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:
Fox Poll: 70% of Americans say groceries cost more than a year ago and nearly 60% blame Trump for it.The sentiment shows how quickly voters are linking the new administration’s trade and tariff policies to rising prices at the checkout line.
View attachment 8142697
What an utterly retarded survey. Both are obvious loaded questions, where the first means that even if everything went down in price, there would still need to be a top 5 and the second doesnt say if there *is* or *isn't* inflation, but whether or not it's the president's fault. Frankly if almost half of the country thinks the president, the largest driving force outside of the Fed, doesn't take the blame for inflation, that is phenomenal. If I shot someone and 40% of the jurors said I wasn't at fault, it would be a cut and dry case of self-defense
 
Last edited:
Just keep in mind that AOC or another Democrat candidate will win the 2028 election and render all of our progress against gay race communism null and void for life.
I agree. JD Vance is looking like the most likely to win in 2028 at the moment. Admittedly that's because there's virtually no competition that we've seen. Who knows? A lot can happen in three years.
 
JD Vance is looking like the most likely to win in 2028 at the moment.
The GOP won't even allow him to get nominated considering he didn't immediately get on his knees and suck Israel's cock the moment he was asked. Best case scenario we're getting Marco Rubio, most likely we're getting Nikki Haley or Vivek Scamaswarthy.
 
Last edited:
is this comment intelligible, everoyne always complains my writing sucks.

View attachment 8143640

View attachment 8143639View attachment 8143638
Its very good.
You could strengthen the opening. something like:
'I write as President of the United States Internet Preservation Society and on behalf of countless online publishers and small businesses systematically de-banked for lawful but politically disfavored speech.'
The 'solely' section on page 2 could use an example between decision. and This such as:
'For instance, a bank could deny services to a cryptocurrency exchange by citing "reputational risk" and then tacking on a minor BSA concern, thereby evading the rule entirely'.
edit: insanely late, oops
 
Last edited:
Note: lol none of this will happen. Pls save me from my unwanted cope disorder

You could just as easily come to terms with the fact that Trump 47, while still a better administration from the onset than Trump 45, is still ultimately fallible. Trump doing shit we don't like is par for the course. Trump hiring people, or otherwise endorsing people who fucking suck (cough FUCKING CUOMO cough THAT HARAMI NARASWAMY cough) is unfortunately par for the course. American presidents kissing the Israeli ring? Again: par for the course. Don't be a dooming fucking faggot like @HOMO FOR LIFE RETURNS. We still have another 3 years of this administration, and all the REEing that it comes with.

Best case scenario? God-Emperor Trump topples the deep state and enshrines MAGA into the constitution.
Worst case scenario? @Fatpacks actually being right about something for once
What's been happening thus far? Boring ass bullshit that niggas here read way too deeply into.
 
Honestly this alone is enough to have me happy with Trump. Any Republicans not supporting the party right now are asking for a senseless loss. We need to up voter registration with the youth further honestly. I think even older boomer demographics can be swayed also. A lot of them have no hope for the future.
I dunno if this has been forgotton, but you can support the party and disagree with some of trumps policy.
 
I'm glad to see over on Twitter basically no one is supporting this stupid 50 year mortgage idea. Everyone needs to loudly oppose it. One good thing about Trump is that if he sees enough public outcry about something from his base, he usually will reevaluate and change course or back off.
Making
Amortization
Great
Again

(For the banks)

Oh banks and investment firms will love it so it will happen. Imagine offering a credit lousy client a 6% interest rate at 50 years - and they take it.

You get to crash the economy and offer a yield of 4% to investors when government bonds might now only then offer 2.5%.

In 10 years when that poor guy has paid back a mere 10% of his loan while
Paying you 6%, he then defaults and you get an asset that has been paying 6% and has gone up in value 30% during that time and you mortgagee sell his asset and make fat.

Conversely in a good economy he defaults and you get your asset from your borrower with almost no principle paid but an increase in value.

Oh yeah, it will happen because the only
Loser is the borrower. All those properties owned by investment firms can be sold off as long term high yielding investments to offer to renters of the future once they control the values to crash them when they need to buy and inflate when they need to sell.

Rent and pay interest. Never own. The model of the future.
 
