|
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 |
On November 03 2025 03:26 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2025 03:12 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 03 2025 02:55 micronesia wrote:
Hawaii trip had to be rescheduled to next year.
I'm all-in. If the GOP refuses to negotiate with the democrats, then they will have no government (slightly different than what you asked but same idea) until disasters start striking beyond what we've seen so far during this shutdown. And they will own it.
Easy for me to say since I'm not one of the first waves of feds (or other affected citizens) to starve as this drags on. I'm inclined to agree, but I just don't know about the "they [Republicans I presume] will own it" part. On one hand they are apparently getting a bit more of the blame than Democrats, but on the other hand, this is the most Democrats have basically ever been blamed. The share of voters who blame Democrats is the highest for the party when compared to other shutdowns or potential shutdowns measured in NBC News polling over the last 30 years.
Not to mention Democrats are basically stuck at their lowest favorability in memory with the shutdown fight not appreciably helping. Democrats are 25 points underwater, with just 28% of voters viewing the party positively, near a record-low positive rating of 27% in March. A majority of voters (53%) say they have a negative view of the Democratic Party.
Republicans have a net-negative rating of 9 points, with 46% viewing the party negatively and 37% viewing it positively.
And according to these results, Democrats’ shutdown standoff has not boosted views of the party within their own ranks. www.nbcnews.comIt is starting to seem like the US might just end up without a functional (in even the most rudimentary sense) legislative branch indefinitely. Is there anyone that believes maybe Democrats should take the "clean CR" and choose another hill to die on? Or does everyone agree that under no circumstances can Democrats be allowed to cave on this? If not the hill of healthcare for millions Americans, what other hill would they stand on?
I was partial to not giving control of the world's most dangerous military and nuclear arsenal to a hopelessly narcissistic megalomaniac dipshit insurrectionist, but yeah, making healthcare slightly less unaffordable is an important hill to die on too.
On November 03 2025 23:31 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2025 09:25 micronesia wrote:
What does "come to the table" mean in this context?
I'd think it's been Trump and the GOP who have been unwilling to "come to the table". I think you meant to say "capitulate". + Show Spoiler +Intro was in the thread a little while back arguing the shutdown was the Dems’ fault. I thought his argument was a little facile but whatever, the thread moved on and the shutdown blame game is a boring argument anyway. Besides, his people are busy over on National Review arguing about whether it’s okay to criticize Phyllis Schlafly, so maybe everybody has better things to do than chant “Schumer Shutdown” and “Trump Shutdown” at each other. I’m not sure how this can end though. I mean, never underrate the Democrats’ cowardice, so maybe they do capitulate at some point, but like… they bet their whole strategy here on the idea that fighting for those healthcare subsidies would be popular. I think that was a good bet, but even if it wasn’t, capitulating now and saying “well, sorry about all that, okay let’s open the government again” is a completely undefendable position. It’s hard to imagine a more damaging outcome for them, and they don’t have to choose it, so you’d hope they’d at least be savvy enough not to do that, right? + Show Spoiler +Meanwhile the Republicans probably could capitulate here and not face much consequence, but like… they don’t want to? Their whole theory of power at this point is that they should just do whatever they want until somebody actually has a way to stop them. And anyway, this shutdown is putting off some uncomfortable Epstein-related business in Congress. In theory they have to face that stuff eventually one way or another? But it’s not clear that’s how they actually think about it. Trump’s talking about killing the filibuster but that would be a big win for Democrats, so I doubt that happens.
DOGE and rescissions are hanging over all of this. The whole foundation of the budgetary process is that the parties will have a chance to negotiate for funding whatever is most important to them, and they’ll have to strike a deal sooner or later. But what value is there in making a deal for your highest priorities to get funded, if they can just turn around and refuse to honor the deal anyway?
So much of what Trump has done this year isn’t just bad, it fundamentally undermines the foundations of our government’s systems. I’m not sure what repairing those foundations even looks like at this point. I’m honestly not sure if the smart money is on the shutdown ending when air traffic controllers stop showing up to work, or if it’s on this thing continuing into 2026.
