You know, Trump is not that bad!

[Boss]

LMAO.... Just as I predicted... MAN, I am fucking brilliant sometimes!

 

[emilynghiem]

It will get worse. I predict that Trump will eventually bite the head off of a bat while on stage.

Funny Vandalshandle but he is too busy biting off heads off everyone else.
I don't think he will run out of people to do that, too, not with the media and journalists
he is chewing up and spitting out. He will even cannibalize allies on his own team!

 

[emilynghiem]

Look

I know I've said some bad things about Trump. Like his campaign is a joke, he can be childish, mildly racist and a total jerk to people. Oh, and a con artist

But, maybe, there is a good person and what we are seeing is a cover, a character that he made up to keep people from taking advantage of him. MaybeI had Trump wrong. Maybe he is not the shrewd manipulative bastard that threatens to send America off into a fiscal abyss by defaulting on the debt, but a visionary that will try anything to make America great. Maybe he does have plans to create jobs, increase production, improve schools and some feasible ideas on how to neutralize ISIS.

Lately, I have thought that I may have rush to a rash decision. Maybe I should reconsider voting for Trump.

So I ask others who made up their mind not to vote for Trump to reconsider the reasons why. If you think about it, there is no way he is as bad as the media protray him. Think about it.

You're right. Trump is not as bad as the media has portrayed him.

He's worse. Much, much worse.

This is a guy who ran one of those get-rich-quick scam operations which preyed on the elderly and stole their retirement nest eggs from them. He deliberately targeted old people to steal from. He is the sleaziest of the sleaze.

You know those telephone con artists who sweet talk lonely old people into giving them their credit card numbers and robbing them blind?

Trump is like that. Times ten to the tenth power.

And I am NOT speaking figuratively. Trump really did prey on the elderly and steal their nest eggs.

How is Hillary not as bad g5000
You are good at researched rebuttals:
Do you have responses to these arguments against Clinton:
1. making personal profits off the nonprofit foundation so it is more self-serving but credited as charity
2. purposely setting up and using the private server
to make millions in personal profits off state department foreign business dealings
^Can you help with these?^

I really think they both send the wrong message politically about how to get and use power.

Whoever is more unifying and about rewarding the working people
and reducing dependence on govt, by shifting power back to states and people,
that's the direction we need to go.

emilynghiem

You RWNJs always try to hide behind Hillary.

Why is it you never have the courage to stay on topic? Why are you always so afraid to just discuss Trumpery's trumpery?

Dear Luddly Neddite I am trying to compare both, and also the statements by both
supporters and attackers of both Clinton and Trump. This is all one conversation to me.

If people cannot answer for both sides, I want to see what they do have.

So far I have the argument that Clinton will appoint a biased court
but Trump's selections will balance the court. No matter what other things
are going on with these two in the media, what policy do they support for
our courts and interpreting laws? Is is rightwing leftwing or Constitutionalist?

I vote for Constitutionalist but may not get that out of these two.
So I am hoping to get those answers out of other people
researching this on BOTH sides Luddly Neddite

Including who has better lawyers and who pays to cover up what.
Let's look at everything. This tells me what people are doing and where they're going.

 

[protectionist]

Orlando was some disenfranchised loser trying to get on the bandwagon of ISIS. I don't believe for a minute it has anything to do with terrorism. Another mass murderer partially due to America's abnormal obsession with guns.

Are you deranged ? The guy was a long-time jihadist, coming from a family of jihadists. Doesn't matte rif he was ISIS or not. He was a jihad terrorist. There is no doubt about it. I can't believe some of the things people say in this forum. Sheeesh!!

 

[protectionist]

Trump Causes More Headaches for Republicans
June 13, 2016


The Lid: “Setting aside the impact that repeating his theories could have on his own electoral chances, Trump’s statements when it comes to national security could be the most consequential parts of his rhetoric when it comes to downballot races. For weeks or even months to come, Republican lawmakers will be asked by journalists and by their political opponents if they believe that Obama is somehow complicit in terror attacks. They’ll be peppered with questions about Trump’s suggestion that Obama should resign in the wake of the attack. They’ll face another round of inquiries about his proposed ban on Muslim immigration.”

“In press conferences, debates, and opposition research, Trump’s positions will be omnipresent for Republicans running for office at any level. If you’re a Republican in a contested race, it’s just about the last thing you probably want to spend the next 147 days doing.”