Last edited:
I dunno if this has been forgotton, but you can support the party and disagree with some of trumps policy.
MAGA doesn't like that attitude though. Every Trump policy has to be total genius that completely works the way it's intended even when reality generates the opposite effect. Like Trump's ceasefire in Palestine that went up in smoke in a few days or TACOing out when tariffing China over rare earths only to be met with China deciding to buy soybeans from everywhere else.

Watch this comment get negrates for being mildly critical.
 
Nigger loving Lincoln notwithstanding (he always looked part nog to me but that's just my opinion) why did he wait two and a half years instead of doing the emancipation proclamation immediately?
Because France and Britain were thinking about siding with the Confederacy. Unfortunately:
View attachment 8145659
I don't doubt that Lincoln had a boner for the spooks, but freeing them was not an act of compassion, it was a tactic of war.
The union would not have held up had Britain or France gotten involved in the war.
Even in its infancy, American culture was centered around...
 
Even in its infancy, American culture was centered around...
It was foretold in the ancient Founding Father texts.

The following words are from Notes on the State of Virginia, written in 1781 during the then ongoing American Revolution by famous writer, Governor of Virginia and 3rd President Thomas Jefferson. Within these paragraphs, Jefferson eloquently covers the topic race, his disdain for Black people, justifies White supremacy and advocates for his desire to emancipate the slaves so that they can be sent elsewhere.

To emancipate all slaves born after passing the act. The bill reported by the revisors does not itself contain this proposition; but an amendment containing it was prepared, to be offered to the legislature whenever the bill should be taken up, and further directing, that they should continue with their parents to a certain age, then be brought up, at the public expence, to tillage, arts or sciences, according to their geniusses, till the females should be eighteen, and the males twenty-one years of age, when they should be colonized to such place as the circumstances of the time should render most proper, sending them out with arms, implements of houshold and of the handicraft arts, seeds, pairs of the useful domestic animals, &c. to declare them a free and independent people, and extend to them our alliance and protection, till they have acquired strength; and to send vessels at the same time to other parts of the world for an equal number of white inhabitants; to induce whom to migrate hither, proper encouragements were to be proposed. It will probably be asked, Why not retain and incorporate the blacks into the state, and thus save the expence of supplying, by importation of white settlers, the vacancies they will leave? Deep rooted prejudices entertained by the whites; ten thousand recollections, by the blacks, of the injuries they have sustained; new provocations; the real distinctions which nature has made; and many other circumstances, will divide us into parties, and produce convulsions which will probably never end but in the extermination of the one or the other race.—To these objections, which are political, may be added others, which are physical and moral. The first difference which strikes us is that of colour. Whether the black of the negro resides in the reticular membrane between the skin and scarfskin, or in the scarf-skin itself; whether it proceeds from the colour of the blood, the colour of the bile, or from that of some other secretion, the difference is fixed in nature, and is as real as if its seat and cause were better known to us. And is this difference of no importance? Is it not the foundation of a greater or less share of beauty in the two races? Are not the fine mixtures of red and white, the expressions of every passion by greater or less suffusions of colour in the one, preferable to that eternal monotony, which reigns in the countenances, that immoveable veil of black which covers all the emotions of the other race? Add to these, flowing hair, a more elegant symmetry of form, their own judgment in favour of the whites, declared by their preference of them, as uniformly as is the preference of the Oranootan for the black women over those of his own species. The circumstance of superior beauty, is thought worthy attention in the propagation of our horses, dogs, and other domestic animals; why not in that of man? Besides those of colour, figure, and hair, there are other physical distinctions proving a difference of race. They have less hair on the face and body. They secrete less by the kidnies, and more by the glands of the skin, which gives them a very strong and disagreeable odour. This greater degree of transpiration renders them more tolerant of heat, and less so of cold, than the whites. Perhaps too a difference of structure in the pulmonary apparatus, which a late ingenious* experimentalist has discovered to be the principal regulator of animal heat, may have disabled them from extricating, in the act of inspiration, so much of that fluid from the outer air, or obliged them in expiration, to part with more of it.

* Crawford.

