The Trump Presidency - Chapter 2

[flere-imsaho]

Well, no. Just more confirmation.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Fun fact: Susie Wiles is the daughter of Pat Summerall.

Pat Summerall, the only announcer in history where the video game version of him sounded better than the real-life version.

[JPhillips]

I can only imagine how crazy the right would get if Biden had Soros sit in on a call with a foreign leader.

[thesloppy]

Every time I read Pat Summerall I hear him saying "Chris Doleman" in my head. Maybe now you do too.

[Lathum]

Just saw in the times a judge granted Smiths request to pause the Jan 6 case for a month so they can consider moving forward. I suspect it will get dropped before Trump ever has to self pardon or appoint his own AG. Man, garland fucked is so hard.

[Danny]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Just saw in the times a judge granted Smiths request to pause the Jan 6 case for a month so they can consider moving forward. I suspect it will get dropped before Trump ever has to self pardon or appoint his own AG. Man, garland fucked is so hard.

All it did was strengthen Trumps support. They needed to go hard or not at all.

[JPhillips]

The best option now is to close the investigation and release a report before the inauguration.

[flere-imsaho]

What Nixon started, Trump finished. The President is above the law.

(To be fair, most rich people are above the law as well.)

[JPhillips]

Somehow Trump is both going to eliminate the Dept. of Education and also nationalize all the education standards.

Donald Trump announces his 10-point plan to rebuild America's school system,

Among others, promises to bring back 'school prayer. ' pic.twitter.com/oeEXgNRX9A

— 𝐀𝐍𝐓𝐔𝐍𝐄𝐒 (@Antunes1) November 9, 2024

[Edward64]

Thought below was an interesting article. I didn't think it was even an option, is there enough time for Dems push through a replacement for Sotomayor?

Hindsight is 20/20. It's easy to criticize RBG for not retiring when she could. If Sotomayor was to pass away during the next 4 years, will she be viewed like RBG?

She's 70 so odds are probably in her favor to last through 2028 but then a roll of the dice who wins in 2028. I think she shouldn't be pressured to leave right now.

wsj.com

Despite calls from some liberal activists for Justice Sonia Sotomayor to step down while Democrats can fill her seat before Inauguration Day, she has no plans to retire from the Supreme Court, people close to the justice said.

“This is no time to lose her important voice on the court. She just turned 70 and takes better care of herself than anyone I know,” said one person close to the justice, suggesting that progressives turn their attention to other ways of safeguarding the Constitution after President-elect Donald Trump takes office.

Sotomayor, appointed in 2009 by then President Barack Obama, is the senior member of the court’s liberal minority, which by custom makes her its leader. Outnumbered by six conservatives, including three appointed by Trump during his first term, the liberals have increasingly been reduced to dissenting opinions that argue the majority has made grave errors on matters from abortion rights to presidential power.

[JPhillips]

Hysterical that after decades of screaming about states' rights, every Trump video is a plan to nationalize some aspect of society and the right is cheering each of them on.

We're going to nationalize voting! Yeah!

We're going to nationalize education standards! Yeah!

We're going to nationalize gun policy! Yeah!

[JPhillips]

Trump says that he should be allowed to make recess appointments(without Senate votes) so that he can fully staff the admin as quickly as possible.

If the GOP agrees, that's basically the end of advise and consent.

[RainMaker]

Congress About to Gift Trump Sweeping Powers to Crush Political Enemies

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Hindsight is 20/20. It's easy to criticize RBG for not retiring when she could. If Sotomayor was to pass away during the next 4 years, will she be viewed like RBG?

No. RBG was ~75 when Obama took office the first time, Sotomayor was ~66 when Biden took office. If RBG had retired in either of Obama's two terms the court would still be 5-4, not 6-3. If Sotomayor gets replaced by a Trump appointee it'll be 7-2. I'd argue that 5-4 to 6-3 is a bigger jump than 6-3 to 7-2, especially with basically no moderates among the GOP appointees.