If you’re a Republican in a contested race, you better ditch the RINO bullshit, and get on the Trump train quick, or millions of Republican voters who voted for Trump, are going to ditch YOU in a hurry.

Who do you think just got the most Republican VOTES of any Republican in history ? Jeb Bush ?

 

[emilynghiem]

Orlando was some disenfranchised loser trying to get on the bandwagon of ISIS. I don't believe for a minute it has anything to do with terrorism. Another mass murderer partially due to America's abnormal obsession with guns.

Are you deranged ? The guy was a long-time jihadist, coming from a family of jihadists. Doesn't matte rif he was ISIS or not. He was a jihad terrorist. There is no doubt about it. I can't believe some of the things people say in this forum. Sheeesh!!

I hope the man's father, wife/ex wife and family receive support
to heal and unite on a higher plan and purpose to overcome these ills.

So many people suffering in their homelands.
I hope they embrace and find the solutions to these ills,
and that is what will prevail from this tragic killings.

 

[protectionist]

Amrchaos,

Most people vote for a guy and hope he is not lying, you are considering voting for a guy cause he might be lying...

Apart from Trump's litany of reasons has said with his own mouth during the campaign for not voting for him, there is also his history... The Trump University is not a flash in the pan, this is the trail of destruction he has left behind him worldwide...

Trump is just a very poor candidate, he is exceptionally weak individual who has grasped US obsession for Conflict TV. If you think about it, he has poor support in his own party...

You are a naive sucker. The Trump U controversy is not a controversy at all. 99% of Trump U customers have not complained one iota. Trump "poor candidate" ? He just racked up the highest # of primary votes of any Republican in history. You are living in a little bubble conjured up for you, by liberal media (that includes RINOs)

 

[emilynghiem]

Trump Causes More Headaches for Republicans
June 13, 2016


The Lid: “Setting aside the impact that repeating his theories could have on his own electoral chances, Trump’s statements when it comes to national security could be the most consequential parts of his rhetoric when it comes to downballot races. For weeks or even months to come, Republican lawmakers will be asked by journalists and by their political opponents if they believe that Obama is somehow complicit in terror attacks. They’ll be peppered with questions about Trump’s suggestion that Obama should resign in the wake of the attack. They’ll face another round of inquiries about his proposed ban on Muslim immigration.”

“In press conferences, debates, and opposition research, Trump’s positions will be omnipresent for Republicans running for office at any level. If you’re a Republican in a contested race, it’s just about the last thing you probably want to spend the next 147 days doing.”

If you’re a Republican in a contested race, you better ditch the RINO bullshit, and get on the Trump train quick, or millions of Republican voters who voted for Trump, are going to ditch YOU in a hurry.

Who do you think just got the most Republican VOTES of any Republican in history ? Jeb Bush ?

Dear protectionist I can't seem to get anywhere trying to unite Conservatives divided over Trump.
The Trump backers tend to bite people's heads off and won't listen any better than he does.

How can we get unity around the Constitution?
Around core principles that embrace and include
where our differences have the freedom to diverge sharply.

Why this business of having backbite and boot each other in the butts? What the heck?
How can we cast out the fear and division, and see clearly how to unite on positive visions and goals?

 

[protectionist]

I hope the man's father, wife/ex wife and family receive support
to heal and unite on a higher plan and purpose to overcome these ills.

So many people suffering in their homelands.
I hope they embrace and find the solutions to these ills,
and that is what will prevail from this tragic killings.

I'm not sure, but I think his father is where he got his radicalism from.

 

[protectionist]

Dear protectionist I can't seem to get anywhere trying to unite Conservatives divided over Trump.
The Trump backers tend to bite people's heads off and won't listen any better than he does.

How can we get unity around the Constitution?
Around core principles that embrace and include
where our differences have the freedom to diverge sharply.

Why this business of having backbite and boot each other in the butts? What the heck?
How can we cast out the fear and division, and see clearly how to unite on positive visions and goals?

Depends on the visions. Too many RINOs (Ryan, McConnell, Graham, etc) are uniting with Democrats, which is the party where they really belong.

 

[emilynghiem]

Dear protectionist I can't seem to get anywhere trying to unite Conservatives divided over Trump.
The Trump backers tend to bite people's heads off and won't listen any better than he does.