I think this is pretty obvious and many people don't really want to acknowledge Democrats have to take this all the way because they know there is a painfully high probability they are going to have to explain (even if only to themselves) how capitulating was actually Democrats making the right decision.
|
i find the lack of information coming from various government agencies has created a kind of fog of war effect. Outside of the shutdown many of Trump's policies and flip flops on issues have created huge uncertainty on many fronts.
P&C insurers are in a favourable market right now. I'm doing everything I can to help my P&C customers.
On November 03 2025 23:51 GreenHorizons wrote:
I was partial to not giving control of the world's most dangerous military and nuclear arsenal to a hopelessly narcissistic megalomaniac dipshit insurrectionist, but yeah, making healthcare slightly less unaffordable is an important hill to die on too.
ya, the problem is we've been hearing about the impending nuclear holocaust since 1951 and its never happened. So every one is numb to it.
here is 1983.
Here is 1951.
2 minutes in...
"just as we must get ready for a fire to burn down a building we must prepare for a new danger: the Atomic Bomb"
|
On November 03 2025 23:40 Gorsameth wrote:
For many Americans missing 1 paycheck is a big problem, how about missing 2? Can Trump conjure another check for the military out of a hat?
Its only a matter of time before the people literally revolt.
That is where this ends, when the Republican caucus betrays Trump to save their own hides, potentially literally.
Would you revolt ? I like my freedom.
If you threw cheeseburgers at him in protest he‘d just eat them.
Is having a different opinion still legal at least ?
|
On November 03 2025 23:40 Gorsameth wrote:
For many Americans missing 1 paycheck is a big problem, how about missing 2? Can Trump conjure another check for the military out of a hat?
Its only a matter of time before the people literally revolt.
That is where this ends, when the Republican caucus betrays Trump to save their own hides, potentially literally.
Obviously the juxtaposition of “we’re not funding SNAP because we don’t want to” with the ballroom, bathroom remodeling, Great Gatsby-themed party, etc. has a lot of “let them eat cake” vibes to it. Nothing foments revolt quite like mass starvation.
I’m almost tempted to suspect it’s intentional? I definitely think a lot of the invasions of blue cities were done partly in hopes of sparking some kind of rebellion they could crush. That would have been a smaller scale thing, though, something you could be confident in suppressing with force. 40 million Americans without SNAP and a military months without a paycheck seems like an insane danger to intentionally court.
Honestly, though, I’d still probably give the chances of something like that before end of year less than 50%. That’s just not really a mode Americans have. They could learn it but I think that’s not something that can happen in a few weeks.
|
i'm going with the 75 year trend and i'm predicting no nuclear holocaust. If I thought it was a real possibility I'd prolly move to some place around Edmonton Alberta Canada. But, it ain't happenin'. Squawking about it's possibility makes for good click bait though.
|
I had another fun interraction with my Trump loving co-worker from the USA, timeline:
- out of the blue, he brings up who is singing at the Superbowl
- he explains how the guy is not only NOT an American (I replied thinking that Puerto Rico is America) and how he hates America (to which I asked is he sure about that, what did he say exactly?)
- he moved on without answering those questions and asked me if I saw that "idiot running for mayor of NY"
- I said I did and that he seems like a nice young man with a cool beard
- this really pissed him off, he said that he's going to ruin the city and how all the rich people will leave so there is no way he can be a good mayor
- my comment was "but isn't that unfair, shouldn't everyone at least give him a chance, he seems popular"
- he retorted with "he's a communist" and I said "nope, I was born under communism and live under socialism and the things he's proposing in NY work pretty well under Socialism over here"
- yeah, he's popular with the illegals and people who my taxes are giving food and healthcare too
- I said that I'm pretty sure you need a social security number to get benefits
- the answer way "most of these people are leaches, they don't want to work they just want free stuff"
- then I googled the unemployment numbers in NY (under 5 %) and % of people who get SNAP but are still working (38%) which was met with "you don't know what you are talking about" and a short "let's pick this up later"
It's absolutely fascinating in what universe these folks live, he got super flustered, increasingly so every step of the way, and all I offered is the minimal resistance and bringing up of facts.