It's still not great, and I think she should have retired when Breyer did, but geriatrics gotta geriatric. Pelosi is still in office, Sanders just won another 6-year Senate term at age 83, Dick Durbin just turned 80, etc.... Just retire you old fucks, and let someone else have a go. They're not going to do worse than you did.

[JPhillips]

Pretty fucking rich that GOPers are pissed at Casey for not concerning in PA yet.

[JPhillips]

Judge Ho is testing out the gobbledygook that the right is going to use to end birthright citizenship. It won't count during an invasion and the President gets to decide when there's an invasion. Problem solved.

[JPhillips]

dola

Israeli minister in charge of settlements says it's time to start preparation to annex the West Bank.

[GrantDawg]

Trump has picked Congressman Lee Zeldin for the EPA. Of bad choices, he at least has acknowledged climate change. Doesn't mean he wants to do anything about it.

[JPhillips]

Somehow Trump is going to eliminate the Dept of Education and simultaneously have control of primary, secondary, and college education standards.

My guess is they'll pass laws giving people the right to sue and allow right-wing judges to impose education standards.

[GrantDawg]

Marco Rubio is being tapped for Secretary of State. Big responsibility for Little Marco.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Hmmm

Be nice if he was able to somehow find a win-win and normalize relations with Cuba

[GrantDawg]

The thinking is DeSantis will likely tap his Chief of Staff to fill Rubio's seat to keep it open for Denantis to take it in 2026. The last Florida governor to try this was Charlie Crist, except he ended up losing in 2010 to Rubiio.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[JPhillips]

A f-ton better than Ric Grenell.

[JPhillips]

dola

If Trump fires Marco after Marco resigns from the Senate that would be his most alpha move ever. And we all know eventually Marco is getting fired.

[Atocep]

I know pretty much everyone here knows this, but I'm so tired of right wingers trying to convince others that Trump ran on some message of unity. Unless you're white and male there is no interest in anything resembling unity from Trump.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

dola

If Trump fires Marco after Marco resigns from the Senate that would be his most alpha move ever. And we all know eventually Marco is getting fired.

These guys are lining up for administration positions thinking it will put them in position for the 2028 nomination when they have absolutely no chance because Trump already made them a joke to all of his followers.

[MIJB#19]

Originally Posted by Atocep

I know pretty much everyone here knows this, but I'm so tired of right wingers trying to convince others that Trump ran on some message of unity. Unless you're white and male there is no interest in anything resembling unity from Trump.

Sane white males should have no interest either, there was a right wing non-criminal alternative on the ballot.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

The thinking is DeSantis will likely tap his Chief of Staff to fill Rubio's seat to keep it open for Denantis to take it in 2026. The last Florida governor to try this was Charlie Crist, except he ended up losing in 2010 to Rubiio.

It continues to boggle my mind that Florida, a state full of retirees, continues to send Rick Scott, a guy who literally defrauded Medicare, back to the Senate.

Proof, as if it were needed, that most voters are very low information indeed.

[Edward64]

Haven't seen it anywhere else but thehill.com has made the call.

Access to this page has been denied

Republicans win House, delivering Trump a trifecta

Republicans are projected to keep control of the House of Representatives, handing the party total control of Washington with President-elect Trump back in the White House in January.

Decision Desk HQ projected the GOP would hold the House by winning its 218th seat on Monday, the number needed for a majority in the lower chamber.

A clean sweep. The Dems misread the room pretty significantly.

Beyonce is 0-2, Taylor 0-1. How do you lose the first time voters with those 2 on your side?

[Lathum]

Saw today that google searches for "tariffs" are up like, 500%. This has a real Brexit feel.

[GrantDawg]

Hide your puppies, Kristi Noem is being named Secretary of Homeland Security.

[Lathum]

I have zero illusions about this administration being anything other than a disaster but at least he is picking people who have actual experience in governing.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by Edward64

A clean sweep. The Dems misread the room pretty significantly.

Beyonce is 0-2, Taylor 0-1. How do you lose the first time voters with those 2 on your side?

On the second part, because celebrity endorsements just don't mean much in politics.

