It's a good profile. Interesting photo and you filled in all the info. The text blurb describes you, but nothing seems to grab attention.

The photo is interesting because it's black & white and high contrast. Filtered? It bugs me that you're not smiling or looking into the camera, but since you're 6' tall, I guess looking up to you is the view the ladies will have to get used to, right? And the monochrome filter is odd, too. For better results, maybe get more photos, with one or more where you're looking into the camera when taking the shot. Smiling would make you more approachable. Maybe get a shot or two of yourself in an interesting place. A beach or an event sounds good!

The text blurb describes a busy, lonely life, and while that may be true, you could fix it a bit. Maybe aim for a "I want to go out you could come along" sentiment. I think emphasize the fun and also maybe add something to describe what kind of woman you seek. Do you have a "type?" That would be good to know. If not, and you're really open to anything, then it's probably fine, as is.

The headline you chose is weird, too. "Hello, how's your day been?" is a salutation. Better could be "Hi, let's go catch a show!" or something like that? Have fun with it.

Anyway, it's still a good profile as is. You seem like a good-looking guy and the ladies will probably understand what you mean anyway. But for the profile that is good but could be better, I rate it 7/10.

Good luck!

Nice photo, but from your selection of "intimate encounter" and no further information beyond age/sex/location, you seem to say "no strings attached" and "let's keep this anonymous." It's also a huge red flag. There may be women around who are looking for an anonymous one-night-stand, but most will probably want to know what they're getting into and whom they're getting with. I'm not a woman, but from what I've heard from my sisters and lady friends, I think they'll see this profile as sketchy.

You do you, I guess, but it would be better if you took the time to explain yourself and fill in the biographical information at least, and for better results, write up a neat headline and text blurb to attract the ladies--show them you've got something going on and make you more interesting and desirable.

Those still aren't crimes, even if Biden did all that. And he didn't. Immigrants may enter the country, but the laws don't allow Biden to lock them out. Biden asked Congress to send him a bill to sign to let him close the borders and Trump had Republicans kill it. Current laws require the US to allow immigrants to apply for asylum.

Russia and China aren't gaining more power--they're both currently under sanctions, and Russia is mired in a war with Ukraine (don't know how you missed that), losing $trillions in economic expansion and lost business. China is currently in an economic crisis, too, with its real estate sector collapsing, and they're in population decline. If China is bullying our adversaries, then that's a good thing. The US is supporting our allies in the region, though.

Babies aren't killed in abortions. Those are embryos or possibly fetuses; not babies, and that's not up to the President to decide, but between the mother and her doctor. Too often, women with serious medical complications are stuck with a pregnancy that can kill them and doctors are afraid to provide abortion services in fear for their licenses or practices or impending legal trouble. By the time they can get the help they need, they're left sterile from it. But none of that affects your "good life."

As to "allowed attacks on Christian’s and ignores the crime committed by his followers" I don't know what you mean. We have laws, and if people are guilty of crimes, they should be charged. Unless by "attack" you mean some words that hurt some Christian's feelings? The 1st Amendment wouldn't let Biden stop that, but maybe you can explain what you meant.

Again: Those aren't crimes. Not in the US, at least. Maybe after November's election, we'll have Democratic majorities and can get the border and abortion laws fixed.

So Special Counsel Robert Hur just wasn't paying attention? And neither were the Chairmen James Comer and Jim Jordan? That was kind of their job, but OK. Got it.

OK, it's not up to you to prove. That is the prosecutor's job. And if trump has any evidence that Biden is guilty of anything, why is he keeping it secret? It's just wishful thinking that Biden is guilty of anything. If you think anybody is in the dark, then show the evidence, but insisting Biden is guilty because "you know" makes you look stupid--especially when you can't even name the crime committed.

It doesn't matter that "American people" are angry. Prosecuting crimes is not dependent on popularity. The laws are in place so that justice is served. No need to check the popular opinion before having Trump pay his bills or serve his time if convicted. Rich white men should not automatically get to do crimes and your love for Trump doesn't make him innocent. Maybe petition the government to make it legal to commit the acts for which he's being charged, or just let Trump prove he's innocent in court.