How can we get unity around the Constitution?
Around core principles that embrace and include
where our differences have the freedom to diverge sharply.

Why this business of having backbite and boot each other in the butts? What the heck?
How can we cast out the fear and division, and see clearly how to unite on positive visions and goals?

Depends on the visions. Too many RINOs (Ryan, McConnell, Graham, etc) are uniting with Democrats, which is the party where they really belong.

Who is left to enforce unity around the Constitution?
protectionist
Do we need to give lessons to Trump and his supporters and see if they can do better
than Obama voters on this concept?

 

[candycorn]

If people cannot answer for both sides, I want to see what they do have.

So far I have the argument that Clinton will appoint a biased court
but Trump's selections will balance the court. No matter what other things
are going on with these two in the media, what policy do they support for
our courts and interpreting laws? Is is rightwing leftwing or Constitutionalist?

I vote for Constitutionalist but may not get that out of these two.
So I am hoping to get those answers out of other people
researching this on BOTH sides

Including who has better lawyers and who pays to cover up what.
Let's look at everything. This tells me what people are doing and where they're going.

Your choice of counsel is your own. I prefer using my own two eyes and my two ears.

There is no doubt that HRC is a flawed candidate for President. I would invite anyone to spend 30 years in the famous “white hot spot light” and emerge 100% in tact. I can only think of a few persons who have done this. Dolly Parton, Meryl Streep, Jimmy Stewart, and possibly Gregory Peck and you’ll note that two of those people were from a different era of media coverage. And you’ll note that much of the stuff about HRC is conjecture about Vince Foster, the CGI getting funds for favors she did as SoS, etc… There is zero meat to the Vince Foster episode and the CGI stuff stops at conjecture. Numerous investigations about Benghazi have turned up nothing. Her e-mail server was a mistake that she would do differently. She regrets the Iraq invasion vote. And she will make more mistakes if she is elected President (real and imagined).

But here is the thing.

She has 8 years as FLOTUS
She has been elected to the Senate twice by the people of NY
She was SoS for 4 years.

And the first word out of her opponent’s mouths are “Those aren’t accomplishments” Well, they are (ask anyone who gets elected or, if you want to have more fun, ask the person who they beat to get elected!!!!). I guess what the haters are talking about is some sort of signature accomplishment like the Marshall Plan or the Camp David Accords or opening China up like Kissinger did. When you have a President who isn’t sending troops all over the map or isn’t embroiled in a true international crisis, the State Department isn’t a place that lends itself to signature accomplishments. What did Jim Baker ever accomplish at the job? Or Cyrus Vance. Or the dozens of other anonymous people to hold the job. Powell didn’t do anything except tarnish his otherwise stellar legacy at the UN and Condi Rice did even less although she was probably the best suited person for the job when she took it. And these were Secretaries of State during true international crises.

As for Senatorial exceptionalism, the concept almost doesn’t exist. Especially given that she served when there was a republican President and the GOP was in control of the Senate for much of her terms.

That is the case for Ms. Clinton based on her professional resume. It stands alone as one of the strongest of anyone to seek the position; as strong as anyone’s since Bush 41 sought the Presidency. He had been in Congress, the UN, at CIA and VP…superior to Ms. Clinton in my view. Sorry Barack.

Based on her personal temperament held up to her opponent, there is no choice. She has had moments she wishes she could have back in 30 years in the spotlight; no doubt. But, TTBOMK, she has never:

• Banned a news paper’s reporters as Mr. Trump has done this week (Donald Trump just barred Washington Post reporters from campaign events. That should bother you.). This isn’t speculation or liberal spin. It is a fact.
• Insinuated that a female moderator/reporter was on her period as Mr. Trump did. On August 8, he was quoted on CNN and reported the federalist.com as follows:
  • “You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes,” Trump continued, “blood coming out of her whatever.”In my opinion, she was off-base,” he concluded. “She’s a lightweight. I couldn’t care less about her.”There were actually 3 moderators present at the debate. He didn’t make any comment about the other two male reporters Trump: Megyn Kelly Had "Blood Coming Out Of Her Whatever"
• Disgustingly mocked a man with a birth defect as Mr. Trump did around Thanksgiving last year. Here is a video of his doing it:

Can you imagine Ms. Clinton partaking in any such behavior? Really?