I would actually say Democrats as a whole didn't do terribly in this election. They didn't have control of the House before, and at worst the margin there is going to be slightly more Republican than before. They won most of the Senate elections in the swing states, losing control there is just a function of which seats were up for re-election, things like Manchin being replaced which was always going to go Republican, and so on. Governor balance stayed the same.

The fact that Harris lost all the swing states but it appears PA is the only senate race that isn't going to the Democrats and the generally close nature of the election indicates that it isn't Democrats in general who failed. Not a red shift, but a Trump Shift; there was something about the Harris-Trump matchup that made people object to Harris more than other Democrats.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Saw today that google searches for "tariffs" are up like, 500%. This has a real Brexit feel.

Do people realize that Biden kept a vast majority of Trump's tariffs from 2016-2019? He also added a bunch on China in his term (esp on semiconductor, steel and EVs).

In fact, Biden has new tariffs on China going into effect in 2025 and 2026 on things like batteries, medical goods, solar cells, etc. At the end of the day, tariffs are always a short term drag on the US GDP but they do offer strategic support for US industries to compete (esp in areas where we don't want to be reliant on China).

Both parties have supported them and there's a good chance Harris would have continued and even extended many of the Tariffs under Trump and Biden had she won. This issue a big red herring for the election that people are making some new disaster coming in with Trump. He certainly wants more, but this was more of an issue to rally his base with nationalism against China.

If you looks at the numbers, the US generated $89 billion in additional taxes from tariffs under Trump's first term. In Biden's term, they generated $144 billion in taxes from tariffs. You are crazy if you think Harris was shutting down that source of revenue (and not expanding it to pay for a lot of what she wanted).

[JPhillips]

Again, Trump benefits from everyone assuming he's lying.

He's the one who said blanket tariffs. He's the one who said maybe we'll eliminate the income tax and replace it with tariffs.

[Arles]

Yeah, Trump has made a ton of promises he's never kept. I could see easing of social security tax with tariffs, but I can't see all of income tax. In two years, I think people are going to be amazed at how little these "extremely dangerous tariffs" have impacted things - partially because 60+% were already in effect in the Biden administration.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Arles

Do people realize that Biden kept a vast majority of Trump's tariffs from 2016-2019? He also added a bunch on China in his term (esp on semiconductor, steel and EVs).

In fact, Biden has new tariffs on China going into effect in 2025 and 2026 on things like batteries, medical goods, solar cells, etc. At the end of the day, tariffs are always a short term drag on the US GDP but they do offer strategic support for US industries to compete (esp in areas where we don't want to be reliant on China).

Both parties have supported them and there's a good chance Harris would have continued and even extended many of the Tariffs under Trump and Biden had she won. This issue a big red herring for the election that people are making some new disaster coming in with Trump. He certainly wants more, but this was more of an issue to rally his base with nationalism against China.

If you looks at the numbers, the US generated $89 billion in additional taxes from tariffs under Trump's first term. In Biden's term, they generated $144 billion in taxes from tariffs. You are crazy if you think Harris was shutting down that source of revenue (and not expanding it to pay for a lot of what she wanted).

There is a difference between strategically using tariffs as negotiating chips and saying they will solve all out financial woes.

If you take him at his word he is going to deport our migrant workforce which is basically 100% responsible for our supply chain of food while also claiming he will put a 20% tariff on all goods from Mexico. That's assuming they will even sell us their goods once remain in Mexico goes back into effect and we start using the US military on Mexico soil.

I'll choose to trust the word of 23 Nobel winning economists over the guy who bankrupted 3 casinos.

[Arles]

Trump's word is about as reliable as broken clock. He's right 2 out of of every 24 attempts just on accident.