I can't even imagine if I tried to ask him if he's happy about Billionaires getting new tax breaks for buying new private jets and his taxes going to pay for that, I will never understand why are people so bothered by people who aren't rich getting something, anything for free when obscenely rich get so much more and they don't even blink.
|
Canada11465 Posts
On November 02 2025 22:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Bad negotiation tactic on Ford's part. It is a classic example of winning a theoretical debate with your negotiating partner and that theory win results in no deal being signed. So far, Mark Carney is a better diplomat than Doug Ford. Doug Ford's province has been falling apart since 2009 and he has done nothing to stem that tide. Ontario needs a genius level leader ... and Doug Ford ain't it. We can give Doug Ford the "Semanticist Of the Year Award". Personally, I want a leader who wins the "Economic Developer of the Year Award". Show nested quote +On November 02 2025 19:59 Acrofales wrote:
Trump really making his case for the Nobel Peace Prize. With the aircraft carrier still parked off the coast of Venezuela, we have this!
I wish C&C was at peak popularity. We'd get some quality memes. The AI art promptists could remove that bird's nest on top of Trump's head so he is as bald as Kane and screaming "Peace Through Power".
Well, Ford is decidedly not negotiating as that's federal.
I suspect he was trying to reach past Trump to his Republican base, hoping (naively) that there is still a sizable remnant of the party of Reagan. Naive, because I think that party is dead and buried (though maybe parts of it is still bunkered down, hoping for change) and now it's the politics of whatever Trump said that day is my party.
But we didn't lose anything. Trump flips so often, we were never getting a deal this year. 90 deals in 90 days? More like 0 in 180. He loves his tariffs, nobody loves the more. Something was going always going to flip him back to his default pro-tariffs position just like something always flips him back to his pro-Putin default. It just happened to be Ford this time.
|
Hey, I got a tale from the streets related to the illegal immigration crackdown.
I pay cash to a Mexican guy who is a very hard working electrical/plumbing/carpentry savant. Some of his Spanish friends are getting hired in a seemingly 100% legit way. Then, when it comes time to pay the customer says "i am not paying you're illegal".
All this is going to do is make cash under the table work more popular and increase the size of the underground economy while eroding any apparent on paper economic growth.
It is 1 thing to oppose illegal immigration. It is a whole other ball game to rip off blue collar hard working people.
Employers commit $15B in wage theft per year.
https://www.opportunityinstitute.org/blog/post/organized-retail-theft-wage-theft/
|
United States43758 Posts
On November 04 2025 02:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
It is a whole other ball game to rip off blue collar hard working people.
It is literally presidential behavior.
|
On November 04 2025 00:52 Jankisa wrote:I had another fun interraction with my Trump loving co-worker from the USA, timeline: + Show Spoiler +
- out of the blue, he brings up who is singing at the Superbowl
- he explains how the guy is not only NOT an American (I replied thinking that Puerto Rico is America) and how he hates America (to which I asked is he sure about that, what did he say exactly?)
- he moved on without answering those questions and asked me if I saw that "idiot running for mayor of NY"
- I said I did and that he seems like a nice young man with a cool beard
- this really pissed him off, he said that he's going to ruin the city and how all the rich people will leave so there is no way he can be a good mayor
- my comment was "but isn't that unfair, shouldn't everyone at least give him a chance, he seems popular"
- he retorted with "he's a communist" and I said "nope, I was born under communism and live under socialism and the things he's proposing in NY work pretty well under Socialism over here"
- yeah, he's popular with the illegals and people who my taxes are giving food and healthcare too
- I said that I'm pretty sure you need a social security number to get benefits
- the answer way "most of these people are leaches, they don't want to work they just want free stuff"
- then I googled the unemployment numbers in NY (under 5 %) and % of people who get SNAP but are still working (38%) which was met with "you don't know what you are talking about" and a short "let's pick this up later"
It's absolutely fascinating in what universe these folks live, he got super flustered, increasingly so every step of the way, and all I offered is the minimal resistance and bringing up of facts. I can't even imagine if I tried to ask him if he's happy about Billionaires getting new tax breaks for buying new private jets and his taxes going to pay for that, I will never understand why are people so bothered by people who aren't rich getting something, anything for free when obscenely rich get so much more and they don't even blink.
I think many of them ruminate and let the idea stew in their heads for a very long time and only have confirmation through self confirming into a ridiculous bias and then they get confronted with their ideas and obviously, they haven't thought of this and that and so and so, so it gets poked full of holes almost immediately. Their identity is attached to it (not just for right leaning folks btw), so they get angry. It's always sad to watch. I wonder how many of them have 3 or fewer friends.
|
On November 04 2025 02:14 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2025 02:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
It is a whole other ball game to rip off blue collar hard working people. It is literally presidential behavior.
he is going back to Mexico in a few months. It's sad man.. I've relied on him for over 10 years. It's sad that he can't legally become a US citizen. He says he'll come back once Trump is gone. I'll prolly have a pile of work waiting for him. The guy is more reliable than a sunrise.
it should be noted that he couldn't get US citizenship during the Obama or Biden tenures as Prez. How good are the Democrats at managing and building a solid immigration system? OR do both parties just want a constant supply of humans working hard in the USA who do not have full citizenship rights?
|
United States43758 Posts
On November 04 2025 02:32 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
it should be noted that he couldn't get US citizenship during the Obama or Biden tenures as Prez.
That is considered good policy. Path to legalization is incredibly unpopular politically.
|
This is literally the same illegal immigrant story the NYT used to report about ad nauseam during Trump #1:
Conservatives interviewed know Roberto the hard working line cook, say he’s the hardest working individual they know and a great guy, and that ICE should be targeting the bad hombres and not people like Roberto. Conservatives interviewed from the next town over say good riddance, Roberto was a criminal and a bad hombre who couldn’t get his green card legally because why else would he enter the country illegally.
The NYT tried to paint it as a story of a complicated and divided America but they were really just a story of Americans who have eroded their scope of the world so much that their interest starts and ends with people they personally know. Of course the customer isn’t going to pay, why would they? The business gave the customer a reason to not pay and that is exactly the thing this administration preaches as a right of every American so, again, why would they pay?
|
On November 04 2025 02:15 Uldridge wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2025 00:52 Jankisa wrote:I had another fun interraction with my Trump loving co-worker from the USA, timeline: + Show Spoiler +
- out of the blue, he brings up who is singing at the Superbowl
- he explains how the guy is not only NOT an American (I replied thinking that Puerto Rico is America) and how he hates America (to which I asked is he sure about that, what did he say exactly?)
- he moved on without answering those questions and asked me if I saw that "idiot running for mayor of NY"
- I said I did and that he seems like a nice young man with a cool beard
- this really pissed him off, he said that he's going to ruin the city and how all the rich people will leave so there is no way he can be a good mayor
- my comment was "but isn't that unfair, shouldn't everyone at least give him a chance, he seems popular"
- he retorted with "he's a communist" and I said "nope, I was born under communism and live under socialism and the things he's proposing in NY work pretty well under Socialism over here"
- yeah, he's popular with the illegals and people who my taxes are giving food and healthcare too
- I said that I'm pretty sure you need a social security number to get benefits
- the answer way "most of these people are leaches, they don't want to work they just want free stuff"
- then I googled the unemployment numbers in NY (under 5 %) and % of people who get SNAP but are still working (38%) which was met with "you don't know what you are talking about" and a short "let's pick this up later"
It's absolutely fascinating in what universe these folks live, he got super flustered, increasingly so every step of the way, and all I offered is the minimal resistance and bringing up of facts. I can't even imagine if I tried to ask him if he's happy about Billionaires getting new tax breaks for buying new private jets and his taxes going to pay for that, I will never understand why are people so bothered by people who aren't rich getting something, anything for free when obscenely rich get so much more and they don't even blink. I think many of them ruminate and let the idea stew in their heads for a very long time and only have confirmation through self confirming into a ridiculous bias and then they get confronted with their ideas and obviously, they haven't thought of this and that and so and so, so it gets poked full of holes almost immediately. Their identity is attached to it (not just for right leaning folks btw), so they get angry. It's always sad to watch. I wonder how many of them have 3 or fewer friends.
