intimidate, buy support, lie, and stop at nothing to gain/keep power. The two main political parties are playing different "games."

The thing is, that viewpoint is very much in the minority if you surveyed Americans. Unless you think 76 percent of the country is evil or something. Polls for the last year have conistently shown that Americans feel the country is headed down the wrong path.

I'll ignore the nonsense about Democrats being evil and the media being evil. That doesn't help anything.

You can ignore whatever you wish, but the truth is the truth.