Trump / Musk (other than DOGE) Omnibus Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 12K
  • Views: 325K
  • Politics 
And pubs are going to support it. The sooner we come to grips with the fact that Trump and anyone who voted for him and now supports him are traitors. They voted for a dictatorship and that’s what they want . And they aren’t going to give it up peacefully.
Yup. My brother tested earlier this week about seeing new doctors for his years long battle with long covid. I first replied and said I loved him then later replied to say that I will not forgive him for his support of Trump until he shows some form contrition.

Fuck every single Trump voter.
 
Too early in the morning for blatant straw manning.
It wasn't straw manning it was sarcasm, lol. Do you know the difference?

if your position is that there shouldn't be any minimum wage set by the government at all - and that the minimum wage should be set by the market - just come out and say it. We all know you tend to pretty libertarian in philosophy.
 
Of all the posters on this board, I'm most disappointed by Zen. Smart enough to know better, not overtly trolling like a lot of others, not a professional contrarian, just stuck in a mental groove they can't quite seem to snap out of. Cognitive bias is a hell of drug. I haven't lost faith in them. They'll have their CFord like come to Jesus moment sooner or later. They're too smart not to. But damned if I'm not disappointed it hasn't happened by now.
 


“THREE DAYS AFTER the National Institutes of Health abruptly announced it would place a strict, low cap on the money it sends to universities and research institutions for the administrative costs of scientific research, the University of Iowa made an abrupt announcement of its own.

The school’s Office of the Vice President for Research declared that going forward, it would pause “the hiring of new Graduate Research Assistants unless they are already budgeted as a direct cost on a funded project.”

The announcement sent shockwaves through parts of academia, providing an alarming demonstration of the impact the NIH cap would have on aspiring scientists. “We were pretty stunned,” the chair of the biochemistry and molecular biology department at a top university told The Bulwark. …”
 
Continued

“… In the first month of the second Trump administration, the world’s richest man—underinformed, chronically online, and staffed by a coterie of teenaged and twentysomethingformer engineering interns—has been moving at warp speed to reshape, reduce, and even dismantle the United States government.

But while Musk’s rampage has been feverishly covered, the scope of its impact remains largely underappreciated.

Experts say it can’t be measured in weeks or months or even in government services affected. Rather, it will be felt over the span of decades and defined in metrics like intellectual talent lost.

Dozens of interviews with top researchers revealed a persistent, overbearing fear that the United States is at the starting point of a massive brain drain.

The federal government has long taken an active role in funding basic scientific research, which is financially risky and expensive but critical to discoveries that yield new technologies, including treatments and cures for diseases. Young researchers hoping to find new treatments for cancer, dementia, or other diseases may find that, with government funding curtailed, they may never get the opportunity. Areas of scientific investigation will be cut off as the Trump administration discourages or outright prohibits funding for certain fields of research.

Some may find refuge in the private sector. But those opportunities will be inherently limited—companies built around making profits don’t tend to fund research with long-shot profit-making upside.

Among accomplished researchers, the fear is that this coming generation of scientists will look overseas or leave their fields entirely, endangering America’s multigenerational standard as the leader in scientific research. …”
 
“… Speaking to reporters at his Mar-a-Lago residence, Trump was asked by BBC News what his message was to Ukrainians who might feel betrayed.

"I hear that they're upset about not having a seat, well, they've had a seat for three years and a long time before that. This could have been settled very easily," he said.

"You should have never started it. You could have made a deal," he later added.

"I could have made a deal for Ukraine," he said.

"That would have given them almost all of the land, everything, almost all of the land - and no people would have killed, and no city would have been demolished."

After the meeting in Riyadh, Trump said he was "much more confident".

"They were very good," he said. "Russia wants to do something. They want to stop the savage barbarianism."

"I think I have the power to end this war," he added.

[a lot of “I” in those thoughts]

“…
Meanwhile, the reaction in Moscow to the change in direction of U.S. foreign policy has been more upbeat.

The U.S. president is "the first, and so far, apparently, the only Western leader who has publicly and loudly said that one of the root causes of the Ukrainian situation was the brazen path of the previous administration to draw Ukraine into NATO," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in a speech to Russian lawmakers Wednesday. "No Western leader has ever said this,”

“This is already a signal that he understands our position," Lavrov added in a speech that covered the broader second Trump administration rather than the president's specific remarks Tuesday. ..”


 
It wasn't straw manning it was sarcasm, lol. Do you know the difference?

if your position is that there shouldn't be any minimum wage set by the government at all - and that the minimum wage should be set by the market - just come out and say it. We all know you tend to pretty libertarian in philosophy.
I never said there shouldn't be a minimum wage set by the government. Did you actually read what I typed and understand it in context?
 
Continued

“… In the first month of the second Trump administration, the world’s richest man—underinformed, chronically online, and staffed by a coterie of teenaged and twentysomethingformer engineering interns—has been moving at warp speed to reshape, reduce, and even dismantle the United States government.

But while Musk’s rampage has been feverishly covered, the scope of its impact remains largely underappreciated.

Experts say it can’t be measured in weeks or months or even in government services affected. Rather, it will be felt over the span of decades and defined in metrics like intellectual talent lost.

Dozens of interviews with top researchers revealed a persistent, overbearing fear that the United States is at the starting point of a massive brain drain.

The federal government has long taken an active role in funding basic scientific research, which is financially risky and expensive but critical to discoveries that yield new technologies, including treatments and cures for diseases. Young researchers hoping to find new treatments for cancer, dementia, or other diseases may find that, with government funding curtailed, they may never get the opportunity. Areas of scientific investigation will be cut off as the Trump administration discourages or outright prohibits funding for certain fields of research.

Some may find refuge in the private sector. But those opportunities will be inherently limited—companies built around making profits don’t tend to fund research with long-shot profit-making upside.

Among accomplished researchers, the fear is that this coming generation of scientists will look overseas or leave their fields entirely, endangering America’s multigenerational standard as the leader in scientific research. …”
This is already happening. A top scientist colleague at my school/institution announced that he is moving his lab to Amsterdam because “he didn’t want to raise his kids in this country and run his research in this funding and political climate”.
 
“… Speaking to reporters at his Mar-a-Lago residence, Trump was asked by BBC News what his message was to Ukrainians who might feel betrayed.

"I hear that they're upset about not having a seat, well, they've had a seat for three years and a long time before that. This could have been settled very easily," he said.

"You should have never started it. You could have made a deal," he later added.

"I could have made a deal for Ukraine," he said.

"That would have given them almost all of the land, everything, almost all of the land - and no people would have killed, and no city would have been demolished."

After the meeting in Riyadh, Trump said he was "much more confident".

"They were very good," he said. "Russia wants to do something. They want to stop the savage barbarianism."

"I think I have the power to end this war," he added.

[a lot of “I” in those thoughts]

“…
Meanwhile, the reaction in Moscow to the change in direction of U.S. foreign policy has been more upbeat.

The U.S. president is "the first, and so far, apparently, the only Western leader who has publicly and loudly said that one of the root causes of the Ukrainian situation was the brazen path of the previous administration to draw Ukraine into NATO," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in a speech to Russian lawmakers Wednesday. "No Western leader has ever said this,”

“This is already a signal that he understands our position," Lavrov added in a speech that covered the broader second Trump administration rather than the president's specific remarks Tuesday. ..”



 
Back
Top