|
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 January 22 2026 05:00 hitthat wrote:
Congratulation Denmark, you won. Alas, this time Trump averts the fate of looking like loser, because US most likely will get some military and economic concessions.
I give it a maximum of 6 months until we're doing this dance again
|
On January 22 2026 05:59 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2026 05:00 hitthat wrote:
Congratulation Denmark, you won. Alas, this time Trump averts the fate of looking like loser, because US most likely will get some military and economic concessions. I give it a maximum of 6 months until we're doing this dance again
Another distraction from the Epstein files will be needed much sooner. More than 1 week of global media attention for this sharade.
|
On January 22 2026 05:35 Gorsameth wrote:
But what has Rutte ever achieved...
(sorry I couldn't help myself)
I don't know what Rutte achieves, but Stoltenberg was definitely more professional in his role. The way Macron and Rutte play theatrics around Trump is hard to watch.
|
On January 22 2026 03:31 Jankisa wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2026 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 22 2026 02:10 Jankisa wrote:On January 22 2026 01:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 22 2026 00:58 LightSpectra wrote:On January 22 2026 00:20 Mohdoo wrote:
Jeffries and Schumer have made it clear they fully intend to simply function as controlled opposition. People who say this never seem to have a very good justification, other than "they seem weak" (an image cultivated by both Republicans in general and Democrats who want to replace them) and "they don't do anything" (which is how the Constitution works when you don't have control over any branch of government). The example at hand would be them folding to Trump on the last shutdown. Since then, Kwark, On January 15 2026 01:24 KwarK wrote:On January 15 2026 00:38 GreenHorizons wrote:Democrats are trying to figure out what they can/should do WASHINGTON — Democrats are wrestling with whether to use a key Jan. 30 deadline to demand constraints on President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown after an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer shot and killed an American woman in Minneapolis.
Progressives in the House and Senate are calling on their party to hold firm in opposition to a funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security unless it comes with conditions — such as requiring agents to wear identification, limiting Customs and Border Protection agents to the border and requiring judicial warrants to arrest suspects in immigration cases.
They say Trump is using autocratic tactics by deploying masked agents in cities to intimidate Americans who don’t support him.
www.nbcnews.comPoll: Should Democrats shutdown the government over ICE?You must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ No
☐ Yes
☐ I don't know
Why or why not? Only if they keep it shut, and that's the problem with their failed shutdown earlier. A shutdown is a nuclear option, it's brinksmanship, it's trying to convince the other side that you want it more and that you're willing to burn together rather than giving in. + Show Spoiler +It's a game theory strategy. Because it hurts both sides it is negative sum, the optimal strategy is for one side to give in before it even starts, the moment the threat is made whichever side believes that they're eventually going to give in should just immediately forfeit the competition. That way they make whatever concession they'd eventually have had to make anyway but without taking the damage of the mutually destructive showdown.
The problem is that you don't know ahead of time whether your side is the side that is going to eventually give in. If you're 5 days from your tipping point but you believe that the other side is only 4 days from their tipping point then rationally you endure just a little bit longer because it'll be worthwhile when you eventually win. Plus all the damage already done is a sunk cost, each additional day you hold out you're only paying a single day of damage, you can't recoup all the damage you've already taken by giving in. That makes it incredibly difficult to surrender if you can convince yourself that the other side is on the verge of giving in.
