US US Politics General 2: Hope Edition - 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:
Click to expand...
Seems like a good time to post some Supreme Court-related remarks from a couple years ago that may or may not age in an interesting way:
"The Biden Administration should ignore the court" - AOC, 2023



"The Supreme Court blocked it but it did not stop me" - Biden, 2024

 
SpergioLeonne said:
Generally yeah, you don’t want a dictator. The problem we have is that our political institutions clearly don’t answer to the president unless the president happens to agree with them
Click to expand...
When that political institution is congress you kinda don't want it to answer to the president. Congress is supposed to be a body where negotiations between factions of the population and the states can take place, leading to a lot of conciliation. One faction (or group of states) take a bit, but they have to give up a bit in return. Democracy is at it's best when nobody truly gets away with everything, but nobody is miserable. Giving unilateral power of taxation to the president removes the negotiation which has a price when it comes to consensus. You can quickly get to 52% of people voting to fuck over the other 48% for free (this has happened more and more as the executive has gotten more and more imperial, Trump's just the latest of imperial presidents) that voted against it if you remove that process.
 
Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:
If you're going solely on physical appearance for congress and senate, I will pick one from each party off the top of my head. For Democrats, I'd probably go with AOC; I like latinas and she's a good looking woman, honorable mention of Jasmine Crockett since I got a weakness for nice smiles and she's probably got a nice ass. For Republicans, I'd go Nancy Mace since she has the milf thing going on. Lauren Boebert would be honorable mention for Republican since she's younger, in shape and I bet she's amazing in bed
Click to expand...
I actually think Jasmine Crockett is kinda cute, except she has some fivehead going on and she's such a dumb cunt that it ruins everything for me. AOC looks like a donkey and I can't unsee it. I do not understand the attraction people have for her, but everyone is different. Boebert reminds me of Sarah Palin. Nancy Mace does have that MILF thing going on, but she'd probably be more up @The Last Stand's alley than mine.
Hollywood Hulk Hogan said:
What about you? Purely physical appearance, from each party
Click to expand...
I thought Kyrsten Sinema had a nice body, so that's one for the Democrats. On the Republican side, pickings are pretty slim. Anna Paulina Luna is good-looking, albeit kooky. There are a few random ones that I think are cute for different reasons, but I'd rather not say and get judged.

If Tulsi counts, yeah, she's quite attractive.
 
Stupid Sexy Flanders said:
If you guys lived outside your bubble a bit you'd realize this is the logical decision.

Also, good luck in the midterms!
Click to expand...
It's amazing that both rates to measure inflation havent risen in the slightest due to tariffs, but I'm sure it's happening despite every known measure not showing it.
 
Imperial Citizen said:
Trump's use of the IEEPA to claim that the executive can put a tax on the importation of any goods, from any country, at any rate, for an unlimited amount of time sounds so antithetical to the nature of how American government should be.
Click to expand...
International relations, including trade relations, are a matter for the executive, and the President is the ultimate executive authority. Trade companies do not outrank the PotUS.
 
Professor Donger said:
Trump could also do what democrats did when the Supreme Court ruled against affirmative action and simply ignore them. They've faced no consequences for it so why not.
Click to expand...
Would be hilarious if after getting fucked over by the courts for a year, the thing that finally gets him to go full Jackson is this because it specifically triggers his autistic rage.
 
Breadbassket said:
President Trump is holding a press conference on SCOTUS’ striking down his tariffs at 12:45 ET
Click to expand...
I can not wait to see the cope and seethe. Wonder if he’ll be chuddie enough to reannouce tariffs through a different method
pwnest injun said:
International relations, including trade relations, are a matter for the executive, and the President is the ultimate executive authority. Trade companies do not outrank the PotUS.
Click to expand...
tariffs are a bit more nuanced than that chud
 
ThisIsGonnaBeGood said:
Would be hilarious if after getting fucked over by the courts for a year, the thing that finally gets him to go full Jackson is this because it specifically triggers his autistic rage.
Click to expand...
Who knows what he's gonna do but this is the man who has had the idea of America getting a "fair deal" with its trading partners on his mind since the 1980s.

 
Zacaria's Hours said:
When that political institution is congress you kinda don't want it to answer to the president. Congress is supposed to be a body where negotiations between factions of the population and the states can take place, leading to a lot of conciliation. One faction (or group of states) take a bit, but they have to give up a bit in return. Democracy is at it's best when nobody truly gets away with everything, but nobody is miserable. Giving unilateral power of taxation to the president removes the negotiation which has a price when it comes to consensus. You can quickly get to 52% of people voting to fuck over the other 48% for free (this has happened more and more as the executive has gotten more and more imperial, Trump's just the latest of imperial presidents) that voted against it if you remove that process.
Click to expand...
Problem here being that if trump was Lot, congress would be getting turned to salt

I don’t think there’s 10 members of congress who genuinely place the well-being of their constituents above reelection
 
Mister Fister said:
You're a retarded nigger faggot and so am I.
Click to expand...
1771607530857.png

The president has alternative statutes to use to implement tariffs, but more importantly most of the work done by the tariffs was to bully other countries into compliance with pro-America policies in order to avoid tariffs. That means that reversing the tariffs is largely immaterial, especially if there exist workarounds for enforcement and the potential for future legislation. The leaders of Country X aren't going to risk half their GDP on a cheeky two week policy change while Trump figures out which statute he should use for the next round of punitive tariffs.
 
mlanguishi said:
she's getting up there in age
Click to expand...
Tulsi has that extremely rare trait of appealing gravitas in a woman. Usually when women try for it, they come out shrill and bitchy like the rest of the women in congress.

She’s a classic, and she’s in better shape than Nancy Mace. I appeal to the farms to look up some pics before mentioning Nancy Mace in the context of attractive women. She’s a bent stick with bolt ons
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom