LOL! Of course. Arminius was an apologist for monergism for much of his Christian life. Even after parting ways with Augustinian monergism, he remained an unequivocal advocate of what we now call "total depravity." He remained at least a one-pointer

. He also continued to subscribe to Protestant Theology pertaining to the nature of God, the Reformation Protestant view of Christ, most of the monergistic view of the covenant(s), and held qualified views of at least two other points in TULIP. He could easily be called a one and two halves pointer

.
The problem discussing soteriology, as I believe I have already noted, is that many Baptists are no longer Arminian. Many Baptists have moved toward the Pelagian end of the spectrum and now hold Traditionalist or Provisionist soteriologies. Augustinian monergism is not identical to Lutheran monergism and neither are identical to Calvinist monergism. On the extreme end strict determinism is a gross misrepresentation of Calvinism just as completely unfettered free will is a gross misrepresentation of Arminianism. Arminius was Augustinian. Wesleyanism is not the same as Arminianism, and Traditionalism is not identical to either of those two viewpoints, and Provisionism isn't identical, either.
Sadly, these differences are not taught to the average Christian and, as a result, there are a lot of ill-informed Christians on both sides of the divide and many Christians who think they are Arminian when they are not. There are also some Baptists who incorrectly think (water) baptism is salvifically causa when it is not. Because we live in an age when information is readily available, church history is not difficult to find and learn and it is not written by persecutors.