And that's the crux of the issue the Democrats have now, they lack credibility due to the scabs crossing the line on the previous shutdown. Every day the Republican leadership are going to go to their members and say "we know they're going to break first, it's probably going to be today or tomorrow, let's pay one more day to cross the finish line". Meanwhile the Democrats are going to have to go to their members and say "I know it hurts and we get deeper in the hole with each passing day and you're probably asking yourself why we're paying such a high price when we're just going to give up anyway but if we can just convince the Republicans that this time we won't do that thing that they just saw us do then they'll rationally give in so yeah, we're on the verge of winning". It's why you don't engage in brinksmanship only to back down. You lose all credibility and even if you subsequently find a hill you're willing to die on you can't convince the other side that this time you mean it so you end up dying on the hill anyway. Jankisa, and others have made the point that them doing so makes materially supporting the fascists murdering people in the streets (ICE, not Israel, in this case) a "necessary evil" for Democrats and their supporters. Oh, boy, GH, that's just so, so, not true. What I said is that doing a shutdown fight now, after they fucked up the last one is dumb and won't accomplish anything. You can't be resentful at people for living in a real world, I mean, what am I talking about, that's your whole shtick, but, you know, for your mental health I'd advise against it. + Show Spoiler +Jimmy "the economy expert" not hearing about Davos until 2026 is either another piece of evidence in a long string of them proving he doesn't know shit about shit, or that he's being full of shit for the sake of "trolling". I clicked on a random timestamp at the BBC live stream and the orange fucktard described an imaginary conversation between him and a pollster who explained if Lincoln and Washington came back they wouldn't be able to beat him. So, in order to address both what Jimmy wrote and Trump verbally shat out: “What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.” I don't see what any of you are disagreeing with? Just personal insults about mental illness. EDIT: and of course Kwark's typical bad faith petulant shitposting + Show Spoiler +On January 22 2026 02:42 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2026 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 22 2026 02:10 Jankisa wrote:On January 22 2026 01:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 22 2026 00:58 LightSpectra wrote:On January 22 2026 00:20 Mohdoo wrote:
Jeffries and Schumer have made it clear they fully intend to simply function as controlled opposition. People who say this never seem to have a very good justification, other than "they seem weak" (an image cultivated by both Republicans in general and Democrats who want to replace them) and "they don't do anything" (which is how the Constitution works when you don't have control over any branch of government). The example at hand would be them folding to Trump on the last shutdown. Since then, Kwark, On January 15 2026 01:24 KwarK wrote:On January 15 2026 00:38 GreenHorizons wrote:Democrats are trying to figure out what they can/should do WASHINGTON — Democrats are wrestling with whether to use a key Jan. 30 deadline to demand constraints on President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown after an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer shot and killed an American woman in Minneapolis.
Progressives in the House and Senate are calling on their party to hold firm in opposition to a funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security unless it comes with conditions — such as requiring agents to wear identification, limiting Customs and Border Protection agents to the border and requiring judicial warrants to arrest suspects in immigration cases.
They say Trump is using autocratic tactics by deploying masked agents in cities to intimidate Americans who don’t support him.
www.nbcnews.comPoll: Should Democrats shutdown the government over ICE?You must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ No
☐ Yes
☐ I don't know
Why or why not? Only if they keep it shut, and that's the problem with their failed shutdown earlier. A shutdown is a nuclear option, it's brinksmanship, it's trying to convince the other side that you want it more and that you're willing to burn together rather than giving in. + Show Spoiler +It's a game theory strategy. Because it hurts both sides it is negative sum, the optimal strategy is for one side to give in before it even starts, the moment the threat is made whichever side believes that they're eventually going to give in should just immediately forfeit the competition. That way they make whatever concession they'd eventually have had to make anyway but without taking the damage of the mutually destructive showdown.
The problem is that you don't know ahead of time whether your side is the side that is going to eventually give in. If you're 5 days from your tipping point but you believe that the other side is only 4 days from their tipping point then rationally you endure just a little bit longer because it'll be worthwhile when you eventually win. Plus all the damage already done is a sunk cost, each additional day you hold out you're only paying a single day of damage, you can't recoup all the damage you've already taken by giving in. That makes it incredibly difficult to surrender if you can convince yourself that the other side is on the verge of giving in.
