USA Politics

Vaenyr said:
Eh, Newsom cozies up to Ben Shapiro and the like, and completely capitulates to their disingenuous framing of various issues. He's slimy and can't stand up to pressure or hold up against scrutiny. Having a savvy social media team that mocks Trump is not enough. Newsom went to a podcast, where the host mentioned AIPAC, and the dude completely short-circuited. He said "that's interesting" almost ten times in less than a minute. I really hope anyone but him will run for the Dems. Of course he'd be better than whatever the GOP will run, but I can't imagine there being any other realistic Dem candidate that I'd like less than freaking Gavin Newsom.
Click to expand...
You're probably getting him, unless somebody else with charisma stands up and runs in the primary. And he does more than mock Trump through social media. New California maps. litigation, uses his voice to make the case of a post Trump USA to world leaders etcetera. As it stands now, which might change, he's essentially the only relevant Democrat who is openly or semi-openly eying a candidacy. Maybe Whitmer will run too, that might work out, but we'll see.

Edit: and I just saw that video. He has to come up with a better answer to that going forward, and he probably will. He was a deer-in-the-headlights there for sure.
 
Last edited:
MrKnickerbocker said:
Pritzker is also making moves, but regardless of how awesome he is I don’t see anyone voting for a billionaire.
Click to expand...
I mean, he won his Governor's race by a large margin. I'm not sure that's going to be a deciding issue in a national race, especially not in a Trump world.
 
Last edited:
Detective Beauregard said:
I’m sure there are tens of conservatives who believe that, and I’ll have what you’re serving, but hold the racism and sexism. That ain’t my jam, son.
Click to expand...
Seriously, blatant racism is one of the main pillars of the conservative movement. They used to hide behind dogwhistles, but they've abandoned that for a while. Like, who are we kidding here? Let's be honest for once lol
 
Good job...

"High tariffs were supposed to slash chronically large U.S. trade deficits. Turns out they really didn’t.

The nation’s trade deficit fell in 2025 by a meager 0.2% to $901.5 billion, but only due to a large and quirky increase in gold exports tied to U.S. tariff policy.

Imports actually rose almost 5% last year and hit a record high. What’s more, the trade deficit in 2025 was still the third-largest ever.

President Donald Trump promised last year that higher tariffs would cut the trade deficit by cajoling more companies to make stuff in America and lessen U.S. dependence on imports.

It didn’t happen. Instead, businesses sought to import badly needed supplies from countries with lower tariffs rather than from those with larger duties."

www.marketwatch.com

U.S. trade deficit is tariff-proof. Imports jump to record high in 2025.

High tariffs were supposed to slash chronically large U.S. trade deficits. Turns out they really didn’t. The trade deficit in 2025 was the third-largest ever.
www.marketwatch.com www.marketwatch.com
 
It doesn't matter because foreign countries are paying trillions to the US for the privilege of trading. Or something.

:nuts:

(that being said, the agreement the Trump administration made with Japan seems interesting though).
 
Last edited:
Supreme Court, as expected, struck down the tariffs issued using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act in a 6-3 vote. I was expecting 7-2, but it appears Kavanaugh's vote in favor is allegedly over 'but the majority didn't state if they had to provide refunds!'. So, that's a chunk of Trump's economic platform hamstrung. As Kavanaugh stated, the majority did not state if the feds had to provide refunds to the importers that paid the tariffs, so I imagine that's going to be another case that'll make it's way to the Supreme Court eventually. Costco's licking their lips now because they already had litigation moving to be refunded, so they may be the one that gets all the way to the head court.

I did have a bigger economic outlook post brewing in my head this morning. May save that for the evening/weekend... maybe.
 
Vaenyr said:
While we're on the topic of economy:

www.cnbc.com

Fourth-quarter U.S. GDP up just 1.4%, badly missing estimate; inflation firms at 3%

The core PCE price index was expected to increase 3% from a year ago in December. GDP was projected to rise at a 2.5% pace in Q4.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com

Yeah, Trump is not having a great Friday today, is he?
Click to expand...
Which makes the Susie Wiles-prompted 'affordability tour' he's been making sporadic appearances for over the past two months has been baffling to watch. The purpose of his appearances has been to present a vision for the Republican Party in midterms to campaign on and what work they're looking to do if they hold the House and Senate. I presume it's his ego that won't let him say anything other than "Everything's already fixed. Everything is cheap. Shut up and stop complaining."

Seriously, how are you going to have a tour addressing concerns about the economy where the message is "Shut up about the economy"? But, then again, the longer this term's gone on, the more clear it is that Wiles isn't the 'savvy political operator' she was billed as shortly after being named Chief of Staff. Campaign manager of a campaign that once again won by ~230,000 votes in what was a coin flip election between two sides that couldn't get out of their own way.

It's similar in a way to the Biden administration's messaging of the economy was pointing at the Dow and going "Look at it! It's at a record high!" and pointing out the macroeconomic moves they've made, which is great, but the population's not benefitting from that directly.

It's pissing on your head and calling it rain and it's rather funny to see the same messaging mistake get repeated in consecutive administrations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top