They seem to require less sleep. A black after hard labour through the day, will be induced by the slightest amusemements to sit up till midnight, or later, though knowing he must be out with the first dawn of the morning. They are at least as brave, and more adventuresome. But this may perhaps proceed from a want of fore-thought, which prevents their seeing a danger till it be present. When present, they do not go through it with more coolness or steadiness than the whites. They are more ardent after their female: but love seems with them to be more an eager desire, than a tender delicate mixture of sentiment and sensation. Their griefs are transient. Those numberless afflictions, which render it doubtful whether heaven has given life to us in mercy or in wrath, are less felt, and sooner forgotten with them. In general, their existence appears to participate more of sensation than reflection. To this must be ascribed their disposition to sleep when abstracted from their diversions, and unemployed in labour. An animal whose body is at rest, and who does not reflect, must be disposed to sleep of course. Comparing them by their faculties of memory, reason, and imagination, it appears to me, that in memory they are equal to the whites; in reason much inferior, as I think one could scarcely be found capable of tracing and comprehending the investigations of Euclid; and that in imagination they are dull, tasteless, and anomalous. It would be unfair to follow them to Africa for this investigation. We will consider them here, on the same stage with the whites, and where the facts are not apocryphal on which a judgment is to be formed. It will be right to make great allowances for the difference of condition, of education, of conversation, of the sphere in which they move. Many millions of them have been brought to, and born in America. Most of them indeed have been confined to tillage, to their own homes, and their own society: yet many have been so situated, that they might have availed themselves of the conversation of their masters; many have been brought up to the handicraft arts, from that circumstance have always been associated with the whites. Some have been liberally educated, and all have lived in countries where the arts and sciences are cultivated to a considerable degree, and have had before their eyes samples of the best works from abroad. The Indians, with no advantages of this kind, will often carve figures on their pipes not destitute of design and merit. They will crayon out an animal, a plant, or a country, so as to prove the existence of a germ in their minds which only wants cultivation. They astonish you with strokes of the most sublime oratory; such as prove their reason and sentiment strong, their imagination glowing and elevated. But never yet could I find that a black had uttered a thought above the level of plain narration; never see even an elementary trait of painting or sculpture. In music they are more generally gifted than the whites with accurate ears for tune and time, and they have been found capable of imagining a small catch*.

* The instrument proper to them is the Banjar, which they brought hither from Africa, and which is the original of the guitar, its chords being precisely the four lower chords of the guitar.

Whether they will be equal to the composition of a more extensive run of melody, or of complicated harmony, is yet to be proved. Misery is often the parent of the most affecting touches in poetry.—Among the blacks is misery enough, God knows, but no poetry. Love is the peculiar œstrum of the poet. Their love is ardent, but it kindles the senses only, not the imagination. Religion indeed has produced a Phyllis Whately; but it could not produce a poet. The compositions published under her name are below the dignity of criticism. The heroes of the Dunciad are to her, as Hercules to the author of that poem. Ignatius Sancho has approached nearer to merit in composition; yet his letters do more honour to the heart than the head. They breathe the purest effusions of friendship and general philanthropy, and shew how great a degree of the latter may be compounded with strong religious zeal. He is often happy in the turn of his compliments, and his style is easy and familiar, except when he affects a Shandean fabrication of words. But his imagination is wild and extravagant, escapes incessantly from every restraint of reason and taste, and, in the course of its vagaries, leaves a tract of thought as incoherent and eccentric, as is the course of a meteor through the sky. His subjects should often have led him to a process of sober reasoning: yet we find him always substituting sentiment for demonstration. Upon the whole, though we admit him to the first place among those of his own colour who have presented themselves to the public judgment, yet when we compare him with the writers of the race among whom he lived, and particularly with the epistolary class, in which he has taken his own stand, we are compelled to enroll him at the bottom of the column. This criticism supposes the letters published under his name to be genuine, and to have received amendment from no other hand; points which would not be of easy investigation. The improvement of the blacks in body and mind, in the first instance of their mixture with the whites, has been observed by every one, and proves that their inferiority is not the effect merely of their condition of life. We know that among the Romans, about the Augustan age especially, the condition of their slaves was much more deplorable than that of the blacks on the continent of America. The two sexes were confined in separate apartments, because to raise a child cost the master more than to buy one. Cato, for a very restricted indulgence to his slaves in this particular,* took from them a certain price.

