|
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 05 2026 01:09 micronesia wrote:
In California, with 60% of the votes, in Prop 40 is 55.6% No to 44.4% Yes, so probably not going to happen. It was, "Imposes a one-time 5 percent tax on individuals and trusts with over $1 billion in assets, and allocates the resulting revenues to fund health care, food assistance and education."
We do need to reconsider how taxes should affect the rich, but I don't think a one-off like this was the right way to do it, even though it could serve an interesting precedent.
I don't live in California but I would've loved if it did pass for the precedent alone. Swing voters are still trickle-down truthers who both don't understand just how wealthy billionaires are, and how much it would positively effect the working class if the tax burden was shifted off of them.
|
On November 05 2026 00:29 PoulsenB wrote:
Some excellent, unhinged Jimmy posts today, this is the stuff I come here for.
Too few obscure hockey and WWE-references.
|
On November 05 2026 00:59 Jankisa wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2026 00:20 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
So can someone tell me, in the simplest terms, what avenues the Ds have for investigating all of the corruption? Are they going after DOJ, CIA, DOD, etc? Or just going to try and get the economy back on track with whatever they can? Do they immediately cancel and renegotiate tariffs or how does that play? I think they can, if they actually want to, walk and chew gum at the same time. First thing they will, most likely do, is go for impeachment of the low hanging fruit, so impeaching the obvious crazies that have high visibility and caused a lot of damage, plus are too stupid to cover their tracks well, my top hit list would be, in order of how easy it would be: 1. Pete Hegseath (Iran war, war crimes, slurs, purges, shit OpSec) 2. Kash Patel (drinking, enriching himself, using FBI as his GF's personal bodyguards adn so much more) 3. Todd Blanche (coached Gishlane Maxwel, covered up Epstein files, nice way to get them back into public eye, plus, you know, he's Trump's personal lawyer who said while serving in DOJ his loyalty is to Trump) 4. RFK Junior (insane, dumps dead bears in Central park, has a brain worm, killed 80 kids in Haiti, plus I'm sure enriching himself and doing a bunch of other illegal shit) 5. Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito (Thomas has been thoroughly documented as a crook, so was his wife, I would prioritize but Schumer the feckless already said no, hopefully he changes his mind) 6. Linda McMahon (enriching herself, likely other scandals easily uncovered) Those are just the impeachments that NEED to happen in my opinion. Then you have investigations into: 1. Kushner (Albania, SA found, Serbia, FIFA, Russia and so much more) 2. Witkoff (Crypto, real estate deals, Russia and so much more) 3. Musk (DOGE, dropped investigations, Philladelphia and Georgia election cases, plenty of fuckery in Texas) Even if these don't result in convictions, the subpoena power and public nature of these cases as well as brazenness that these morons operate will paint a clear picture, but it needs to be prioritized and done, form Jan 20th, every day, an announcement of investigation, subpoenas, testimonies etc.
I think they should at least have really long hearings on each issue and just use bullying interrogation tactics. If Hillary could do an 11-hour-long hearing on Benghazi, surely Trump can do one too. They should also have targeted hearings on the underlings to make perjury much harder for people to avoid. Patel and Hegseth would absolutely have had meetings where they did stupid shit in the presence of career staff. They also have fired so many people that there is a wide pool of willing witnesses.
|
On November 05 2026 01:08 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2026 00:47 Introvert wrote:On November 05 2026 00:14 Gorsameth wrote:On November 05 2026 00:09 Introvert wrote:On November 04 2026 23:54 KwarK wrote:On November 04 2026 23:44 Introvert wrote:
I mean it is going to be interesting to see how these super red state dems interpret what happened. It's not like South Carolinians are suddenly for Medicare for all. But I've said since the 2016 election dems could have gotten so much from him if they didn't say he was the next Hitler. That’s always been true. But most presidents don't recalibrate after mid term beat downs. These dems ran to the right of the national party on things like energy and immigration. I guess they could become Doug Jones and just vote party line and lose in 6 years. But somehow I don't think most want that. How will the Andrews's of SC do in fights vs the AES's of the senate and house. Remains to be seen Vance said Trump was America’s Hitler and got the VP seat so it can work out. You are actually making my point. Trump will make up with almost anyone. But I've said since the 2016 election dems could have gotten so much from him if they didn't say he was the next Hitler Clearly them calling Trump Hitler didn't matter. Because his current VP did aswell. Your point "they should not have done that" is in direct opposition to your point "he will make up with anyone" So which was your point? He wasn't nominated while calling him Hitler. You have to make up with him, but I'm saying it can be done. Those two things perfectly work together. Not sure if the density is intentional at this point Are you desperately avoiding explaining your position on Iran because you know it will age badly? Or are taking some time to gather your thoughts and post a complete answer? He is not dense, you are going to be. It is not a realistic strategy to completely 180 on all their values for personal gain like Vance did. Especially when all of America said that his policies are the worst in modern history.
No, I'm more interested in talking about the election atm.
If you got Trump to sign a bunch of Dem legislation how is that doing a 180 on your values? I'm not talking about actual dem becoming VP. I'm talking about Democrats pushing for some of their legislative items.
|
On November 05 2026 01:09 micronesia wrote:
In California, with 60% of the votes, in Prop 40 is 55.6% No to 44.4% Yes, so probably not going to happen. It was, "Imposes a one-time 5 percent tax on individuals and trusts with over $1 billion in assets, and allocates the resulting revenues to fund health care, food assistance and education."
We do need to reconsider how taxes should affect the rich, but I don't think a one-off like this was the right way to do it, even though it could serve an interesting precedent.
Voter ID also won almost everywhere except CA and a number of other conservative ballot props won in places dems carried. Like I said last night always interesting to look at that stuff. CO even looks like it will ban transgender surgery for minors. Biological sports separation won in multiple states too.
Edit: also very funny thing in VA removing the state's (defunct) gay marriage ban won by less than abortion rights in the state constitution. Kind of an odd one lol
|
I used AI to see what percentage of the GDP is in blue states now (not including Alaska) it is up to 67.5%! Which is crazy.
Also, I wonder how musk is going to be impacted. He moved to Texas to get away from the blue wave and instead helped user it in. So much of his wealth and company success is based on government money and contracts. I don’t think it will be apocalyptic for him, because Texas will still want all the jobs, but I’d imagine a lot worse given how much he dropped on the opposition.
Also, as much as JJR was all over the map and saying things that even contradicted himself. It was good for Trump to so far stay away from his usual lies about voter fraud. At lest for now.
|
On November 05 2026 01:23 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2026 01:08 Billyboy wrote:On November 05 2026 00:47 Introvert wrote:On November 05 2026 00:14 Gorsameth wrote:On November 05 2026 00:09 Introvert wrote:On November 04 2026 23:54 KwarK wrote:On November 04 2026 23:44 Introvert wrote:
I mean it is going to be interesting to see how these super red state dems interpret what happened. It's not like South Carolinians are suddenly for Medicare for all. But I've said since the 2016 election dems could have gotten so much from him if they didn't say he was the next Hitler. That’s always been true. But most presidents don't recalibrate after mid term beat downs. These dems ran to the right of the national party on things like energy and immigration. I guess they could become Doug Jones and just vote party line and lose in 6 years. But somehow I don't think most want that. How will the Andrews's of SC do in fights vs the AES's of the senate and house. Remains to be seen Vance said Trump was America’s Hitler and got the VP seat so it can work out. You are actually making my point. Trump will make up with almost anyone. But I've said since the 2016 election dems could have gotten so much from him if they didn't say he was the next Hitler Clearly them calling Trump Hitler didn't matter. Because his current VP did aswell. Your point "they should not have done that" is in direct opposition to your point "he will make up with anyone" So which was your point? He wasn't nominated while calling him Hitler. You have to make up with him, but I'm saying it can be done. Those two things perfectly work together. Not sure if the density is intentional at this point Are you desperately avoiding explaining your position on Iran because you know it will age badly? Or are taking some time to gather your thoughts and post a complete answer? He is not dense, you are going to be. It is not a realistic strategy to completely 180 on all their values for personal gain like Vance did. Especially when all of America said that his policies are the worst in modern history. No, I'm more interested in talking about the election atm. If you got Trump to sign a bunch of Dem legislation how is that doing a 180 on your values? I'm not talking about actual dem becoming VP. I'm talking about Democrats pushing for some of their legislative items.
But Vance doing a 180 is how he got in Trumps good books. It is not like they had some meeting of the minds and came to some sort of consensus where both compromised. Vance just completely flip flopped.
I’ll circle back to you on Iran in a couple of days then.
|
On November 05 2026 01:26 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2026 01:09 micronesia wrote:
In California, with 60% of the votes, in Prop 40 is 55.6% No to 44.4% Yes, so probably not going to happen. It was, "Imposes a one-time 5 percent tax on individuals and trusts with over $1 billion in assets, and allocates the resulting revenues to fund health care, food assistance and education."
We do need to reconsider how taxes should affect the rich, but I don't think a one-off like this was the right way to do it, even though it could serve an interesting precedent. Voter ID also won almost everywhere except CA and a number of other conservative ballot props won in places dems carried. Like I said last night always interesting to look at that stuff. CO even looks like it will ban transgender surgery for minors. Biological sports separation won in multiple states too. The propositions without the (R) name to drag them down did great on cultural issues. If it was (D) candidate vs (R) candidate, D just won. Left-winger or moderate.
On November 05 2026 00:20 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
So can someone tell me, in the simplest terms, what avenues the Ds have for investigating all of the corruption? Are they going after DOJ, CIA, DOD, etc? Or just going to try and get the economy back on track with whatever they can? Do they immediately cancel and renegotiate tariffs or how does that play? They schedule hearings, subpoena Republicans, and Republicans either skip it or plead the fifth.
They put in a DoJ referral for contempt, and the DoJ declines to prosecute.
They throw up an impeachment vote, and it fails in the Senate. Some 1% chance that an especially egregious case is pressured to resign.
They campaign on needing the presidency and thus the DoJ in 2028. Everybody's pardoned walking out the door. Only idiots that break the law again after the pardons go to jail.
|
On November 05 2026 00:29 PoulsenB wrote:
Some excellent, unhinged Jimmy posts today, this is the stuff I come here for.
Between JJR's ignorance of Trump's infamous ogling, harassment, and assault of kids and oBlade's insistence that Trump is actually a Democrat in disguise, I really feel like they're trying to one-up each other. These meltdowns could have been avoided if they'd just taken the day off or said something short and sweet like "Yeah we lost pretty badly; hopefully we win in 2028" instead of what they've been saying.
|
On November 04 2026 23:09 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2026 23:05 oBlade wrote:On November 04 2026 22:29 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
Trump's response on Fox last night was excellent. He said he'd negotiate with the Democrats to get stuff passed. He's always been up for that, being a Democrat himself. That doesn't matter. They can't negotiate with him. They can't negotiate with Hitler. Especially the DSA nuts. He could get Republicans to float a universal healthcare bill or free college bill at any time and Democrats would have to block it so he would never have the chance to sign it. He could do that now and it wouldn't make it past the filibuster. Lol I love this cope. Democrats would pass that in an instant and say the 2026 elections were so overwhelming they even forced Trump to become a socialist.
Absolutely not. A universal healthcare bill floated by Trump would be written by ChatGPT with RFK Jr's prompts and involve throwing a raw liver and a magic crystal on everyone's doorstep every other Tuesday.
|
On November 05 2026 01:42 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2026 23:09 LightSpectra wrote:On November 04 2026 23:05 oBlade wrote:On November 04 2026 22:29 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
Trump's response on Fox last night was excellent. He said he'd negotiate with the Democrats to get stuff passed. He's always been up for that, being a Democrat himself. That doesn't matter. They can't negotiate with him. They can't negotiate with Hitler. Especially the DSA nuts. He could get Republicans to float a universal healthcare bill or free college bill at any time and Democrats would have to block it so he would never have the chance to sign it. He could do that now and it wouldn't make it past the filibuster. Lol I love this cope. Democrats would pass that in an instant and say the 2026 elections were so overwhelming they even forced Trump to become a socialist. Absolutely not. A universal healthcare bill floated by Trump would be written by ChatGPT with RFK Jr's prompts and involve throwing a raw liver and a magic crystal on everyone's doorstep every other Tuesday.
It would not surprise me if they floated a bad bill that needs to be voted down on purpose.
If they actually raise a good bill and democrats vote against it then it would be MUCH more damaging to them than agreeing with a republican bill.
On another topic, looking in from the outside I wonder how long the government will shut down before a new budget gets passed.
|
The President can only suggest legislation to Congress. In both chambers Democrats would decide what makes it to the floor to vote on. "Pass a bill that has a poison pill designed to make the other party vote against it for bad headlines" is a strategy that only works if you control one or both of the chambers.
|
On November 05 2026 01:34 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2026 00:29 PoulsenB wrote:
Some excellent, unhinged Jimmy posts today, this is the stuff I come here for. Between JJR's ignorance of Trump's infamous ogling, harassment, and assault of kids and oBlade's insistence that Trump is actually a Democrat in disguise, I really feel like they're trying to one-up each other.
Why do you want to misunderstand, every single time, no matter what it is? You were a professor at one point and you can't get the point about Trump being a Democrat? Forget agree or disagree, you can't even get it? Jesus.
You psyopped yourself into thinking:
-someone with the border and immigration policy of Clinton and Obama (Deporter-in-Chief)
-someone with weaker crime policy than the "Superpredators" Clintons (if you remember his bipartisan first term First Step Act)
-someone pro gay marriage
-someone who is not personally anti-abortion and only ever made it so abortion policy should be set by laws rather than courts
-someone with the trade policy of a pre-NAFTA Democrat
-someone who's an anti-ground-war anti-neocon anti-interventionist with the military mentality of Obama and Biden of collect all the intel, buy all the expensive MIC toys, and then kill them and/or run away
-someone who wants to cut the bloat of federal government and achieved less to do so than Clinton and Gore's initiatives
-someone who wants the energy and manufacturing of any pre-"Inconvenient Truth" union Democrat
-someone whose best friends are a fucking electric car magnate and an environmental lawyer/Kennedy
-someone who thinks nuclear weapons are the single greatest threat to the world and wants trilateral denuclearization
-someone who loves nuclear power which is what normal environmentalism knew was the clean answer before Three Mile Island made people nuts
-someone who wants to make kids as healthy as Michelle Obama wanted
-someone under whom Congress spent their pants off like Biden
-someone whose 2nd term OBBBA restrictions on welfare eligibility pale in comparison to Clinton's "end welfare as we know it" Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act
...into thinking that person was the antichrist Hitler. You fixated 10 years of your life on this misapprehension and let it rewire your whole brain for probably the next 10 at least. If you actually noticed the antichrist you worship against was basically a Democrat, it would make you go oops Democrats from 20-30 years ago were the antichrist Hitler but thank god we've made so much progress since then. Must keep out the cognitive dissonance.
|
On November 05 2026 02:31 oBlade wrote:
-someone who's an anti-ground-war anti-neocon anti-interventionist with the military mentality of Obama and Biden of collect all the intel, buy all the expensive MIC toys, and then kill them and/or run away
Republicans did so badly last night that oBlade is gaslighting himself into believing Democrats started the Iran War
|
Next we'll hear that Hitler was a socialist, actually.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