He will continue what Biden and him had setup and he will probably extend the China ones. He will try to do some strategic ones on Europe and Japan specifically, but those are mostly on steel and semiconductor items we make in the US. As an aside, my day job is working for a US semiconductor company that has a brother/sister relationship with a big Japan exporter. They simply send their products to us, we house them for a period of months and distribute them to avoid the tariffs (we have been doing this even before Trump). Again, I don't think this will be as dire as people are making it out to be.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Arles

Yeah, Trump has made a ton of promises he's never kept. I could see easing of social security tax with tariffs, but I can't see all of income tax. In two years, I think people are going to be amazed at how little these "extremely dangerous tariffs" have impacted things - partially because 60+% were already in effect in the Biden administration.

The question isn't have they impacted things but has he kept his promises and made things better?

His solution to everything was tariffs and drill baby drill. It isn't just that he promised to remove income taxes. What about no taxes on tips? Subsidized child care? Cheaper good across the board, lower inflation, cheaper gas, affordable housing, etc...

All promises he made based off tariffs that he claims other nations will pay for despite corporations already having plans in place to raise the cost of consumer goods. People elected him FULL WELL KNOWING everything else that comes with it because he convinced enough low information voters he can fix it. IF two years from now it is status quo he has failed on that promise and we will be suffering all the other BS.

[Lathum]

Jesse Watters mom didn’t invite him to thanksgiving. lol.

[cuervo72]

Good.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Arles

Do people realize that Biden kept a vast majority of Trump's tariffs from 2016-2019? He also added a bunch on China in his term (esp on semiconductor, steel and EVs).

It's just different when the politician has a D as opposed to an R next to the name.

[RainMaker]

They're going to make Lara Trump the new Senator in Florida is my guess.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

They're going to make Lara Trump the new Senator in Florida is my guess.

That would mean Desantis is not interested in being a Senator and is only eyeing the White House in 4 years. No way he puts someone in that position that he thinks will run again if he his planning on running for it.

[larrymcg421]

I mean, it might be that we were talking about universal tariffs vs. targeted tariffs, but sure, just throw out stupid one liners like an asshole.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

That would mean Desantis is not interested in being a Senator and is only eyeing the White House in 4 years. No way he puts someone in that position that he thinks will run again if he his planning on running for it.

I think he wants to be Senator but he's also too much of a pussy to stand up to Trump.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I mean, it might be that we were talking about universal tariffs vs. targeted tariffs, but sure, just throw out stupid one liners like an asshole.

Yeah, I agree with this. The 10% tariff across the board is a very bad idea in my opinion and I doubt it would ever pass. That's just stupid. I do think that having targeted tariffs to allow US companies to stay competitive and active in key industries isn't a bad idea. Especially since China basically pays for their companies to initially make things at a loss until they run out all the competition and then they slowly raise up prices after.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I mean, it might be that we were talking about universal tariffs vs. targeted tariffs, but sure, just throw out stupid one liners like an asshole.

Sure, they were targeted to eliminate competition from companies that donate large sums of money to Democrats. An added boost of exacerbating climate change too. We're at the point of defending crony capitalism.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Arles

Yeah, I agree with this. The 10% tariff across the board is a very bad idea in my opinion and I doubt it would ever pass. That's just stupid. I do think that having targeted tariffs to allow US companies to stay competitive and active in key industries isn't a bad idea. Especially since China basically pays for their companies to initially make things at a loss until they run out all the competition and then they slowly raise up prices after.

Why is it the US governments responsibility to eliminate competition for companies? Why can't those companies just create a better product or lower their prices? This is just corporate welfare packaged as populism.

And the tariff talk doesn't mention retaliatory tariffs. Maybe you help the shareholders of auto companies a bit. But these other countries will put a tariff on corn, soybeans, whiskey, wine, etc. So you helped one industry and fucked over others. I get that politicians like that because now industries will have to fight to give more donations to stop that, but you're also just reaching a point where the government chooses what businesses get to win and which ones get to lose.

[Arles]

People have been using the "chicken little" export tariffs on US goods forever. They rarely occur (outside of maybe China). The US has had tariffs on Europe and Japan before and didn't get nailed there. I don't think we should have tariffs on Europe or Japan, and usually the ones we have done in the past are pretty minimal.

If Trump starts putting a 10-15% tariff on everything imported, I will be right beside you guys against it.