There is no choice for anyone who examines the two candidates side by side. Hillary all the way.

 

[amrchaos]

If people cannot answer for both sides, I want to see what they do have.

So far I have the argument that Clinton will appoint a biased court
but Trump's selections will balance the court. No matter what other things
are going on with these two in the media, what policy do they support for
our courts and interpreting laws? Is is rightwing leftwing or Constitutionalist?

I vote for Constitutionalist but may not get that out of these two.
So I am hoping to get those answers out of other people
researching this on BOTH sides

Including who has better lawyers and who pays to cover up what.
Let's look at everything. This tells me what people are doing and where they're going.

Your choice of counsel is your own. I prefer using my own two eyes and my two ears.

There is no doubt that HRC is a flawed candidate for President. I would invite anyone to spend 30 years in the famous “white hot spot light” and emerge 100% in tact. I can only think of a few persons who have done this. Dolly Parton, Meryl Streep, Jimmy Stewart, and possibly Gregory Peck and you’ll note that two of those people were from a different era of media coverage. And you’ll note that much of the stuff about HRC is conjecture about Vince Foster, the CGI getting funds for favors she did as SoS, etc… There is zero meat to the Vince Foster episode and the CGI stuff stops at conjecture. Numerous investigations about Benghazi have turned up nothing. Her e-mail server was a mistake that she would do differently. She regrets the Iraq invasion vote. And she will make more mistakes if she is elected President (real and imagined).

But here is the thing.

She has 8 years as FLOTUS
She has been elected to the Senate twice by the people of NY
She was SoS for 4 years.

And the first word out of her opponent’s mouths are “Those aren’t accomplishments” Well, they are (ask anyone who gets elected or, if you want to have more fun, ask the person who they beat to get elected!!!!). I guess what the haters are talking about is some sort of signature accomplishment like the Marshall Plan or the Camp David Accords or opening China up like Kissinger did. When you have a President who isn’t sending troops all over the map or isn’t embroiled in a true international crisis, the State Department isn’t a place that lends itself to signature accomplishments. What did Jim Baker ever accomplish at the job? Or Cyrus Vance. Or the dozens of other anonymous people to hold the job. Powell didn’t do anything except tarnish his otherwise stellar legacy at the UN and Condi Rice did even less although she was probably the best suited person for the job when she took it. And these were Secretaries of State during true international crises.

As for Senatorial exceptionalism, the concept almost doesn’t exist. Especially given that she served when there was a republican President and the GOP was in control of the Senate for much of her terms.

That is the case for Ms. Clinton based on her professional resume. It stands alone as one of the strongest of anyone to seek the position; as strong as anyone’s since Bush 41 sought the Presidency. He had been in Congress, the UN, at CIA and VP…superior to Ms. Clinton in my view. Sorry Barack.

Based on her personal temperament held up to her opponent, there is no choice. She has had moments she wishes she could have back in 30 years in the spotlight; no doubt. But, TTBOMK, she has never:

• Banned a news paper’s reporters as Mr. Trump has done this week (Donald Trump just barred Washington Post reporters from campaign events. That should bother you.). This isn’t speculation or liberal spin. It is a fact.
• Insinuated that a female moderator/reporter was on her period as Mr. Trump did. On August 8, he was quoted on CNN and reported the federalist.com as follows:
  • “You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes,” Trump continued, “blood coming out of her whatever.”In my opinion, she was off-base,” he concluded. “She’s a lightweight. I couldn’t care less about her.”There were actually 3 moderators present at the debate. He didn’t make any comment about the other two male reporters Trump: Megyn Kelly Had "Blood Coming Out Of Her Whatever"
• Disgustingly mocked a man with a birth defect as Mr. Trump did around Thanksgiving last year. Here is a video of his doing it:

Can you imagine Ms. Clinton partaking in any such behavior? Really?

There is no choice for anyone who examines the two candidates side by side. Hillary all the way.

But Candycorn

You are judging Trump by a few character flaws. Is it not possible that he could still make a great leader despite those flaws? Millions of Republicans think so, why not you?

