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:
Does a tire fire affect you even if its not being burned on your property?

I swear im going to have to explain object permeation next

APES STRONGER TOGETHER, hows that for ya Mr. Darkest N. Gorilla?
Burma's on fire. I don't fucking care. That's like asking me to care about a house on fire in a different state.
 
you sound like some nigger in NYC circa june 1940

"All those countries conquered by the nazis arent American, why die for danzig?

IF YOUR NEIGHBORS HOUSE IS ON FIRE IT WILL BURN ITS WAY TO YOU IF YOU DONT HELP HIM
America was not surely invested in going to war in Europe. Even after Pearl Harbor, it was the Nazis who declared war on the United States, not the other way around. That war was not required by the Tripartite Pact with Japan. It was entirely possible that the United States would not enter war with Germany until, at least, a later point. So your analogy is bullshit—and that's coming from a Jew who has no love for the mustached painter from Austria.

The policy of the United States literally until Germany declared war (which they didn't have to) was "we'll give money and supplies to the Soviets and British, but why die for Danzig?"
 
If we're talking about the Democrat platform, I predict they're gonna go all in on gibs. Full on UBI, bribe the American people. I think that it would be the most tempting short-term thing they could offer the American people to lure them away from the right. The more they play on people's economic anxiety, the more convinced of this I become.
 
If we're talking about the Democrat platform, I predict they're gonna go all in on gibs. Full on UBI, bribe the American people. I think that it would be the most tempting short-term thing they could offer the American people to lure them away from the right. The more they play on people's economic anxiety, the more convinced of this I become.
YANG GANG'S GONNA GET ITS WIN ANY DAY NOW
 

Chicago Has Seen Significant Gun Violence Declines Under ‘Peacekeepers’ Program, New Study Finds​

Matt Masterson | April 17, 2025, 1:28 pm
The Peacekeepers program, an initiative that seeks to reduce harm in some of the Chicago neighborhoods most affected by gun violence, has led to significant reductions in shootings in recent years, a new report has found.

Gov. J.B. Pritzker, Mayor Brandon Johnson and other public officials lauded the program after a new Northwestern University study found that specific “hotspots” where peacekeepers have been deployed have seen drops of more than 40% in gun violencebetween 2023 and 2024.

“Corner by corner, block by block, neighborhood by neighborhood, we are freeing our communities from the age-old patterns of crime and violence,” Pritzker said during an event Thursday at the Pullman Community Center. “That bold and innovative approach has produced truly remarkable results.”

Pritzker on Thursday also took aim at President Donald Trump, saying public safety is “under attack” under his administration. Pritzker pointed to a new memo from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which he said proposes eliminating all federal violence intervention funding.

“Donald Trump is OK if people in Chicago die,” Pritzker said. “Why? Because he wants to cut life-saving programs. That’s what is going to happen — people will die if we cut violence intervention programs. Why is he doing this? Because he wants to give massive tax cuts to the wealthiest people in America.”

Under the Peacekeepers program, more than 1,200 individuals have been deployed into areas affected by gun violence to help defuse tensions and mediate conflicts among residents. Those individuals are often members of those communities and leverage their relationships to help stop violence before it happens.

The program, which is largely state-funded and implemented by the gun violence prevention nonprofit Chicago CRED, launched as a pilot program in 2018 in 14 community areas affected by gun violence: Austin, West Garfield Park, East Garfield Park, Brighton Park, North Lawndale, Little Village, Back of the Yards, Roseland, West Pullman, Greater Englewood, Humboldt Park, Woodlawn, South Shore and Greater Grand Crossing.

Northwestern’s Center for Neighborhood Engaged Research & Science in a new report this month found that those community areas and the violence hotspots where peacekeepers were deployed each saw sharper declines in shootings than the city overall between 2023 and 2024.

According to the report, the Peacekeepers program led to a 41% drop in victimizations within violence hotspots — areas with disproportionately high levels of shootings and victimizations — during that 24-month period compared to the two years prior.

That same report found a 31% decrease in the number of shootings across the Peacekeepers’ entire community areas during that same period.

“I’m proud to say in the city of Chicago, crime is down,” Johnson said Thursday, noting that thus far in 2025, homicides are down more than 20% compared to last year. “That does not happen without the partnership — violence interrupters, community members as well as our police department.”

By the end of the 2024 fiscal year, the Peacekeepers program had expanded from those 14 pilot communities to 27 total community areas in Chicago, eight suburban communities and more than 200 hotspots.

The Northwestern report also found that 13 of the 14 community areas saw increases to their average “peace intervals,” identified as the amount of time between violent incidents.

Those areas collectively totaled a net increase of 136 days without shootings in the 2023-24 period compared to the previous two years. Andrew Papachristos, the Northwestern professor who studied the Peacekeepers program, said that time offers residents “respite from trauma (and) time to heal.”