And that's the crux of the issue the Democrats have now, they lack credibility due to the scabs crossing the line on the previous shutdown. Every day the Republican leadership are going to go to their members and say "we know they're going to break first, it's probably going to be today or tomorrow, let's pay one more day to cross the finish line". Meanwhile the Democrats are going to have to go to their members and say "I know it hurts and we get deeper in the hole with each passing day and you're probably asking yourself why we're paying such a high price when we're just going to give up anyway but if we can just convince the Republicans that this time we won't do that thing that they just saw us do then they'll rationally give in so yeah, we're on the verge of winning". It's why you don't engage in brinksmanship only to back down. You lose all credibility and even if you subsequently find a hill you're willing to die on you can't convince the other side that this time you mean it so you end up dying on the hill anyway. Jankisa, and others have made the point that them doing so makes materially supporting the fascists murdering people in the streets (ICE, not Israel, in this case) a "necessary evil" for Democrats and their supporters. Oh, boy, GH, that's just so, so, not true. What I said is that doing a shutdown fight now, after they fucked up the last one is dumb and won't accomplish anything. You can't be resentful at people for living in a real world, I mean, what am I talking about, that's your whole shtick, but, you know, for your mental health I'd advise against it. + Show Spoiler +Jimmy "the economy expert" not hearing about Davos until 2026 is either another piece of evidence in a long string of them proving he doesn't know shit about shit, or that he's being full of shit for the sake of "trolling". I clicked on a random timestamp at the BBC live stream and the orange fucktard described an imaginary conversation between him and a pollster who explained if Lincoln and Washington came back they wouldn't be able to beat him. So, in order to address both what Jimmy wrote and Trump verbally shat out: “What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.” I don't see what any of you are disagreeing with? Just personal insults about mental illness. “play your roles properly, it’s breaking my immersion” I'm very clearly disagreeing with your misconstrued framing of what I say, and I didn't personally insult you, I just told you that a change in attitude might be beneficial for your mental health, because the way you are engaging here is clearly a sign of someone detached from reality. Okay, that's what I thought.
None of you are disagreeing with the reality/fact that Democrats failure on the last shutdown makes a shutdown over materially supporting Trump's fascist gestapo ICE [1] functionally impossible. Though, to be clear, "Progressives" are actually only ostensibly "demanding" requiring agents to wear identification, limiting Customs and Border Protection agents to the border and requiring judicial warrants to arrest suspects in immigration cases. in exchange for their support/vote preventing a shutdown. Democrats can't even get away with only that much appeasement to the fascists.
Many of you understandably don't like seeing that written out and emotionally lash out at me/accuse me of things like being "detached from reality" for pointing it out. I wish that wasn't the political reality we're all witnessing, but it is, regardless of how we feel about it or each other.
[1] https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/democrats-push-fight-dhs-funds-ice-shooting-minneapolis-rcna253799
|
On January 22 2026 05:59 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2026 05:00 hitthat wrote:
Congratulation Denmark, you won. Alas, this time Trump averts the fate of looking like loser, because US most likely will get some military and economic concessions. I give it a maximum of 6 months until we're doing this dance again
I see that you still haven't grasped the rhythm of the bullshit. One month tops. 6 months is way too long for the man childs attention span. In 2-4 weeks he will once again remember that he wants Greenland, and start some new bullshit.
Or he needs some distraction from Epstein again. 6 months is way beyond the horizon of this "government" actions. Once Trump has some shit engraved in his mind, he comes back to it at any opportunity. And apparently Greenland is there.
|
Donald Trump has won again! Another victory for the greatest leader in the history of leaders and the history of greatness!
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/21/trump-greenland-tariffs-nato-00739429
Trump is going to get some mineral and resource guarantees along with a restatement of what already exists. LOL. I said that at the start. If Trump is the greatest of all American leaders (other than Vince Lombardi) i guess I'm the Kreskin of Nostradamouses...meh.
Trump did win in getting so many NATO countries to spend 5% of GDP on military. THat was a while ago though. Its always good to double and triple count your wins i guess?
They're popping champagne over at Fox News 
|
On January 22 2026 05:00 hitthat wrote:
Congratulation Denmark, you won. Alas, this time Trump averts the fate of looking like loser, because US most likely will get some military and economic concessions.
The only way he doesn't look like a loser is if you're literally rooting for him to profit from the insider trading.
|
United States43483 Posts
On January 22 2026 06:52 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Donald Trump has won again! Another victory for the greatest leader in the history of leaders and the history of greatness! https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/21/trump-greenland-tariffs-nato-00739429Trump is going to get some mineral and resource guarantees along with a restatement of what already exists. LOL. I said that at the start. If Trump is the greatest of all American leaders (other than Vince Lombardi) i guess I'm the Kreskin of Nostradamouses...meh. Trump did win in getting so many NATO countries to spend 5% of GDP on military. THat was a while ago though. Its always good to double and triple count your wins i guess? They're popping champagne over at Fox News
The greatest American victory since Vietnam.
|
On January 22 2026 06:52 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Donald Trump has won again! Another victory for the greatest leader in the history of leaders and the history of greatness! https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/21/trump-greenland-tariffs-nato-00739429Trump is going to get some mineral and resource guarantees along with a restatement of what already exists. LOL. I said that at the start. If Trump is the greatest of all American leaders (other than Vince Lombardi) i guess I'm the Kreskin of Nostradamouses...meh. Trump did win in getting so many NATO countries to spend 5% of GDP on military. THat was a while ago though. Its always good to double and triple count your wins i guess?They're popping champagne over at Fox News
How? By siding with Russia? Such a great victory. Win Putin's favor and lose all your allies.