 

[bendog]

Look

I know I've said some bad things about Trump. Like his campaign is a joke, he can be childish, mildly racist and a total jerk to people. Oh, and a con artist

But, maybe, there is a good person and what we are seeing is a cover, a character that he made up to keep people from taking advantage of him. MaybeI had Trump wrong. Maybe he is not the shrewd manipulative bastard that threatens to send America off into a fiscal abyss by defaulting on the debt, but a visionary that will try anything to make America great. Maybe he does have plans to create jobs, increase production, improve schools and some feasible ideas on how to neutralize ISIS.

Lately, I have thought that I may have rush to a rash decision. Maybe I should reconsider voting for Trump.

So I ask others who made up their mind not to vote for Trump to reconsider the reasons why. If you think about it, there is no way he is as bad as the media protray him. Think about it.

The drugs you get with a colonoscopy are not that bad either. The ten hours of constant shitting is a bitch though.

 

[Wilbur Right]

Is it not possible that he could still make a great leader despite those flaws? Millions of Republicans think so, why not you?

It is possible I could win the lottery. But would you want to bet the farm on it? No.
Same with Trump. Long odds. To long of odds for me.

 

[candycorn]

If people cannot answer for both sides, I want to see what they do have.

So far I have the argument that Clinton will appoint a biased court
but Trump's selections will balance the court. No matter what other things
are going on with these two in the media, what policy do they support for
our courts and interpreting laws? Is is rightwing leftwing or Constitutionalist?

I vote for Constitutionalist but may not get that out of these two.
So I am hoping to get those answers out of other people
researching this on BOTH sides

Including who has better lawyers and who pays to cover up what.
Let's look at everything. This tells me what people are doing and where they're going.

Your choice of counsel is your own. I prefer using my own two eyes and my two ears.

There is no doubt that HRC is a flawed candidate for President. I would invite anyone to spend 30 years in the famous “white hot spot light” and emerge 100% in tact. I can only think of a few persons who have done this. Dolly Parton, Meryl Streep, Jimmy Stewart, and possibly Gregory Peck and you’ll note that two of those people were from a different era of media coverage. And you’ll note that much of the stuff about HRC is conjecture about Vince Foster, the CGI getting funds for favors she did as SoS, etc… There is zero meat to the Vince Foster episode and the CGI stuff stops at conjecture. Numerous investigations about Benghazi have turned up nothing. Her e-mail server was a mistake that she would do differently. She regrets the Iraq invasion vote. And she will make more mistakes if she is elected President (real and imagined).

But here is the thing.

She has 8 years as FLOTUS
She has been elected to the Senate twice by the people of NY
She was SoS for 4 years.

And the first word out of her opponent’s mouths are “Those aren’t accomplishments” Well, they are (ask anyone who gets elected or, if you want to have more fun, ask the person who they beat to get elected!!!!). I guess what the haters are talking about is some sort of signature accomplishment like the Marshall Plan or the Camp David Accords or opening China up like Kissinger did. When you have a President who isn’t sending troops all over the map or isn’t embroiled in a true international crisis, the State Department isn’t a place that lends itself to signature accomplishments. What did Jim Baker ever accomplish at the job? Or Cyrus Vance. Or the dozens of other anonymous people to hold the job. Powell didn’t do anything except tarnish his otherwise stellar legacy at the UN and Condi Rice did even less although she was probably the best suited person for the job when she took it. And these were Secretaries of State during true international crises.

As for Senatorial exceptionalism, the concept almost doesn’t exist. Especially given that she served when there was a republican President and the GOP was in control of the Senate for much of her terms.

That is the case for Ms. Clinton based on her professional resume. It stands alone as one of the strongest of anyone to seek the position; as strong as anyone’s since Bush 41 sought the Presidency. He had been in Congress, the UN, at CIA and VP…superior to Ms. Clinton in my view. Sorry Barack.

Based on her personal temperament held up to her opponent, there is no choice. She has had moments she wishes she could have back in 30 years in the spotlight; no doubt. But, TTBOMK, she has never:

• Banned a news paper’s reporters as Mr. Trump has done this week (Donald Trump just barred Washington Post reporters from campaign events. That should bother you.). This isn’t speculation or liberal spin. It is a fact.
• Insinuated that a female moderator/reporter was on her period as Mr. Trump did. On August 8, he was quoted on CNN and reported the federalist.com as follows:
  • “You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes,” Trump continued, “blood coming out of her whatever.”In my opinion, she was off-base,” he concluded. “She’s a lightweight. I couldn’t care less about her.”There were actually 3 moderators present at the debate. He didn’t make any comment about the other two male reporters Trump: Megyn Kelly Had "Blood Coming Out Of Her Whatever"
• Disgustingly mocked a man with a birth defect as Mr. Trump did around Thanksgiving last year. Here is a video of his doing it:

Can you imagine Ms. Clinton partaking in any such behavior? Really?

