Trump / Musk (other than DOGE)

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 12K
  • Views: 548K
  • Politics 
ZenMode said:
'Why don't you try again, and ditch the whole "functional minimum wage" stuff? Try a different approach."

Pass. This started as a simple question to cford and has morphed into something that is not worth continuing.
Click to expand...
Fine. But when you say that the market clearing wage is functionally a minimum wage, you come across as silly and unserious. Because those are literally opposite concepts. Well, maybe not pure opposites, but almost.
 
Liberals: do not take the bait. Do not oppose those designations. They are trying to bait you into reflexively defending gangs as part of a commitment to rule of law.

The proper response: cool, but please do not drone strike into territory controlled by other countries, especially our allies.
 
altmin said:
25% price hike on a Lexus or an Audi, etc should be fun.

www.cp24.com

Trump to introduce 25% tariffs on autos, pharmaceuticals and chips

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Tuesday he intends to impose auto tariffs 'in the neighbourhood of 25 per cent' and similar duties on semiconductors and pharmaceutical imports, the latest in a series of measures threatening to upend international trade.
www.cp24.com www.cp24.com
Click to expand...
"He did not provide a date for announcing those duties and said he wanted to provide some time for drug and chip makers to set up U.S. factories so that they can avoid tariffs."

LOL. I wonder how long it takes to set up a chip factory in Trump's mind.

What will happen instead is that manufacturers who use chips will relocate outside the US.
 
Patb78 said:
This is what I think. I feel that after Trump is gone they won’t be able to hold together. People will be coming out of the woodwork claiming to be his heir and they are the trumpiest politician there is. There has already been plenty of fighting among the factions in MAGA and the GOP. With him gone, there will be no one to coalesce around.
Click to expand...

Trump has plenty of children, I really wouldn't be surprised if Don Jr. ends up as the candidate in 2028 if Vance stumbles. Frankly, they've setup their family to dominate politics for decades and decades so you might as well drop the hopium here. If you thought the Kennedys were a dominant political family you haven't seen anything yet. They've taken their model and amplified it by a factor of 100, since the Kennedy's still were always reliant on New England poltical dominance to help them at the Federal level. Trump has basically covered the entire nation with base support moving forward, its not going away anytime soon. Even if the kids don't become candidates themselves, they'll be kingmakers in perpetuity for whomever the GOP nominates when Donald goes to the grave.
 
Note that mere designation as a terrorist organization does not actually make them "eligible" for drone strikes, whatever that's supposed to mean.
 
nycfan said:




They are going to launch strikes in Mexico and Central and South America, aren’t they?
Click to expand...

If mexico won't do anything about the cartels, trump said during the campaign he would. I'm just very interested to see that if he did attack a cartel with a drone, how many on here would be sympathetic to the cartel.
 
Zoo_View said:
If Vance succumbs to the ChristoNationalists rather than the Techbroligarchy, that helps make my point about Vance. He’s completely malleable and easily manipulated. He has no core beliefs.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don’t see it that way, at all. You may see Vance as malleable, I see him as cynical and calculated. For all the “Thiel is his puppet master” I think there’s equal chance Vance is using the tech lords for his own devices, which more aligns with Heritage Foundation, and I suspect has from the start.
 
Last edited:
Callatoroy said:
If mexico won't do anything about the cartels, trump said during the campaign he would. I'm just very interested to see that if he did attack a cartel with a drone, how many on here would be sympathetic to the cartel.
Click to expand...
People claiming Trump acted illegally does not mean they are “sympathetic to the cartel” although that’s the kind of bullshit right wing news loves.

“If you don’t support Trump mounting attacks on our neighbors and allies you support drug cartels.” Such bullshit.
 
I wouldn't sympathize with them at all. If he hadn't cleared it with that country, I'd be pretty pissed at us for violating other nations' sovereignty. I doubt that the short term gain could possibly be worth the long term damage to our relationship with them.

One of the problems with all these short term wins is that they aren't worth the battle damage. Look at having to rehire the nuclear people or the bird flu people. You've sown distrust and dissatisfaction and the people that you lost are likely your best people because they are going to catch on somewhere else sooner.

That might not be so bad for some jobs. The party loyalty thing happens. But a lot of these jobs are pretty apolitical and actually need skills.
 
Callatoroy said:
If mexico won't do anything about the cartels, trump said during the campaign he would. I'm just very interested to see that if he did attack a cartel with a drone, how many on here would be sympathetic to the cartel.
Click to expand...
I could care less about the well-being of the cartels but am concerned about launching attacks inside the sovereign borders of our allies in the region without their consent or cooperation. What if Mexico or Canada decides to start bombing gun manufacturers in the United States because we do little to nothing to stop them from supplying weapons to the cartels? Sure, that seems unlikely but using force in the region without cooperation from the governments of the applicable countries has typically been a bad approach to U.S. foreign policy.
 
Callatoroy said:
If mexico won't do anything about the cartels, trump said during the campaign he would. I'm just very interested to see that if he did attack a cartel with a drone, how many on here would be sympathetic to the cartel.
Click to expand...
Nobody. The reason to be terrified of that complete idiocy isn't because we are sympathetic to cartels. It's because a) those types of strikes more often that not hit innocents and miss the supposed targets; and b) it would hurt Americans as it would put an enemy on our southern border. If Trump attacks cartels inside Mexico, it would almost certainly mean the end of Mexican cooperation on immigration and drug enforcement. It would undoubtedly make the problem worse, not better.

And if you don't believe me, read about the Medellin cartel. Or read this link

 
nycfan said:
I could care less about the well-being of the cartels but am concerned about launching attacks inside the sovereign borders of our allies in the region without their consent or cooperation. What if Mexico or Canada decides to start bombing gun manufacturers in the United States because we do little to nothing to stop them from supplying weapons to the cartels? Sure, that seems unlikely but using force in the region without cooperation from the governments of the applicable countries has typically been a bad approach to U.S. foreign policy.
Click to expand...
How someone as smart as that poster appears to think he is doesn’t understand this is bewildering.
 
nycfan said:
I could care less about the well-being of the cartels but am concerned about launching attacks inside the sovereign borders of our allies in the region without their consent or cooperation.
Click to expand...
Which can't happen, because the cartels don't just hang out in large corporate campuses with adequate signage.

The drug cartels are successful and hard to combat precisely because they are embedded within Mexican society. In some places, the cartel "headquarters" is the local police station.

There is no way to target cartels with drone strikes in such a way that would avoid destroying assets of the Mexican government, or assets of Mexican nationals who aren't involved with the cartels at all.
 
superrific said:
The proper response: cool, but please do not drone strike into territory controlled by other countries, especially our allies.
Click to expand...

Well, if we do it over the objections of the Mexican gov't, that gives the gov't some deniability that they probably wouldn't mind having.

I have mixed feelings about this. They are truly awful people, and might as well be labelled terrorists IMO, but it seems obvious there are going to be repurcussions on US soil.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top