Yeah, this guy kind of seems lonely to me, a small town guy who just works, most people at work don't share his leanings, I'm pretty approachable so sometimes he goes off when we are chatting before a meeting.
The crazy part to me is how much he allows this shit to influence his life, my boss told me that he wouldn't come to Europe for a conference (good for me, I got a free trip to Amsterdam going instead of him) because "they hate Americans" over there.
When we talked about tariffs and such, he just doesn't get that all of this is imposed form the USA side, he started talking about "unfair trade barriers" and I immediately asked him did you not see that the first thing the EU countered with after Trump's moronic liberation day was "let's do 0-0, no one pays any tariffs" and that talking point was gone in an instant, replaced with "but it's not fair to our industry", how, I mean a huge VW factory is in Tennessee, why would you go after your allies.
That one also trailed off very quickly.
It's pretty crazy to me that otherwise nice, decent people get so insane over having to give an equivalent of $40 a year for SNAP and even less for welfare a year if they make $60 k +, and these are the people that upset you?
|
On November 03 2025 23:57 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2025 23:40 Gorsameth wrote:
For many Americans missing 1 paycheck is a big problem, how about missing 2? Can Trump conjure another check for the military out of a hat?
Its only a matter of time before the people literally revolt.
That is where this ends, when the Republican caucus betrays Trump to save their own hides, potentially literally. Obviously the juxtaposition of “we’re not funding SNAP because we don’t want to” with the ballroom, bathroom remodeling, Great Gatsby-themed party, etc. has a lot of “let them eat cake” vibes to it. Nothing foments revolt quite like mass starvation. I’m almost tempted to suspect it’s intentional? I definitely think a lot of the invasions of blue cities were done partly in hopes of sparking some kind of rebellion they could crush. That would have been a smaller scale thing, though, something you could be confident in suppressing with force. 40 million Americans without SNAP and a military months without a paycheck seems like an insane danger to intentionally court. Honestly, though, I’d still probably give the chances of something like that before end of year less than 50%. That’s just not really a mode Americans have. They could learn it but I think that’s not something that can happen in a few weeks.
I mean the Senate could at any time vote to allow a vote on the clean CR which would then pass, and includes SNAP. But also, whether legal or not, the administration has announced they will tap the USDA contingency fund to disburse SNAP benefits, which will cover not even a month's worth. There are limits to what the government can fund when Congress doesn't give them the money to fund it.
|
On November 04 2025 04:32 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2025 23:57 ChristianS wrote:On November 03 2025 23:40 Gorsameth wrote:
For many Americans missing 1 paycheck is a big problem, how about missing 2? Can Trump conjure another check for the military out of a hat?
Its only a matter of time before the people literally revolt.
That is where this ends, when the Republican caucus betrays Trump to save their own hides, potentially literally. Obviously the juxtaposition of “we’re not funding SNAP because we don’t want to” with the ballroom, bathroom remodeling, Great Gatsby-themed party, etc. has a lot of “let them eat cake” vibes to it. Nothing foments revolt quite like mass starvation. I’m almost tempted to suspect it’s intentional? I definitely think a lot of the invasions of blue cities were done partly in hopes of sparking some kind of rebellion they could crush. That would have been a smaller scale thing, though, something you could be confident in suppressing with force. 40 million Americans without SNAP and a military months without a paycheck seems like an insane danger to intentionally court. Honestly, though, I’d still probably give the chances of something like that before end of year less than 50%. That’s just not really a mode Americans have. They could learn it but I think that’s not something that can happen in a few weeks. I mean the Senate could at any time vote to allow a vote on the clean CR which would then pass, and includes SNAP. But also, whether legal or not, the administration has announced they will tap the USDA contingency fund to disburse SNAP benefits, which will cover not even a month's worth. There are limits to what the government can fund when Congress doesn't give them the money to fund it.
You're right the republicans can do that as they have the votes to pass it. They've already overruled the filbuster this year and could do it again if they felt like it.
There are limits to what congress can fund, but there are also suppose to be floors to it as well, which Trump has famously ignored.
|
On November 04 2025 04:32 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2025 23:57 ChristianS wrote:On November 03 2025 23:40 Gorsameth wrote:
For many Americans missing 1 paycheck is a big problem, how about missing 2? Can Trump conjure another check for the military out of a hat?
Its only a matter of time before the people literally revolt.
That is where this ends, when the Republican caucus betrays Trump to save their own hides, potentially literally. Obviously the juxtaposition of “we’re not funding SNAP because we don’t want to” with the ballroom, bathroom remodeling, Great Gatsby-themed party, etc. has a lot of “let them eat cake” vibes to it. Nothing foments revolt quite like mass starvation. I’m almost tempted to suspect it’s intentional? I definitely think a lot of the invasions of blue cities were done partly in hopes of sparking some kind of rebellion they could crush. That would have been a smaller scale thing, though, something you could be confident in suppressing with force. 40 million Americans without SNAP and a military months without a paycheck seems like an insane danger to intentionally court. Honestly, though, I’d still probably give the chances of something like that before end of year less than 50%. That’s just not really a mode Americans have. They could learn it but I think that’s not something that can happen in a few weeks. I mean the Senate could at any time vote to allow a vote on the clean CR which would then pass, and includes SNAP. But also, whether legal or not, the administration has announced they will tap the USDA contingency fund to disburse SNAP benefits, which will cover not even a month's worth. There are limits to what the government can fund when Congress doesn't give them the money to fund it.
Getting into what “clean CR” means in this context is the argument I was skipping with Intro, and I’ll skip it here if it’s all the same to you.
It’s interesting, though, how ICE and Trump’s ballroom keep funding, even though embassy workers or soldiers or SNAP do not. What’s going on there, do you think?
|
On November 04 2025 07:16 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2025 04:32 oBlade wrote:On November 03 2025 23:57 ChristianS wrote:On November 03 2025 23:40 Gorsameth wrote:
For many Americans missing 1 paycheck is a big problem, how about missing 2? Can Trump conjure another check for the military out of a hat?
Its only a matter of time before the people literally revolt.
That is where this ends, when the Republican caucus betrays Trump to save their own hides, potentially literally. Obviously the juxtaposition of “we’re not funding SNAP because we don’t want to” with the ballroom, bathroom remodeling, Great Gatsby-themed party, etc. has a lot of “let them eat cake” vibes to it. Nothing foments revolt quite like mass starvation. I’m almost tempted to suspect it’s intentional? I definitely think a lot of the invasions of blue cities were done partly in hopes of sparking some kind of rebellion they could crush. That would have been a smaller scale thing, though, something you could be confident in suppressing with force. 40 million Americans without SNAP and a military months without a paycheck seems like an insane danger to intentionally court. Honestly, though, I’d still probably give the chances of something like that before end of year less than 50%. That’s just not really a mode Americans have. They could learn it but I think that’s not something that can happen in a few weeks. I mean the Senate could at any time vote to allow a vote on the clean CR which would then pass, and includes SNAP. But also, whether legal or not, the administration has announced they will tap the USDA contingency fund to disburse SNAP benefits, which will cover not even a month's worth. There are limits to what the government can fund when Congress doesn't give them the money to fund it. Getting into what “clean CR” means in this context is the argument I was skipping with Intro, and I’ll skip it here if it’s all the same to you. It’s interesting, though, how ICE and Trump’s ballroom keep funding, even though embassy workers or soldiers or SNAP do not. What’s going on there, do you think?
Trumps paying for that with “gifts” that have many string attached. So it isn’t even being paid for by the government!
I’m just confused why with a balanced budget and trillions of dollars of DOGE savings they need to raise the debt ceiling at all. It’s almost as confusing as why illegals are even a problem when you have a giant wall perfectly designed to stop all illegal immigration paid for by Mexico.
|
On November 04 2025 07:25 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2025 07:16 ChristianS wrote:On November 04 2025 04:32 oBlade wrote:On November 03 2025 23:57 ChristianS wrote:On November 03 2025 23:40 Gorsameth wrote:
For many Americans missing 1 paycheck is a big problem, how about missing 2? Can Trump conjure another check for the military out of a hat?
