You're still refuting arguments I never made. In fact none that I ever saw made here.

I repeated in my response to you the exact argument I've been making. Which is that Trump and Trumpism put enormous pressure on things like the EU and NATO, so I've discussed it, but I never predicted that they would be gone by this point in Trump's term (that was the essence of your initial argument to me). As soon as I pointed that out, you twisted again, refuting an argument you constructed in your own head where I apparently claimed to never have discussed those things here. A very convenient, and very Trumpian, approach to debate.

That's another great aspect of Trump's populism - constantly moving the bar in a discussion. You do that very well. I frankly see a little of it in Liz, which bothers me. Biden attacked her for being impractical and a pie in the sky academic, to which she responded "powerful men have to stop telling women how to think!!". Taking on a line of attack never leveled against her, but one that will bring it's own version of "lock her up" mindlessness to her pep rallies. Maybe it will be something like "shut the sexist up!"

Trump is an opponent of the world order that has done so much to keep an unprecedented peace in the world for 70+ years. Only time will tell if an empowered 2nd term Trump can actually bring about its demise. I am not and never did predict that, but yes, I've discussed it, because it is at the core of my opposition to Trump. I expect that Warren would be a better partner on the world stage (Attila the Hun would be a better partner on the world stage) - I don't think she would travel to a country on official business while attacking their leadership on her Twitter feed, which all by itself would be a massive foreign policy improvement.