Didn't you vote for this dumbfuck?
|
On January 22 2026 07:09 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2026 06:52 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Donald Trump has won again! Another victory for the greatest leader in the history of leaders and the history of greatness! https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/21/trump-greenland-tariffs-nato-00739429Trump is going to get some mineral and resource guarantees along with a restatement of what already exists. LOL. I said that at the start. If Trump is the greatest of all American leaders (other than Vince Lombardi) i guess I'm the Kreskin of Nostradamouses...meh. Trump did win in getting so many NATO countries to spend 5% of GDP on military. THat was a while ago though. Its always good to double and triple count your wins i guess? They're popping champagne over at Fox News The greatest American victory since Vietnam.
He nailed this post with the same accuracy he had in naming Canada's top 3 sports.
On January 22 2026 06:22 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2026 03:31 Jankisa wrote:On January 22 2026 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 22 2026 02:10 Jankisa wrote:On January 22 2026 01:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 22 2026 00:58 LightSpectra wrote:On January 22 2026 00:20 Mohdoo wrote:
Jeffries and Schumer have made it clear they fully intend to simply function as controlled opposition. People who say this never seem to have a very good justification, other than "they seem weak" (an image cultivated by both Republicans in general and Democrats who want to replace them) and "they don't do anything" (which is how the Constitution works when you don't have control over any branch of government). The example at hand would be them folding to Trump on the last shutdown. Since then, Kwark, On January 15 2026 01:24 KwarK wrote:On January 15 2026 00:38 GreenHorizons wrote:Democrats are trying to figure out what they can/should do WASHINGTON — Democrats are wrestling with whether to use a key Jan. 30 deadline to demand constraints on President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown after an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer shot and killed an American woman in Minneapolis.
Progressives in the House and Senate are calling on their party to hold firm in opposition to a funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security unless it comes with conditions — such as requiring agents to wear identification, limiting Customs and Border Protection agents to the border and requiring judicial warrants to arrest suspects in immigration cases.
They say Trump is using autocratic tactics by deploying masked agents in cities to intimidate Americans who don’t support him.
www.nbcnews.comPoll: Should Democrats shutdown the government over ICE?You must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ No
☐ Yes
☐ I don't know
Why or why not? Only if they keep it shut, and that's the problem with their failed shutdown earlier. A shutdown is a nuclear option, it's brinksmanship, it's trying to convince the other side that you want it more and that you're willing to burn together rather than giving in. + Show Spoiler +It's a game theory strategy. Because it hurts both sides it is negative sum, the optimal strategy is for one side to give in before it even starts, the moment the threat is made whichever side believes that they're eventually going to give in should just immediately forfeit the competition. That way they make whatever concession they'd eventually have had to make anyway but without taking the damage of the mutually destructive showdown.
The problem is that you don't know ahead of time whether your side is the side that is going to eventually give in. If you're 5 days from your tipping point but you believe that the other side is only 4 days from their tipping point then rationally you endure just a little bit longer because it'll be worthwhile when you eventually win. Plus all the damage already done is a sunk cost, each additional day you hold out you're only paying a single day of damage, you can't recoup all the damage you've already taken by giving in. That makes it incredibly difficult to surrender if you can convince yourself that the other side is on the verge of giving in.
