Donald J. Trump (For everyone else except Victor)
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
nut nut homeless went up in the USA during the Biden admin exclusively because of immigrants.
there weren't more american homeless in 2024 than in 2020.
Biden let in millions extra of random poor people and some of them ended up sleeping rough as expected.
Do you have any evidence to support this or are you just spouting self serving BS ?
I don't have a belief system that sorts behavior into good vs bad, virtuous vs evil. I simply see a world of cause and effect and a Darwinian exercise in survival of the fittest.
That's even worse.
Our primate cousins betray and deceive each other when it suits their interests. Does that make a chimpanzee a "piece of ****" ?
Are you asserting that humans are no more intellectually evolved than chimpanzees?
So when you look at someone like Trump ..... you say to yourself, I am good and he is bad and forego the entire exercise of asking WHY those traits exist.
I don't, actually. Whenever someone constantly thinks to themselves, "I am good, and they are bad" they are walking a slippery slope. Lots of evil have been done by "good people" who gradually transitioned to evil people through hundreds of tiny bad decisions, especially in the name of fighting evil. People who have convinced themselves they are good people and are incapable of being bad people, so they stop checking themselves and over time they are committing horrendous acts.
A lot of the J6 folk were probably good people at one time and then through small bad decisions in the name of fighting what they perceived as bad, they became animals. If you have "God on your side" it's very easy to do very bad things while thinking you're doing good things.
That is just nihilistic edge lord bullshit.
It really depends upon how you assess intelligence. Certainly, our combination of frontal cortex, voice box and capacity for language separates us in terms of the power of a single specimen.
The achievements of just a relatively small number of brilliant humans enabled to unlock the secrets and engineering process to build atomic bombs. Chimps don't have the mutations necessary to do anything like that.
But intellect is only one dimension of humans. It's a big brain strapped onto the same primitive fight or flight survival mechanisms located lower in the brain stem. That big brain is amplified in its capacity for magnifying the worst of our instincts.
If an anthropologist saw a chimp hoarding more bananas than it could eat and they rotted while other chimps in the group starved, they would wonder what disease that chimp was possessed with. In humans, they put those put on the cover of magazines and they lead corporations and buy elections to ensure the status quo.
Chimps don't have birthright succession. The leader of the pack arrives as a result of what nature instills in them in terms of their capacity lead.
Humans are in a period where they have abandoned that. Donald Trump got rich because of a handout from his father. Kamala Harris because the party elites chose her. The Democratic Party had zero intra-party competition about the best ideas for leading the country. Name two Democrats who disagree with each other ?
So ..... we are a step behind chimps when it comes to the meritocratic process of selecting leaders. People with ideas that compete with neoliberal economics are not allowed a public space to compete.
To the extent that our greater intelligence has given us a mastery of Machiavellian divide and conquer tactics, that's not smart if one has the objective of getting the entire herd to work together.
Our capacity for cooperation is arguably less than chimps. Chimps don't reward other chimps to play the roles of Rachel Maddow and Sean Hannity and divide them into tribes that despise each other.
A surge in immigration that peaked just as last year’s homeless count was taken accounted for the bulk of its historic rise reported in December, grossly inflating the picture of homelessness in America.
Because the local agencies taking the count across the country do not ask for immigration status, homeless numbers ballooned in a handful of states that took in tens of thousands of immigrants, and those states, in turn, pushed the national number to an unprecedented high of nearly 772,000.
It's always magical how the left CREATES A PROBLEM and then uses the problem IT CREATED ON PURPOSE to ask for MORE POWER TO THE LEFT to fix it, claiming it was caused by something else entirely.
Trump's promise to immediately lower food prices was of course ridiculous.
But this sort of unserious grandstanding by Democrats isn't great either.
If you look at his source, no, of course, he does not have any evidence to support his bs claim.
He is worse than Playbig at backing up his claims.
Trump's promise to immediately lower food prices was of course ridiculous.
But this sort of unserious grandstanding by Democrats isn't great either.
How is that even remotely grandstanding? Trump made outrageous promises that he hasn't kept and the opposition party is calling him out on it. That's sort of how politics works.
lol bOtH sIdEs
Trump's promise to immediately lower food prices was of course ridiculous.
But this sort of unserious grandstanding by Democrats isn't great either.
Don’t forget ending Ukraine war in 1 day too .