*Tous doulous etaxen örísmenon nomismatos homilcin tais therapainisin. Plutarch. Cato.

But in this country the slaves multiply as fast as the free inhabitants. Their situation and manners place the commerce between the two sexes almost without restraint.—The same Cato, on a principle of œconomy, always sold his sick and superannuated slaves. He gives it as a standing precept to a master visiting his farm, to sell his old oxen, old waggons, old tools, old and diseased servants, and every thing else become useless. 'Vendat boves vetulos, plaustrum vetus, ferramenta vetera, servum senem, servum morbosum, & si quid aliud supersit vendat.' Cato de re rusticâ. c. 2. The American slaves cannot enumerate this among the injuries and insults they receive. It was the common practice to expose in the island of Æsculapius, in the Tyber, diseased slaves, whose cure was like to become tedious†.

† Suet. Claud. 25.

The emperor Claudius, by an edict, gave freedom to such of them as should recover, and first declared, that if any person chose to kill rather than to expose them, it should be deemed homicide. The exposing them is a crime of which no instance has existed with us; and were it to be followed by death, it would be punished capitally. We are told of a certain Vedius Pollio, who, in the presence of Augustus, would have given a slave as food to his fish, for having broken a glass. With the Romans, the regular method of taking the evidence of their slaves was under torture. Here it has been thought better never to resort to their evidence. When a master was murdered, all his slaves, in the same house, or within hearing, were condemned to death. Here punishment falls on the guilty only, and as precise proof is required against him as against a freeman. Yet notwithstanding these and other discouraging circumstances among the Romans, their slaves were often their rarest artists. They excelled too in science, insomuch as to be usually employed as tutors to their master's children. Epictetus, Terence, and Phædrus, were slaves. But they were of the race of whites. It is not their condition then, but nature, which has produced the distinction.—Whether further observation will or will not verify the conjecture, that nature has been less bountiful to them in the endowments of the head, I believe that in those of the heart she will be found to have done them justice. That disposition to theft with which they have been branded, must be ascribed to their situation, and not to any depravity of the moral sense. The man, in whose favour no laws of property exist, probably feels himself less bound to respect those made in favour of others. When arguing for ourselves, we lay it down as a fundamental, that laws, to be just, must give a reciprocation of right: that, without this, they are mere arbitrary rules of conduct, founded in force, and not in conscience: and it is a problem which I give to the master to solve, whether the religious precepts against the violation of property were not framed for him as well as his slave? And whether the slave may not as justifiably take a little from one, who has taken all from him, as he may slay one who would slay him? That a change in the relations in which a man is placed should change his ideas of moral right and wrong, is neither new, nor peculiar to the colour of the blacks. Homer tells us it was so 2600 years ago.


'Emisu, gar t' areles apoainutai euruopa Zeus
Haneros, eut' an min kata doulion ema elesin. Od. 17. 323.


Jove fix'd it certain, that whatever day
Makes man a slave, takes half his worth away.


But the slaves of which Homer speaks were whites. Notwithstanding these considerations which must weaken their respect for the laws of property, we find among them numerous instances of the most rigid integrity, and as many as among their better instructed masters, of benevolence, gratitude, and unshaken fidelity.—The opinion, that they are inferior in the faculties of reason and imagination, must be hazarded with great dissidence. To justify a general conclusion, requires many observations, even where the subject may be submitted to the anatomical knife, to optical glasses, to analysis by fire, or by solvents. How much more then where it is a faculty, not a substance, we are examining; where it eludes the research of all the senses; where the conditions of its existence are various and variously combined; where the effects of those which are present or absent bid defiance to calculation; let me add too, as a circumstance of great tenderness, where our conclusion would degrade a whole race of men from the rank in the scale of beings which their Creator may perhaps have given them. To our reproach it must be said, that though for a century and a half we have had under our eyes the races of black and of red men, they have never yet been viewed by us as subjects of natural history. I advance it therefore as a suspicion only, that the blacks, whether originally a distinct race, or made distinct by time and circumstances, are inferior to the whites in the endowments both of body and mind. It is not against experience to suppose, that different species of the same genus, or varieties of the same species, may posses different qualifications. Will not a lover of natural history then, one who views the gradations in all the races of animals with the eye of philosophy, excuse an effort to keep those in the department of man as distinct as nature has formed them? This unfortunate difference of colour, and perhaps of faculty, is a powerful obstacle to the emancipation of these people. Many of their advocates, while they wish to vindicate the liberty of human nature, are anxious also to preserve its dignity and beauty. Some of these, embarrassed by the question 'What further is to be done with them?' join themselves in opposition with those who are actuated by sordid avarice only. Among the Romans emancipation required but one effort. The slave, when made free, might mix with, without staining the blood of his master. But with us a second is necessary, unknown to history. When freed, he is to be removed beyond the reach of mixture.
 