And that's the crux of the issue the Democrats have now, they lack credibility due to the scabs crossing the line on the previous shutdown. Every day the Republican leadership are going to go to their members and say "we know they're going to break first, it's probably going to be today or tomorrow, let's pay one more day to cross the finish line". Meanwhile the Democrats are going to have to go to their members and say "I know it hurts and we get deeper in the hole with each passing day and you're probably asking yourself why we're paying such a high price when we're just going to give up anyway but if we can just convince the Republicans that this time we won't do that thing that they just saw us do then they'll rationally give in so yeah, we're on the verge of winning". It's why you don't engage in brinksmanship only to back down. You lose all credibility and even if you subsequently find a hill you're willing to die on you can't convince the other side that this time you mean it so you end up dying on the hill anyway. Jankisa, and others have made the point that them doing so makes materially supporting the fascists murdering people in the streets (ICE, not Israel, in this case) a "necessary evil" for Democrats and their supporters. Oh, boy, GH, that's just so, so, not true. What I said is that doing a shutdown fight now, after they fucked up the last one is dumb and won't accomplish anything. You can't be resentful at people for living in a real world, I mean, what am I talking about, that's your whole shtick, but, you know, for your mental health I'd advise against it. + Show Spoiler +Jimmy "the economy expert" not hearing about Davos until 2026 is either another piece of evidence in a long string of them proving he doesn't know shit about shit, or that he's being full of shit for the sake of "trolling". I clicked on a random timestamp at the BBC live stream and the orange fucktard described an imaginary conversation between him and a pollster who explained if Lincoln and Washington came back they wouldn't be able to beat him. So, in order to address both what Jimmy wrote and Trump verbally shat out: “What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.” I don't see what any of you are disagreeing with? Just personal insults about mental illness. EDIT: and of course Kwark's typical bad faith petulant shitposting + Show Spoiler +On January 22 2026 02:42 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2026 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 22 2026 02:10 Jankisa wrote:On January 22 2026 01:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 22 2026 00:58 LightSpectra wrote:On January 22 2026 00:20 Mohdoo wrote:
Jeffries and Schumer have made it clear they fully intend to simply function as controlled opposition. People who say this never seem to have a very good justification, other than "they seem weak" (an image cultivated by both Republicans in general and Democrats who want to replace them) and "they don't do anything" (which is how the Constitution works when you don't have control over any branch of government). The example at hand would be them folding to Trump on the last shutdown. Since then, Kwark, On January 15 2026 01:24 KwarK wrote:On January 15 2026 00:38 GreenHorizons wrote:Democrats are trying to figure out what they can/should do WASHINGTON — Democrats are wrestling with whether to use a key Jan. 30 deadline to demand constraints on President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown after an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer shot and killed an American woman in Minneapolis.
Progressives in the House and Senate are calling on their party to hold firm in opposition to a funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security unless it comes with conditions — such as requiring agents to wear identification, limiting Customs and Border Protection agents to the border and requiring judicial warrants to arrest suspects in immigration cases.
They say Trump is using autocratic tactics by deploying masked agents in cities to intimidate Americans who don’t support him.
www.nbcnews.comPoll: Should Democrats shutdown the government over ICE?You must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ No
☐ Yes
☐ I don't know
Why or why not? Only if they keep it shut, and that's the problem with their failed shutdown earlier. A shutdown is a nuclear option, it's brinksmanship, it's trying to convince the other side that you want it more and that you're willing to burn together rather than giving in. + Show Spoiler +It's a game theory strategy. Because it hurts both sides it is negative sum, the optimal strategy is for one side to give in before it even starts, the moment the threat is made whichever side believes that they're eventually going to give in should just immediately forfeit the competition. That way they make whatever concession they'd eventually have had to make anyway but without taking the damage of the mutually destructive showdown.
The problem is that you don't know ahead of time whether your side is the side that is going to eventually give in. If you're 5 days from your tipping point but you believe that the other side is only 4 days from their tipping point then rationally you endure just a little bit longer because it'll be worthwhile when you eventually win. Plus all the damage already done is a sunk cost, each additional day you hold out you're only paying a single day of damage, you can't recoup all the damage you've already taken by giving in. That makes it incredibly difficult to surrender if you can convince yourself that the other side is on the verge of giving in.