I'm sorry if these facts hurt, but blaming Biden or the Democrats overall is wrong. This mess is Trump's fault. He's the criminal.

Hah, yeah, the Congressional Republicans already tried that lie. There's no evidence Biden committed any such crimes. So good luck with that.

The point is to offer constructive criticism, and it's not like he was hit in the face with a shovel or anything. And some people could use reassurance that they're not ugly. Why would I need to insult anybody?

It's a pretty good profile. It makes you seem somewhat wild and energetic, and the text rambles a bit. Maybe you could clean it up a bit. Add some white space--break it into paragraphs.

The photos are mostly clear and show your face well. They also seem to be from different time periods, where you main photo seems to be an old photo that you like, and it's difficult to place the others--they look so different. Almost like they're sisters.

So, it seems that you have an interesting personality and a disjointed writing style, but you clearly put work into your profile, but reading through that is a bit hard to follow. Maybe I'd TOTALLY get it if I were Canadian and that much into lacrosse, but alas, for the weird/jumbled blurb and the odd collection of photos, I'd only rate it 8/10.

Good luck!

"The American people" is not a link. I'm an American person and I can see this trial isn't political. Are you trying to say that lying on a loan application is a Republican thing, and prosecuting civil fraud is unfair to Republicans? Good luck with that.

It's also hilarious that Trump is so criminal that you cannot keep the cases straight. Here's a quick list:

1. The New York civil fraud case, filed by DA Tish James, was presided by Judge Arthur Engoron. I don't know about his daughter, but the ruling says Trump owes over $450 million with interest, and your "most experts"/"American people" have yet to identify grounds for appeal, and it's way too late to get the judge to recuse himself.

2. The falsified business records case ("hush money" to porn star) brought by DA Alvin Bragg, starts this month, and is presided by Judge Juan Merchan. The judge's daughter, Lauren Merchan runs a digital media consulting firm, which has worked for Democratic campaigns. And to answer your question, Judge Merchan probably didn't recuse himself because there's no need--he doesn't work for his daughter.

3. The election racketeering case in Georgia is being presided by Judge Scott McAfee, and brought by DA Fani Willis. No word on Judge McAfee's family, but that is a big, complicated case and will likely take a long time, despite several of the defendants already taking plea deals--agreeing to testify against Trump as needed.

4. The classified documents case in Florida is being presided by Judge Aileen Cannon, and brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith. Judge Cannon was appointed by Trump to her position, and several of her orders apparently misstate the relevant laws or show ignorance of the federal court rules. She might get replaced, but she seems to be doing what she can to help Trump delay the trial until after the elections.

People that think these trials are political aren't paying attention. Each of the cases came with indictments from grand juries. Not simply charged by politicians.

Unless by "experts" you mean the commenters on the Conservative blogs you follow, I doubt that. Most opinions I've read confirm that appeals are difficult and citing the political views of the DA aren't sufficient. Tish James brought a carefully documented case and witnesses to court. Trump had no defense. It was such an obvious case that the judge granted a default judgement. Even the notion that there were no victims isn't enough. First the law doesn't require the prosecution to find a victim, and second, the state's witness testified that banks lost out on hundreds of $million in interest Trump would've otherwise paid. And besides, it's fraud. Saying you can't charge because nobody was hurt is like saying people can drive drunk as long as they don't get into an accident. Trump will lose his appeal.

Anyway, I only searched the web for a while to see if I could find any "experts" who agreed with you, and had no luck. Got a link?

I don't really care that Trump's bond was reduced to $175 million. He's still responsible for the full $454 million plus interest when he loses his appeal.

The valuation of Truth Social was ridiculous. That network/app only has a tiny fraction of the regular users of any of the competing social networks, and Devin Nunez never even had a solid plan to make a profit. Maybe they were hoping once the merger became final, conservatives and sponsors would magically flock to it, and that's just not how it works.

In the short-term, share price could be misleading. Most stocks drop in price after IPO. Facebook famously fell to half it's IPO price in the first month, and that stock is a few thousand percent higher now. Maybe Truth Social changes its ways for the better and DJT (the stock) finds stability. We'll see.