There is no choice for anyone who examines the two candidates side by side. Hillary all the way.

But Candycorn

You are judging Trump by a few character flaws. Is it not possible that he could still make a great leader despite those flaws? Millions of Republicans think so, why not you?

Would you agree that some “character flaws” disqualify you from some activities? You want to know what happened after he was called onto the carpet for mocking the man with a birth defect. First he lied and said he had never met him. Next, he, Mr. Trump, demanded that people should apologize to him—Mr. Trump for suggesting he was mocking him. So he thinks he did nothing wrong. The thing is that in the ensuing 8 months or whatever it has been…he has repeated the gesture where he wasn’t mocking anyone 0.00 times. So first he lies about not knowing him, then he demands an apology, and after that, he certainly indicates that he knows he did something that was at least controversial.

And the last issue is the “big” thing in my book. First he did the disgusting act of mocking a man with a birth defect. Then he went through the fishworm of once you’re hooked, you flip and flop and see if you can get free. Once you realize you’re on the hook…most people give up. Not this small fraction of a man…. He just kind of lets it die. Which is fine for internal matters where there is no demonstrable behavior otherwise where they cannot be seen. The fact that he hasn’t done it, mixed with the fact that his “the WWE is real” backers love it when he behaves like Randy Savage or Kevin Nash means that Mr. Trump knows exactly what he did, knows it is just about the most disgusting thing he could do with his pants up, and rightly stopped it.

The issue is two fold as CiC. After insulting the PM of Germany or the King of Jordan or US Poet Laureate…the “walk back” will be silence. Secondly, the insult that would take place because this doofus cannot help himself.

——————

It swings further to judgment. Divulging the private phone number of his opponent; mocking Christianity with jokes about the Bible being his favorite book and not knowing the colloquial pronunciation of 2 Corinthians… The childish name calling of “Lying Ted” “Pocahontas” “Crooked Hillary”….

I can go on….

You want that guy sending your kids into the middle east to “Kick ISIS’s Ass”?

 

[Boss]

Would you agree that some “character flaws” disqualify you from some activities?

Yeah.... like the "character flaw" of lying about a video when you know something was a coordinated terror attack you were warned about... just because you need to CYA. OR... the "character flaw" of ignoring federal espionage laws against transferring sensitive classified material over unsecured electronic devices to your illegal private servers then repeatedly lying about it to CYA. OR... the "character flaw" of claiming you're a feminist while running on the coattails of your misogynist husband who's "bimbos" you helped to destroy.

Hillary is basically qualified for activities in the Day Area of the local prison.

 

[candycorn]

Would you agree that some “character flaws” disqualify you from some activities?

Yeah.... like the "character flaw" of lying about a video when you know something was a coordinated terror attack you were warned about... just because you need to CYA. OR... the "character flaw" of ignoring federal espionage laws against transferring sensitive classified material over unsecured electronic devices to your illegal private servers then repeatedly lying about it to CYA. OR... the "character flaw" of claiming you're a feminist while running on the coattails of your misogynist husband who's "bimbos" you helped to destroy.

Hillary is basically qualified for activities in the Day Area of the local prison.

 

[Wilbur Right]

Yeah.... like the "character flaw" of lying about a video when you know something was a coordinated terror attack you were warned about... just because you need to CYA. OR... the "character flaw" of ignoring federal espionage laws against transferring sensitive classified material over unsecured electronic devices to your private servers then repeatedly lying about it to CYA. OR... the "character flaw" of claiming you're a feminist while running on the coattails of your misogynist husband who's "bimbos" you helped to destroy.

Man bossy, if only you could PROVE all the happy horseshit you believe.

 

[Wilbur Right]

Bossy even if everything you said about Hillary is true, so fucking what. Republicans are offering trump. End of story. Hillary will be president. Tell your doctor he needs to up your meds.