Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!

NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.

Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.

If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread

GreenHorizons

United States22624 Posts

5 hours ago

#95501

On February 19 2025 02:58 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:

Show nested quote +

And that's my cue to disengage from discussing anything further with you. I tried but I'm tired of the same shit you puke any time someone engages with you.

I just pointed out why she didn't push him out earlier and how if she finally pushes him out now (as every day she waits is pretty inexplicable) it doesn't really help her with the problems that prevented her from doing it months ago.

It also doesn't really help Democrats as they're just going to replace him with someone that's a creep, also going to collaborate with Trump on immigration, and also corrupt. Not to mention the doors it opens for Trump loyalists to take advantage of similar powers elsewhere.

It's not me you're effectively refusing to engage with, it's the disconnect between the political rhetoric you and other lib/Dems/ilk use/believe and the reality around you.

EnDeR_

Spain2533 Posts

2 hours ago

#95502

On February 19 2025 03:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote:

Show nested quote +

I do not think I have ever stated Trump is making America "so great". I think Trump is on a path towards improving the every day lives of every day, average working people in America. We will know in a couple of years if all these moves he is making are working.

I think America was "great" for hard working average people from about 1950 to about 1973. Things levelled off from 1973 until about 2008. Since about 2008, the country has been on a very slow decline. If Trump can bring things up to the levels for 1973-2008 I'll be super impressed. However, I'd just like to see some improvement rather than a continued slow decline.

I think getting criminals out of sanctuary cities is a good move. I think renegotiating the USMCA will improve things for Americans.

Canada and Mexico must pay for their own military defence. Both countries can start to build their military now. Alternatively, they could just make straight up cash payments to the USA for its military services. Another solution is to surrender an % ownership stake in their natural resources and oil reserves. It is 100% reasonable for the USA to make specific material demands of these countries due to the costs she burdens in defending all of NA. Trump has done a nice job in this area.

Canada and Mexico having to pay a much greater share of GDP on military defense will mean they'll have to spend less in other areas. If this harms the quality of life of Canadians and Mexicans.. so be it. Part of the burden of nationhood is military defence. Both countries have been living in this bizarre Utopia where they do not need to allocate resources to their respective military.

Defending against whom?

Billyboy

433 Posts

1 hour ago

#95503

I find it concerning that this statement is being made

“Barron Trump represents the future of the conservative movement, and we would be honored to have him join College Republicans of America,” CRA President Will Donahue said.

I guess just having the last name makes you the future of the conservative movement. Big cheer for nepotism (or monarchy?).

Acrofales

Spain17805 Posts

36 minutes ago

#95504

On February 19 2025 06:29 EnDeR_ wrote:

Show nested quote +

Defending against whom?

Canada, in fairness, needs to protect a rather large stretch of Arctic ocean that basically borders on Russia. Mexico, though... I mean, what? I understand the cartels are a problem, but expecting Mexico to do the brunt of the work there when their entire raison d'etre is supplying the enormous demand for drugs from the USA is a bit upside down. Deal with the opioid crisis with functioning programs to help the victims. Also fix your pharma industry and oversight so you don't have Purdue peddling heroin to absolutely everyone again. Not by sending the army after the supply. That hasn't worked so far, ever. You'd think that after the last 30+ years of the War on Drugs, you'd have learned that for every supplier you crack down on, 5 new ones spring up. And when it isn't Mexico it'll be somewhere else. As long as the market is there...