US US Politics General 2 - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

General Trump Banner.png

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hair plugs was Biden's thing ( I think Rush even called him Plugs, iirc), they're probably just projecting their secret disgust of Biden's shitty hair on Trump's mane of combover magic. Insulting Trump's hair is just a waste of energy, he literally took the hair insults and turned it into a brand, like three+ decades ago. His silhouette is as famous as Hitchcock's.
 
4chan had an April Fools day event that closed /pol/ for most of the day. When it came back online there were threads, but bots seemed to be much lower than usual. Here are some comments made by posters claiming to be from Wisconsin.
WI anon 1.pngWI anon 2.pngWI anon 3.png
Demoralization shills out in full force as usual. Stop going to /pol/.
 
None of the three mention Palestine or deportations.

First anon says he won't vote until policies benefit the "white American".
Second anon says fuck "cuckservatives" and MIGA.
Third anon calls Trump a zionist that wants to ban criticism of Israel.

P.S. those are the first three anons I found on 4plebs saying they were from Wisconsin and talked about voting. I didn't try and cherry pick them.
It’s more that the anons are so uncompromising and are also demoralizing shills. The dems won because the dems vote more now and you are seeing that most dems vote in Wisconsin regardless of election
 
I saw people talking about the federal reserve so I am going to post what might be my most controversial post here and that is saying something you people do not like me.

Ok if you are against the central banking, can you explain why without using America or the federal reserve as an example ?

The reason I say this is because the federal reserve is not a central bank at least not in the traditional sense of the world, it operates with way more autonomy then almost nay major central bank. If anything you think this would be liked my more market oriented libertarian types, so why do you critique the federal reserve but never say the Bank of England or the people's bank of China ? do your critiques extend to those central banks ? If not then why ? they are more government controlled and give the government more power over the market so you would think they would be worst but libertarians almost never critique them so I guess no.
Central banking is a great thing. It litterally creates money out of nothing for free with no catch. Before central banking people had to just have all the money to do something. Now you can have a fart app worth the equivalent of 1000 years of food harvest that creates no real actual value. Technology and central governmental control truly is amazing!
 
Demoralization shills out in full force as usual. Stop going to /pol/.
I think you are incorrect in your assessment of them being shills.

I agree /pol/ is a shithole filled with bots and shills intended to demoralize people. I think bots or shills didn't post those 3 posts. I think the April Fools shutdown gave a short window with more authentic users posting when /pol/ came back online.

The sentiments expressed by those three anons is in line with the posting trends of their demographic (disaffected white male from midwest). I see the same patterns across the "funny bro" websites (9Gag, FunnyJunk, iFunny, Memedroid, etc). 𝕏 has them too, but the algorithm kills their engagements so they don't post as much there and there is little back and forth conversations.
 
I can reasonably believe that some voters would be stupid enough to vote Yes on voter ID while simultaneously voting for the D judge. Doesn't mean there wasn't fraud, just that it's more believable.

Oh and newsflash from an NC resident for my cheesefucking northern neighbors: that voter ID law you just overwhelmingly voted on will now be litigated endlessly by your own elected state officials who hate you. You, the people, wanted voter ID but your "betters" (like your newly elected supreme Court justice) will attempt to throw it out all the way up to SCOTUS. Enjoy!
 
The EU and U.S. actually have a relatively balanced trade relationship when accounting for both goods and services
Lolwut, even I know that's a lie


the Trump administration preferred to communicate directly with individual EU capitals, even though Brussels plays a pivotal role in trade policy for its 27 members.
Cry harder

“a cold and windless winter coupled with a supply shock from Russia at the start of the year,”
Wow the thing Trump warned about actually happened

The question is how seriously can we take Trump's plans for tariffs
How retarded are these people?

Ajay Parmar
Oh makes sense

Anyway thanks for the article. The media gives me the impression that the EU is like a woman being confused that a man speaking plainly is just a man speaking plainly and no games are really being had.
 
I can reasonably believe that some voters would be stupid enough to vote Yes on voter ID while simultaneously voting for the D judge. Doesn't mean there wasn't fraud, just that it's more believable.
The number of normie retards who intentionally do this shit to "balance things out" is incalculable. It won't be until the oldest three or even four generations die out that this will stop being a thing.
 
The number of normie retards who intentionally do this shit to "balance things out" is incalculable. It won't be until the oldest three or even four generations die out that this will stop being a thing.
People have a really hard time believing this but it's true. Very similar to our close supreme Court race that ended in the D's favor. This candidate (NC) should have lost on merit alone. She's a fiercely partisan activist judge appointed (not elected) by our previous Governor.

She won anyway and the reason is exactly what you said. Normies who want to be "impartial" see a potential 6-1 Republican lean on the state supreme Court and intentionally "balance it" with their vote no matter what their beliefs are.
 
People have a really hard time believing this but it's true. Very similar to our close supreme Court race that ended in the D's favor. This candidate (NC) should have lost on merit alone. She's a fiercely partisan activist judge appointed (not elected) by our previous Governor.

She won anyway and the reason is exactly what you said. Normies who want to be "impartial" see a potential 6-1 Republican lean on the state supreme Court and intentionally "balance it" with their vote no matter what their beliefs are.
Well good thing in Ohio we voted out 2 of our 3 liberal judges since the other one wasn't on the ballot and also got rid of our Neocon judge who was siding with Democrats most times and replaced her with a better judge, so I guess we'll see what happens next election. A lot of boomers will vote democrat now simply because it doesn't violate the status quo for them. They want to enjoy their retirement and since they have enough money for themselves they aren't threatened by the results of Democrat rule. There's also a lot who are still in that 60s mindset of protesting and have refused to let that go even today.
 
The "blue cliff" at 4AM was a Milwaukee vote dump.
Okay, and I'm arguing that vote dumps can be done carefully. Especially in a limited special election where they're only paying attention to a few counties. Especially one where Trump personally humiliated on national television when he told the world that Clinton tried to warn them to pay attention to Wisconsin and they failed to do so. Just because cheating is not as blatant as other instances doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I detailed it in another post but you're talking about half a million people voting for Crawford but either voting for Voter ID or simply not voting on Questions at all.

I'm sorry, but the narrative of "it's a bipartisan issue" doesn't fly when it's a statistically significant number and you have the leftists screaming no voter ID from the top of their lungs every chance they get. Just because it's less obvious until you break down the numbers doesn't mean it didn't happen. You can't have a narrative of "only people who care about politics vote in the special elections" and "a quarter of the voters simply didn't vote on an important question" and then say it's a statistically significant number that's a literal 1/4 of the total vote. There's laws on statistics and probability that defy these results enough to warrant a hard audit.
 
Back