And that's the crux of the issue the Democrats have now, they lack credibility due to the scabs crossing the line on the previous shutdown. Every day the Republican leadership are going to go to their members and say "we know they're going to break first, it's probably going to be today or tomorrow, let's pay one more day to cross the finish line". Meanwhile the Democrats are going to have to go to their members and say "I know it hurts and we get deeper in the hole with each passing day and you're probably asking yourself why we're paying such a high price when we're just going to give up anyway but if we can just convince the Republicans that this time we won't do that thing that they just saw us do then they'll rationally give in so yeah, we're on the verge of winning". It's why you don't engage in brinksmanship only to back down. You lose all credibility and even if you subsequently find a hill you're willing to die on you can't convince the other side that this time you mean it so you end up dying on the hill anyway. Jankisa, and others have made the point that them doing so makes materially supporting the fascists murdering people in the streets (ICE, not Israel, in this case) a "necessary evil" for Democrats and their supporters. Oh, boy, GH, that's just so, so, not true. What I said is that doing a shutdown fight now, after they fucked up the last one is dumb and won't accomplish anything. You can't be resentful at people for living in a real world, I mean, what am I talking about, that's your whole shtick, but, you know, for your mental health I'd advise against it. + Show Spoiler +Jimmy "the economy expert" not hearing about Davos until 2026 is either another piece of evidence in a long string of them proving he doesn't know shit about shit, or that he's being full of shit for the sake of "trolling". I clicked on a random timestamp at the BBC live stream and the orange fucktard described an imaginary conversation between him and a pollster who explained if Lincoln and Washington came back they wouldn't be able to beat him. So, in order to address both what Jimmy wrote and Trump verbally shat out: “What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.” I don't see what any of you are disagreeing with? Just personal insults about mental illness. “play your roles properly, it’s breaking my immersion” I'm very clearly disagreeing with your misconstrued framing of what I say, and I didn't personally insult you, I just told you that a change in attitude might be beneficial for your mental health, because the way you are engaging here is clearly a sign of someone detached from reality. Okay, that's what I thought. None of you are disagreeing with the reality/fact that Democrats failure on the last shutdown makes a shutdown over materially supporting Trump's fascist gestapo ICE [1] functionally impossible. Though, to be clear, "Progressives" are actually only ostensibly "demanding" Show nested quote +requiring agents to wear identification, limiting Customs and Border Protection agents to the border and requiring judicial warrants to arrest suspects in immigration cases. in exchange for their support/vote preventing a shutdown. Democrats can't even get away with only that much appeasement to the fascists. Many of you understandably don't like seeing that written out and emotionally lash out at me/accuse me of things like being "detached from reality" for pointing it out. I wish that wasn't the political reality we're all witnessing, but it is, regardless of how we feel about it or each other. [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/democrats-push-fight-dhs-funds-ice-shooting-minneapolis-rcna253799
People lash out at you because you are very unpleasant to them. And it gets very annoying for people when you are on repeat.
Change it up and talk about more effective ways to combat this fascism. Maybe name some groups that have had more success then the Democrats. Or maybe name some countries that are doing a good job and how they are doing. Any variety would go a long way.
|
United States43483 Posts
On January 22 2026 07:20 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2026 06:52 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Donald Trump has won again! Another victory for the greatest leader in the history of leaders and the history of greatness! https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/21/trump-greenland-tariffs-nato-00739429Trump is going to get some mineral and resource guarantees along with a restatement of what already exists. LOL. I said that at the start. If Trump is the greatest of all American leaders (other than Vince Lombardi) i guess I'm the Kreskin of Nostradamouses...meh. Trump did win in getting so many NATO countries to spend 5% of GDP on military. THat was a while ago though. Its always good to double and triple count your wins i guess?They're popping champagne over at Fox News How? By siding with Russia? Such a great victory. Win Putin's favor and lose all your allies. Didn't you vote for this dumbfuck?
They may not be America’s allies anymore but they are much better armed than they were before they hated him. It’s like the old saying goes, “better a heavily armed adversary than a lightly armed friend”.
|
Rumor is that America will gain sovereign territory in Greenland for military bases (The Telegraph early scoops, unconfirmed) in the proposed deal.
Which could’ve been done through NATO and by negotiations behind closed doors. But Trump being Trump makes everything about his ego and slights and perceived rejection from the cool kids table and need to make everything about him.