Its only a matter of time before the people literally revolt.
That is where this ends, when the Republican caucus betrays Trump to save their own hides, potentially literally. Obviously the juxtaposition of “we’re not funding SNAP because we don’t want to” with the ballroom, bathroom remodeling, Great Gatsby-themed party, etc. has a lot of “let them eat cake” vibes to it. Nothing foments revolt quite like mass starvation. I’m almost tempted to suspect it’s intentional? I definitely think a lot of the invasions of blue cities were done partly in hopes of sparking some kind of rebellion they could crush. That would have been a smaller scale thing, though, something you could be confident in suppressing with force. 40 million Americans without SNAP and a military months without a paycheck seems like an insane danger to intentionally court. Honestly, though, I’d still probably give the chances of something like that before end of year less than 50%. That’s just not really a mode Americans have. They could learn it but I think that’s not something that can happen in a few weeks. I mean the Senate could at any time vote to allow a vote on the clean CR which would then pass, and includes SNAP. But also, whether legal or not, the administration has announced they will tap the USDA contingency fund to disburse SNAP benefits, which will cover not even a month's worth. There are limits to what the government can fund when Congress doesn't give them the money to fund it. Getting into what “clean CR” means in this context is the argument I was skipping with Intro, and I’ll skip it here if it’s all the same to you. It’s interesting, though, how ICE and Trump’s ballroom keep funding, even though embassy workers or soldiers or SNAP do not. What’s going on there, do you think? Trumps paying for that with “gifts” that have many string attached. So it isn’t even being paid for by the government! I’m just confused why with a balanced budget and trillions of dollars of DOGE savings they need to raise the debt ceiling at all. It’s almost as confusing as why illegals are even a problem when you have a giant wall perfectly designed to stop all illegal immigration paid for by Mexico.
Maybe because the currency is overvalued in relation to the debt ?
One can guess…
|
On November 04 2025 04:03 Hat Trick of Today wrote:
This is literally the same illegal immigrant story the NYT used to report about ad nauseam during Trump #1:
Conservatives interviewed know Roberto the hard working line cook, say he’s the hardest working individual they know and a great guy, and that ICE should be targeting the bad hombres and not people like Roberto. Conservatives interviewed from the next town over say good riddance, Roberto was a criminal and a bad hombre who couldn’t get his green card legally because why else would he enter the country illegally.
The NYT tried to paint it as a story of a complicated and divided America but they were really just a story of Americans who have eroded their scope of the world so much that their interest starts and ends with people they personally know. Of course the customer isn’t going to pay, why would they? The business gave the customer a reason to not pay and that is exactly the thing this administration preaches as a right of every American so, again, why would they pay?
Because the guy did a great job and you've got a lifetime of future work lined up for him. Also, you are asking for trouble when you renege on a cash deal. Have you ever tried to get basic stuff fixed around your house? Guys good at plumbing, electrical, and carpentry do not grow on trees. So, that's why I paid every cash deal I've made with the guy. It is a massive PITA constantly trying to find good new people.
The guy i know has been trying for many years to get citizenship. He is skilled and has options. My wife and I are going to try and help him apply to get Canadian citizenship. His construction contracting company employs 6 people. Because he has viable options he might reject going to Canada because of the cold weather. If he had zero options I'm sure he'd head north.
I am positive there are plenty of lousy, violent criminal illegal immigrants. I am also positive there are many very hard working super skilled immigrants who can make the country a better place to live. The key is to have a proper immigration system so that you only bring in the really good people. I will use an historical example because all the facts are easily verifiable. During the 1970s the Canadian immigration system did a nice job bringing in top quality people from Pakistan and India. I am positive there are plenty of scummy, violent psychotic criminals in both of those countries. These poor quality people never made it into Canada. WHo knows if they even wanted to freeze their ass off in Canada any way. Now, if you look at the low violent crime rates and solid income levels in cities in Canada that have tonnes of Pakistanis and East Indians it is clear these 1970s immigrants ended up being good for the country.
The key is not the individual immigrants. The key is to build and maintain a good immigration system.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