“Your presence matters, your conversations matter, your courage matters,” Papachristos said Thursday, speaking to the Peacekeepers in attendance. “You are literally extending moments of peace — that matters.”
Link

Let’s look at annual homicide rates for Chicago, shall we? This is from Grok.

• 2000: ~630 homicides, rate ~21.7 per 100,000 (population ~2.9 million).
• 2001: ~666 homicides, rate ~23.0 per 100,000.
• 2002: ~656 homicides, rate ~22.6 per 100,000.
• 2003: ~601 homicides, rate ~20.7 per 100,000.
• 2004: 448 homicides, rate 15.65 per 100,000.
• 2005: ~451 homicides, rate ~15.7 per 100,000.
• 2006: ~471 homicides, rate ~16.4 per 100,000.
• 2007: ~443 homicides, rate ~15.4 per 100,000.
• 2008: ~513 homicides, rate ~17.9 per 100,000.
• 2009: ~459 homicides, rate ~16.0 per 100,000.
• 2010: ~436 homicides, rate 16.02 per 100,000.
• 2011: ~433 homicides, rate ~16.0 per 100,000.
• 2012: ~506 homicides, rate ~18.7 per 100,000.
• 2013: ~415 homicides, rate ~15.3 per 100,000.
• 2014: ~426 homicides, rate ~15.7 per 100,000.
• 2015: ~478 homicides, rate 18.6 per 100,000.
• 2016: ~762 homicides, rate ~28.1 per 100,000.
• 2017: 653 homicides, rate ~24.1 per 100,000.
• 2018: 561 homicides, rate ~20.7 per 100,000.
• 2019: 492 homicides, rate ~18.2 per 100,000.
• 2020: 770 homicides, rate 28.0 per 100,000.
• 2021: 804 homicides, rate 29.6 per 100,000.
• 2022: 695-725 homicides, rate ~25.8-26.9 per 100,000 (709 reported by some sources).
• 2023: 617 homicides, rate ~22.9 per 100,000.
• 2024: 573 homicides, rate ~21.2 per 100,000.
• 2025: 101 homicides (through April 12), projected rate unavailable due to partial data.

Lmao
IMG_2431.webp
 
Last edited:
you sound like some nigger in NYC circa june 1940

"All those countries conquered by the nazis arent American, why die for danzig?

NYC isn't in France, which is where the "Why die for Danzig?" propaganda was circulated. Germany shares a much longer border with France than Sudan does with the United States.

Prior to declaration of war, the USA supported the Western Allies in the war with materiel and eventually escorts because the globe-spanning British and French empires falling under Nazi control had immediate, obvious consequences to the security of the United States. By contrast, Burma could be taken over by a satanic death cult, and it wouldn't affect us at all.
 
Burma's on fire. I don't fucking care. That's like asking me to care about a house on fire in a different state.
I remember when Myanmar got a major female leader named Aung San Suu Kyi, who was praised by international lefty media for transitioning the country from military junta to democracy. Her political maneuverings catapulted her party to power, which created a prime minister role special for her, and she got a Nobel Peace Prize. Then she killed a bunch of journalists, cheated in later elections, killed a bunch of protestors, and said jack shit about the Rohingya genocide (for which she had her Nobel Peace Prize revoked).

Some jeet I knew years ago who went to Harvard carried water for Aung San Suu Kyi like nobody's business. Knowing that she turned out to be yet another communist murderer, no doubt destroying that lunatic's parasocial relationship, brings me joy.
 
Last edited:
Some jeet I knew years ago who went to Harvard carried water for Aung San Suu Kyi like nobody's business. Knowing that she turned out to be yet another communist lunatic, no doubt destroying that lunatic's parasocial relationship, brings me joy.

Its time for the foreign policy faggots in the State Department to realize that...

India in general hates the West as much as China does.

And supporting and pandering to jeets isn't going to stop the chinks.

The jeets have a stronger military relationship with Russia as well.

I always thought this business pandering push and outsourcing to India, was some retarded plot to keep India in the Western Sphere, when that is where the idea of the "non aligned" movement originated during the Cold War.
 
Unfortunately pitches like "we need to help this country stabilize because they might be an incredibly good ally and give us stuff in the future, just trust me" does not immediately sell itself to Americans anymore after the absolute debacles in the Middle East the last two decades, Afghanistan's current situation especially. I'd argue there's a cultural and religious difference when comparing Ukraine to those countries, but that's why people are skeptical.

The very last country that was "stabilized" in the current paradigm.

Is run by Al Qaeda and former ISIS member, who got sanitized by CNN and supported by the kind of libshits that support Ukraine to a unhinged degree.
 
Back