How is that even remotely grandstanding? Trump made outrageous promises that he hasn't kept and the opposition party is calling him out on it. That's sort of how politics works.
Democrats need different framing. "He's a liar" is obviously true, but no one seems to care.
Proposing to use the FTC to crack down on "surveillance pricing" is not a realistic solution to elevated food prices, and I doubt that Elizabeth Warren believes it is a realistic solution. It's just something to put in a letter so you can make it appear as if there is some easy solution that everyone is failing to implement.
What is this thing you guys have about making up cute little names for everyone you don't like? Seems sort of 7th gradish, but that isn't surprising.
Fauci's sin was to shake his head when your idiot in chief said the stupidest crap that came out of his tiny mind.
Democrats need different framing. "He's a liar" is obviously true, but no one seems to care.
Proposing to use the FTC to crack down on "surveillance pricing" is not a realistic solution to elevated food prices, and I doubt that Elizabeth Warren believes it is a realistic solution. It's just something to put in a letter so you can make it appear as if there is some easy solution that everyone is failing to implement.
Did Warren actually say cracking down on surveillance pricing would be a "solution" to food prices? AFAICT, the article shows her aiming completely valid criticism at Trump failing to live up to the promises he made. That's a far cry from Warren claiming she has a realistic solution.
Whether or not surveillance pricing is something the FTC should be combating is something we can debate, but Warren is hardly "grandstanding" by opposing it any more than any politician opposing a policy is grandstanding.
Did Warren actually say cracking down on surveillance pricing would be a "solution" to food prices? AFAICT, the article shows her aiming completely valid criticism at Trump failing to live up to the promises he made. That's a far cry from Warren claiming she has a realistic solution.
You are correct that the comment about surveillance pricing in the original NBC article that I linked was attributed to the executive director of a think tank, not Warren. Warren has pushed a very, very similiar point in the past.
To be clear, agribusiness is a good place to look for antitrust violations, including outright price-fixing. I don't mean to suggest otherwise. But I do not believe using the FTC to crack down on surveillance pricing or similar practices is likely to be successful. In fact, I think that the most likely outcome of such an effort would be the creation of bad decisional law.
If anyone thinks Trump could do anything about grocery pricing they are dreaming . Though Kamala promised the same thing .
I saw an interesting piece on Tariffs were the USA put tariffs on washing machines . This raised the prices of washing machines being imported of course but the manufacturers in the USA raised their prices on washing machines as well. As well dryers which were not subject to tarifs went up the same amount .
No one can stop corporate greed
You are correct that the comment about surveillance pricing in the original NBC article that I linked was attributed to the executive director of a think tank, not Warren. Warren has pushed a very, very similiar point in the past.
To be clear, agribusiness is a good place to look for antitrust violations, including outright price-fixing. I don't mean to suggest otherwise. But I do not believe using the FTC to
I'm not going to argue whether or not stopping grocery surge pricing is a bad idea, but I don't see Warren saying her plan will be a complete solution to grocery prices; she's just saying that surge pricing will harm consumers. She might well be wrong on that point, but afaict she's not grandstanding in a way that would have been out of line even in a pre-Trump era. It's also fair game for her to point out Trump's failed promises. All of this seems like it's how politics has always been done, nevermind the fact that Trump is out there every day promising to give idiots bags of magical beans.
greed = profitability... one is a simpleton's characterization, the other is the basis for the free market economy.
Having low or zero profitability is not virtuous... it just means you suck at business.
the first peoples to complain about inequality and 'labeling' are the first ones to employ them to characterize a failed position.
I'm not going to argue whether or not stopping grocery surge pricing is a bad idea, but I don't see Warren saying her plan will be a complete solution to grocery prices; she's just saying that surge pricing will harm consumers. She might well be wrong on that point, but afaict she's not grandstanding in a way that would have been out of line even in a pre-Trump era. It's also fair game for her to point out Trump's failed promises. All of this seems like it's how politics has always been done, ne
Fair enough. After reading the actual letter rather than the news article, I believe that I overstated things a bit in my OP on this topic.
POTUS can do some stuff to lower food prices, but even the fastest interventions require at least a few months to have sizeable effects.
And the tariff game Trump wants to play doesn't help at all in that regard.
The "day one" promise of price reductions was a lie / exaggeration, he could have limited himself to a resolve to do everything in his power to reduce prices as soon as possible with the same effect.
But it's not directionally false, even if technically false