It's a start. You filled in the biographical stats, and posted some clear photos, but you left the text blurb and your profession empty.

I like that the photos do a good job of showing your face and you're looking into the camera lens. Lots of people should copy your camera angle. You could've dressed up a bit and smiling couldn't hurt--it'd make you look that much more approachable.

The text blurb area is where you tell us about you and what you're looking for. Are you easy-going or a really demanding kind of guy? Are you looking for a local woman, or even open to something less conventional? You can also describe your interests.
There's no rational limit to that space, so have fun with it, but keeping it brief or at least easy and fun to read would be great.

Anyway, you seem like a good-looking young man, and lots of women don't even read the text, so you'll probably do alright. But for the profile missing the occupation and text blurb with photos that almost look accidental (even if clear and well-lit), I'd rate it only 5/10.

Good luck!

No, the defects in the Constitution are their inability to predict Trump could be such a criminal. No Democratic president ever needed to pardon himself.

Also, "transgender invisibility day" is not a thing. "International Transgender Day of Visibility" was set as March 31 over ten years go. The White House is still hosting the annual Easter Egg Roll and related festivities on the South Lawn from 7AM to 7PM. The ITDV just got a proclamation. I, for one, am sorry for all the people with such fragile sensibilities that transgender people upset them so much.

Yes, Apple makes $billions because they make products that people want to buy. Samsung too.

I have worked in the computer software industry for years, and can confirm that just because the government is suing to stop anticompetitive activities, doesn't mean the products are bad or that consumers are totally getting hurt. It's a complicated situation, but in general, Apple is using their dominant position in the market to force things onto developers and even onto consumers who may not know better, or even care. The bottom line is that they're breaking the law, and you can't put a corporation in jail, so they have to sue.

This is delusional. Under Biden we have the healthiest economy in the free world. Unemployment is lower and the stock market is higher than at any time during the Trump Administration. Trump cozied up with dictators because they said nice things to him, and literally shared classified information with them--even kicking out all his staff when meeting the Russians in the Oval Office. Domestically, he hired family and friends, or TV pundits to work in his administration, and fired them if they dared put the country over Trump.

I will say that Trump was brilliant from one point of view. He's exposed the defects in our Constitution. Before him, we never thought a President could, or would ever need, to pardon himself. Before Trump, nobody ever wondered whether a President could commit crimes with total immunity, and what if the president's political party holds a majority in one of the chambers of Congress, can he do whatever he likes? It's sickening, but now possible that our next president could be a convicted felon and get away with selling national defense secrets, because he claims he declassified them when the cheque cleared.

You're right. I mixed up the Republican rage of the week. Biden didn't say the exact right thing to avoid yet more Republican rage, that incidentally makes no actual difference to 99% of the population.

Statistics are important, and I guarantee you that the next Republican president will parade all the statistics that make them look better, too. So an immigrant killed a woman in Georgia and statistics remind us how rare that is. The US could spend all our time and money on immigrant-on-citizen violence, or we could better spend it on other things because that rarely happens. Violent crime is trending lower overall, too.

Do you think the family of Laken Riley would feel better if she was killed by a "good old boy" from her neighborhood? No. They're just hurt and looking for anybody to blame.

Biden did not apologize to the immigrant who killed a police officer. He only apologized for using the incorrect and racially charged term "illegal." Also the family of the slain officer are rabid conservatives and did not invite Biden to appear at the wake. I don't know all the details of the crime, but even if Biden supports giving immigrants a chance, and some go on to commit crimes, the statistics still show that immigrants are less criminal on average than full US citizens, despite what your favorite conservative bloggers apparently tell you.

Biden's done a good job. Despite Republican majorities in the House & Senate, he's passed over a $trillion in investments into the national infrastructure as well as programs to return manufacturing--especially semiconductor fabrication back to the US. Science education. How about the $35 cap on insulin? That's just off the top of my head.

But this next election will really just be about Biden vs. Trump. What has Trump done as President?