Happy to see him making a public ass of himself and bear the humiliation on the international stage. He deserves it.
|
On January 22 2026 07:20 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2026 06:52 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Donald Trump has won again! Another victory for the greatest leader in the history of leaders and the history of greatness! https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/21/trump-greenland-tariffs-nato-00739429Trump is going to get some mineral and resource guarantees along with a restatement of what already exists. LOL. I said that at the start. If Trump is the greatest of all American leaders (other than Vince Lombardi) i guess I'm the Kreskin of Nostradamouses...meh. Trump did win in getting so many NATO countries to spend 5% of GDP on military. THat was a while ago though. Its always good to double and triple count your wins i guess?They're popping champagne over at Fox News How? By siding with Russia? Such a great victory. Win Putin's favor and lose all your allies. Didn't you vote for this dumbfuck?
relax man. try not to take a maudlin old man's theatrics too seriously. i'm not a 1 issue voter. i'm moderately pleased with the work the team around Trump has done over the past year. The federal government gets a 6.75/10 from me in year 1. Median salaries are up... blue collar worker pay is rising faster than white collar pay. The average working man is benefiting from the moderate economic expansion in 2025.
Now, in some fancy diagram i saw on Fox News they showed the path of a mythical "intercontinental ballistic missile" leaving the Soviet Union and going over the arctic circle, over Nuuk Greenland, across Quebec, over Montreal and then hitting Washington DC. This is the reason the USA must have ownership of Greenland. Ok, great.
By this same logic shouldn't Trump demand US ownership of Montreal?
|
Canada11389 Posts
On January 22 2026 06:52 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Donald Trump has won again! Another victory for the greatest leader in the history of leaders and the history of greatness! https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/21/trump-greenland-tariffs-nato-00739429Trump is going to get some mineral and resource guarantees along with a restatement of what already exists. LOL. I said that at the start. If Trump is the greatest of all American leaders (other than Vince Lombardi) i guess I'm the Kreskin of Nostradamouses...meh. Trump did win in getting so many NATO countries to spend 5% of GDP on military. THat was a while ago though. Its always good to double and triple count your wins i guess? They're popping champagne over at Fox News
Glory to Astroska! Our glorious dear leader has succeeded in Iceland, or Greenland, or the 'land of Ice' after shaking down Canada's parliament for not awarding him a Juno.
What, pray tell, did Trump get that he could not have gotten by regular negotiations instead of trying to rattle apart NATO?
Considering Greenland (or was it Iceland?) used to have 17 bases that have been reduced voluntarily, do you really think America couldn't have requested that Greenland be included in his 'golden dome'?
Finally, considering there is a war in Europe, how are you able to so easily able to lay the cause of increased spending on Trump's pompous ramblings rather than
1) Putin's invasion
2) America is proving to be erratic and unreliable and therefore the world must re-arm itself, with nukes if necessary.
But no, Glory to Astroska! (And the probably the ninth war ended by not starting it himself, by Trump's count. Give that man a sticker.)
By this same logic shouldn't Trump demand US ownership of Montreal?
Yes. All the anti-logic used to justify seizing Greenland would apply to seizing Canada as well.
|
|
|
On January 22 2026 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:
and of course Kwark's typical bad faith petulant shitposting
I tried to explain this ages back. GH is the forum cat, is deliberate about doing things (inflammatory posts) to try to get your attention, and doesn't like you getting "distracted" by others so will come and sit on your keyboard when you're trying to write your next post to oBlade or Introvert or whoever. Then you try to give kitty some actual proper attention and oops, wasn't really interested in meaningfully interacting with you after all.
"Petulant" is the go-to GH word for "pointing out my antisocial forum behaviour" *
I did find it interesting that GH proudly declared that they "managed to get an abolish I.C.E. banner on TV", though. No Kings, who they specifically said were a bad protest, never did that! Oh, they have anti-ICE banners all over their protests? Oh.
* Yeah you can probably call this post antisocial too but I basically never post so I don't feel like I'm shitting up much
EDIT: My point is not to denigrate or litigate GH's protest actions, ICE sucks, but rather to point out that a bit of reality slipped through their facade of being so superior on the topic in that one moment.
|
United States43483 Posts
On January 22 2026 09:50 dyhb wrote:
Rumor is that America will gain sovereign territory in Greenland for military bases (The Telegraph early scoops, unconfirmed) in the proposed deal.
Which could’ve been done through NATO and by negotiations behind closed doors. But Trump being Trump makes everything about his ego and slights and perceived rejection from the cool kids table and need to make everything about him.
Happy to see him making a public ass of himself and bear the humiliation on the international stage. He deserves it.
These proposed deals never turn into deals. Whenever Trump TACOs he always declares that he won because he got the concept of a deal.
You know that there's no deal on the table here because he negotiated it with Rutte who is not, in fact, the King of Iceland.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