We're entering the last days of the American Republic.

It seems both sides are intent to bring about some level of authoritarianism, the Democrats because they believe they know what best for everyone and dammit you will do as we tell you you filthy peasants and the GoP because if they let the Democrats move first they will all find themselves on the wrong side of the now all powerful Democrats and either in jail or broken.

Honestly if we are heading for a American Empire stage of society development, and I'm pretty sure we are, I'd rather the authoritarianism come from the side that isn't full of troons, communists and karen's whose only goal is to enforce their will on the world.
This is probably the attitude the Roman Senators had when they just voted Augustus to have more and more power.

While everyone discusses the viability of 50 year mortgages and never owning a home (or buying one when they're 40) I'll just leave this totally unrelated text here as food for thought.

View attachment 8145481
That brings up a good point. I have only vaguely seen this 50 year mortgage stuff in the headlines...would it be open to anyone over 30? Like can a 50 year old walk into a bank and with a straight face apply for a 50 year mortgage?

It seems that since debts aren't transferable after death, it would be a great way to cheat the system. Get cheap mortgage, die, let the bank take the house. I know people whose parents did that, even married couples, with houses and credit cards. One guy had a car he bought when he was very old, and credit cards in his name only. He died and his wife let the bank take the car and told the cc companies to pound salt. None of their other communal property, even their house, was fair game for the banks or cc companies to take because it all reverted to her. And he got the use of that brand new car for a few years.

Seems if you weren't trying to give the house to anyone it would be a good scheme for an older person, unless the 50 year is only for people of a certain age. But would that be legal under age discrimination laws?
 
Faggot on the Tubes

Do these people not realize that it isn't necessary just the race of the people in a particular story. The problem is all the stories that Hollywood makes is one of two kinds. It's either fuck the White man he's the most evil thing or everyone good is actually not White. That in and of itself wouldn't be to awful but they're also poorly written in terms of their story structure. No major conflict or character arch. They're self indulgent.

I remember turning red because the whole story was a thinly veiled story about her first period and having her first sexual feelings. This might be a normal thing women go through, but so is taking a shit. I don't want to watch "every woman bleeds and gets horny" the movie with my young son or daughter. I want something that will inspire them to virtue, or inform them about the general conditions of life (suffering, evil, death, as well as hope, redemption, friendship etc.) At some point the every woman bleeds explaination should come from their mother or some other woman in their family. I'm pretty sure the moral of the story was fuck you mom and dad I can do what I want. The last refuge of the petulant child.

There will always be a number of people that will always love the slop served to them by the elite no matter how obviously shit. Truly sickening.
 
Interesting charts on the ACA premiums. What is not indicated is within the Red States what the break down is of participants if they are Republican or Democrat. But what is clear is that the ACA is heavily entrenched. Should Democrats take a win in ACA being extended but suffer the loss of the extended subsidy implemented in 2021 being not extended, the ones hardest by the expiration of that added 2021 subsidy will be that vital voting block of over 60 year olds. Its campy data as the 45-60K bracket isn't there (probably because it doesn't say what the news cycle wants it to say, assumption).

But as a participant myself, I hardly see a cost of an extra $100-200 per year as anything to worry about, given my grocery bill each month has climbed that.

Take it for what it is.

Screenshot 2025-11-09 at 8.36.53 AM.pngScreenshot 2025-11-09 at 8.37.41 AM.pngScreenshot 2025-11-09 at 8.42.50 AM.png
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom