US Politics the 2025 trump presidency thread

[jasperkent]

 

[alasdairm]

For all the government agencies being dismantled by Elon….i don’t see a single plan being put forth of how the thing said agency was supposed to address will now be addressed.

i think you answered your own (implied) question

alasdair

 

[alasdairm]

looks like susan crawford has handily defeated brad schimel in the wisconsin supreme court election.

11% margin with 64% reporting.

in february and march polling, the race was pretty close - neck and neck or crawford with a ~2% lead.

trump, who won the state in 2024, backed brad schimel.

elon musk spent a reported $20m on the race.

alasdair

 

[arrall]

looks like susan crawford has handily defeated brad schimel in the wisconsin supreme court election.

11% margin with 64% reporting.

in february and march polling, the race was pretty close - neck and neck or crawford with a ~2% lead.

trump, who won the state in 2024, backed brad schimel.

elon musk spent a reported $20m on the race.

alasdair

In FL-6, where Trump and the House candidate won by over 30% just months ago, the Dem candidate only lost by about 10% this time…

 

[4DQSAR]

“Starting on day 1 we will end inflation and make America affordable again”

I think the one thing most people agree upon is that ALL politicians lie. This was a rather artless example since no methodology was given (or possible as far as I know). But as I proposed before, there is a hardcore of MAGA that indulge in magical thinking (look up the term if unfamiliar - it has a specific meaning in psychology). Can we presume that the statement was made only to appeal to that specific grouping?

In Russia, there are two different words for lie (stay with me here)

ложь (ložʹ) - An intentional lie intended to decieve.
враньё (vranʹjó). - a lie told where both the person propagating the lie and the audience both understand it to be a lie. But it's of benefit to someone that it be said.

What I suggest is that what Donald Trump (among others) is doing is managing to find a middle ground between those two terms. WE know it isn't true but we aren't the target demographic. Maybe even the target demographic don't believe it to be factually correct but to them it has some 'truthiness'? It's the uncertainty that as a Brit, I cannot really test.

I'm just trying to provide a vocabulary we can use to discuss this matter. @TheLoveBandit was kind enough to pick up on 'flood the zone' and that's not my invention either. I heard it on the 'Strong Message Here' podcasts. I think they are really useful as it proved me with some understanding of how to naviagate a discussion about Donald Trump (and others). I don't ask you to agree with my opinion, only that you check it out so I can use more of the terms.

 

[brokedownpalace10]

Trump, repeatedly and incessantly said he would bring down prices, "immediately". The most famous time was in front of a table of groceries. The whole theme of the presser was bringing down grocery prices immediately.

He said, "day one" quite a few times. Here are just a couple examples at rallies.

Go to 41:25

And, on this one at 1:31


He said "day one" many more times. I was really a major theme.

He posted online saying it would be, "fast".

I could go on. I think we all know that, at this point, saying "all politicians lie" is a false equivalency.
Yes, politicians lie, but not to the level where we are told by their faithful to not believe anything they say and that that is cool. It's just how he is. It's, "just Trump".
Bush senior arguably lost his second term with his, "Read my lips, no new taxes" statement. John Edwards lied about an affair and it cost him what would have likely been a successful presidential bid. Yeah, politicians lie, but it's also a scandal if it's done too egregiously. There are consequences.
Elections have been won and lost by catching the other side in a lie or "flip flopping".



It's like I said previously. If a person in any public debate is caught in a lie repeatedly, why should anyone believe anything they say? Credibility matters.

 

[ChemicallyEnhanced]

I realize this may be technically complaining about a fart in a septic tank, but personally I still haven't forgiven him for what he did to my girlfriend Kathy Griffin.

 

[ChemicallyEnhanced]

Trump, repeatedly and incessantly said he would bring down prices, "immediately". The most famous time was in front of a table of groceries. The whole theme of the presser was bringing down grocery prices immediately.

He said, "day one" quite a few times. Here are just a couple examples at rallies.

Go to 41:25

And, on this one at 1:31


He said "day one" many more times. I was really a major theme.

He posted online saying it would be, "fast".

I could go on. I think we all know that, at this point, saying "all politicians lie" is a false equivalency.
Yes, politicians lie, but not to the level where we are told by their faithful to not believe anything they say and that that is cool. It's just how he is. It's, "just Trump".
Bush senior arguably lost his second term with his, "Read my lips, no new taxes" statement. Yeah, politicians lie, but it's also a scandal if it's done too egregiously.
Elections have been won and lost by catching the other side in a lie or "flip flopping".



It's like I said previously. If a person in any public debate is caught in a lie repeatedly, why should anyone believe anything they say.

Both in Canada and here in Europe a LOT of people are now boycotting any US-made products meaning the tariffs thing is likely to make prices in the US and their economy even worse

 

[TheLoveBandit]

if you have other priorities that need attention first, he shouldn't have made such a huge deal - a priority, if you will - about solving the problem of high groceries on day 1. he absolutely hammered the issue in his campaign. a lot of people voted for him because of that. even trump himself said it was the reason he won the election.

We agree there is only so much a person can do in a set amount of time. I'd argue, this term Trump is doing a lot more than any other president, certainly any in my lifetime. And, yes, he's promised even more, some on 'day 1'. But, I believe he is moving on the majority of the real priorities. Border? Done, shut down to nearly nil entries AND working on deportations as promised. Economy - I highlighted opening up fossil fuels, but it takes awhile for the contractors to get back to building the drill rigs and pipelines and refineries. Step one is allowing them to do this. What I would turn around and ask is what do you (collective group) believe is MORE he could do to address these top priorities? HOW could he lower prices/inflation quicker than what he is doing now? Those were the top two agenda items, and aside from Democrats filing law suits, these are moving like top priorities. Abortion? Pushed down to states, where I agree that belongs. Health care? I heard very little this go'round about it being a priority - certainly wasn't for most conservatives that I've heard from. Is it an issue? YES. But first term proved he can't do it without congress, so see below. Ending wars? On it, but using for leverage in America's best interests (ie, mineral rights from Ukraine). I'll take the assignment to go back and find a listing of his agenda items, their priorities, and how things are moving or not.

as i mentioned before, for the first 2 years (over 700 days...) of his first term he had republican majorities in both the house and the senate and he got nothing done on healthcare.

Yeah, he ain't worried about re-election. Congress is. I'm not having much faith in holding both houses and getting much permanent change implemented by them via law. History has proven, repeatedly, the Republicans in congress are weak and squishy.

he deals with that by trying to rewrite history.

"concepts of plans"?

I don't get the reference or follow what you are speaking to on this one.

 

[kiely]

I think it's gas. ( prices )

Just observing.

 

[TheLoveBandit]

“Groceries, it’s an interesting word, it’s like everything you put in your stomach. The stomach is speaking”

Reminds me A LOT of 'Deep Thoughts with Jack Handy'. There are many ways to take his words when he goes off like that. None of them positive nor impressive.

I’m only convinced that the boomers voted to watch the working generation get crushed and suffer so they could sit back and enjoy the pain exacted upon a generation that they hate one last time before they die, from the comfort of their paid for retirement set up. This is about revenge for them for society dismantling their way of life.

Are you familiar with the 'social contract' whereby older generations raise the younger ones, and in return the younger ones take care of the older ones as they age out? The vast, vast majority of people in society are not of the 'get mine' mentality you describe. Older generations may resent change from the norms they had, but that has occurred with EVERY generation. Every.damn.one. And yet, the cycle continues and society survives. It evolves, but it survives.

I'm curious about their 'paid for retirement set up'. Other than those on gov't pensions, who/how is paying for these set ups? I'd like to get one.

They hate have seen Society become more progressive, they hate having seen blacks become unsegregsted, they hate having witnessed the fall of Christianity in society -; they hate seeing women go from housemakers to surpassing men in education and pedigree - becoming independent; they want to punish society for this shift. They don’t care about destroying society because they won’t be here in 5 years

You have a very twisted view of society. It's a shame, because it blinds you to a lot of the good out there in the world. I hope someday you discover it, and can appreciate more of the love and joy, and acceptance, that the rest of the world feels. Yeah, there's a lot of political turmoil in the western world these days. And, if you have a steady diet of MSM (both sides) feeding that, your head can be polluted by it. But I'm telling you, that makes up about 2-3% of the real world. I truly hope you can find the rest of it.

For all the government agencies being dismantled by Elon….i don’t see a single plan being put forth of how the thing said agency was supposed to address will now be addressed.

As an example:


The point being this 'elimination' is removing beauracrats, not scientists and real impact players. Combine management so we have less salaried positions doing the same thing. Increase efficiency. Same for closing USAID = removing the waste, but retaining the value provided under State dept. Eliminating the Dept of Ed? Pushing it back to state level (again, where I agree it belongs), but I better see the funding changed accordingly (ie, lower federal taxes that supported Dept of Ed, and allow states to levy what taxes they feel is appropriate to support the Ed they designate). EDIT: There WILL be cuts to scientists and impact players in many cases, again see USAID. But those will be in line with what Trump (and his supporters) view as waste (such as DEI social programs abroad, research on transgending mice, etc).

 

[4DQSAR]

I highlighted opening up fossil fuels, but it takes awhile for the contractors to get back to building the drill rigs and pipelines and refineries.

I think I mentioned this before but the crude oil produced by the US and Canada are qualitatively different. It's my understanding that Canadian crude is classed as 'heavy' while most if not all US crude is classed as 'light'. From my limited knowledge of petrochemicals, heavy crude can be 'cracked' into lighter hydrocarbons but I'm unaware of any technology to perform whatever the opposite of cracking is.

Whatever the fine detail, more than one commentator has noted that the US doesn't want for light crude but certain applications require heavy crude and that is imported.

I don't know what the outcomes will be, just wanted people to be aware that not all crude oil is created equally.

On a related note, the average production cost of each barrel of OPEC heavy crude is around $29 while new (offshore) US production is expected to cost $78 per barrel. I appreciate that this is comparing apples and oranges but I note that most current US refining capacity is designed to deal with heavy crude. I don't think I need to point out that construction of new refineries is a slow and costly business (which has been noted) and the time-scales involved for construction to break-even are quite long (presuming competition within the USA).

 

[TheLoveBandit]

From my limited knowledge of petrochemicals,

I likely have only a slightly more experienced understanding of petrochemicals. However, building on what you said, my understanding is that the US refineries are capable of accepting a wide range of crude. On the other hand, Canada has only limited refineries for what they can drill out of the ground, so they are somewhat reliant on pipelines to the US to refine their crude into something more useable. It isn't a question of know how or capability, but of existing infrastructure.

The US has traditionally switched between summber blends and winter blends on what they provide to the market. We have a LOT more refineries than most other countries, and those refineries have a much wider capabilty to process different levels of crude. The alternative is adding the cost to ship crude to other countries with capable refineries that have available capacity - possible, but will add expense.

I have no idea on Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) which apparently US has in abundance and offered to ship to Europe to displace Russian LNG, but sounds like all the LNG is via ships.

 

[brokedownpalace10]

Both in Canada and here in Europe a LOT of people are now boycotting any US-made products meaning the tariffs thing is likely to make prices in the US and their economy even worse

The bad thing is that inflation had been down for some time on the day of the election.

United States Inflation Rate

Inflation Rate in the United States decreased to 2.80 percent in February from 3 percent in January of 2025. This page provides - United States Inflation Rate - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

tradingeconomics.com

One good thing about Trump getting in is that it has actually made Republicans online differentiate between prices and inflation. Inflation had been brought down for some time Nov. 2024, but prices remained high.

As many economists (and Dems) said at the time, bringing prices down (deflation) is hard. (and not necessarily a good thing) Trump did agree *right* after the election and before he even took office.

Deflation is actually a bad economic sign if there is much of it at all. Not a good thing. The proper way to solve the problem would be to temper inflation and then work on bringing wages up.

People knew, and said before the election that it was an empty promise.
All we've had since the election is changing the goalposts. A deceptive debating practice.

 

[4DQSAR]

I likely have only a slightly more experienced understanding of petrochemicals. However, building on what you said, my understanding is that the US refineries are capable of accepting a wide range of crude. On the other hand, Canada has only limited refineries for what they can drill out of the ground, so they are somewhat reliant on pipelines to the US to refine their crude into something more useable. It isn't a question of know how or capability, but of existing infrastructure.

The US has traditionally switched between summber blends and winter blends on what they provide to the market. We have a LOT more refineries than most other countries, and those refineries have a much wider capabilty to process different levels of crude. The alternative is adding the cost to ship crude to other countries with capable refineries that have available capacity - possible, but will add expense.

I have no idea on Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) which apparently US has in abundance and offered to ship to Europe to displace Russian LNG, but sounds like all the LNG is via ships.

Why the U.S Can’t Use the Oil it Produces

The reason the U.S. can’t fully utilize the oil it produces boils down to a mix of economic, infrastructural, and geopolitical factors.

www.fuelstreamservices.com

Here’s Why The U.S. Has Lost Oil Refining Capacity

One of the causes of the ongoing diesel shortage is the loss of U.S. refining capacity. Here is why — despite huge profits — certain refineries have closed.

www.forbes.com

Why U.S. Oil Refineries Aren't Upgraded to Maximize Domestic Oil

The complex factors behind this issue and why upgrading refineries poses significant challenges.

blog.refinerymaps.com

I do not clam the knowledge to check the veracity of the above links but there appear to be a lot of commentators on this topic. These are simply a sample of sources - they aren't hard to find.

LPG is a thing unto itself and transportation of LPG is more complex than I had imagined. Just about the only fine (and odd) detail I'm aware of is that US gas fields sometimes contain unexpectely high quantities of helium. In fact, I think I'm correct in saying that the US provides almost all the helium used in the world. Odd as it sounds, to me THIS would seem a key export that would have more leverage than the more obvious targets so far under discussion.

 

[TheLoveBandit]

I'll take the assignment to go back and find a listing of his agenda items, their priorities, and how things are moving or not.

Trump's platform: (note, not all 'day 1')

1. Seal the border and stop the migrant invasion
2. Carry out the largest deportation operation in american history
3. End inflation, and make america affordable again
4. Make america the dominant energy producer in the world, by far!
5. STOP OUTSOURCING, AND TURN THE UNITED STATES INTO A MANUFACTURING SUPERPOWER
6. Large tax cuts for workers, and no tax on tips!
7. Defend our constitution, our bill of rights, and our fundamental freedoms, including freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to keep and bear arms
8. Prevent world war three, restore peace in europe and in the middle east, and build a great iron dome missile defense shield over our entire country -- all made in america
9. End the weaponization of government against the american people
10. Stop the migrant crime epidemic, demolish the foreign drug cartels, crush gang violence, and lock up violent offenders
11. Rebuild our cities, including washington dc, making them safe, clean, and beautiful again.
12. Strengthen and modernize our military, making it, without question, the strongest and most powerful in the world
13. Keep the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency
14. Fight for and protect social security and medicare with no cuts, including no changes to the retirement age
15. Cancel the electric vehicle mandate and cut costly and burdensome regulations
16. Cut federal funding for any school pushing critical race theory, radical gender ideology, and other inappropriate racial, sexual, or political content on our children
17. Keep men out of women's sports
18. Deport pro-hamas radicals and make our college campuses safe and patriotic again
19. Secure our elections, including same day voting, voter identification, paper ballots, and proof of citizenship
20. Unite our country by bringing it to new and record levels of success

Oddly, not mentioning health care, tho I swear I heard him talk about lowering health costs. Unless it is considered part of14 and medicare?

All the other ones, I'm good with. Domestically - protect the boarder, deport illegals (esp those with criminal records), end migrant crime, fight the drug cartels, end CRT/DEI/etc, keep men out of women's sports*, get radicals out of our campuses, secure elections**...yeah, I"m good with the progress on all those.

He's got some undefined, nebulous items (rebuild American cities? Unite our country and bring success?). Sounds nice in a rally, but I'd rather have some defined goals on what is 'success' and what is the plan to get there.

*Trans agenda - ftr this is closer to me than any of you will appreciate, and I personally support anyone being who they are. I do not agree with being forced to play to other people's views of the world, but I'll respect their right to how they view themselves. I am strongly against genetic males in female sports.

**Secure elections - recent EO requiring proof of citizenship in order to vote is something I am greatly in favor of, and I find it hard to give much merit to the arguments against it (minorities can't get ID, women who marry will have differeing names from birth certificate and voter ID) mainly because the access to IDs has been proven false, repeatedly, and a difference of names on papers is something we deal with in society everyday (ie, legal name changes thru marriage or court order) and if you don't wish to update voter ID you can bring the legal paperwork showing the name change (court order, marriage certificate) just like anywhere else. These are not viable arguments. That said, I am very strongly in favor of states keeping control over their voting processes and controls, I don't like federal reach into that area. I didn't like it when Dems were in power and attempted to make any breathing (or not) individual able to vote, I don't like Trump trying to institute federal rules on a state issue. I will acknowledge there is inherent risk in not having these federal standards (ie, any state can set rules that imbalance voting rights, but that should be addressed thru courts and local/state voting lawmakers out of office, or better yet public vote on an issue as Cali does on a lot and WI just did on requiring voter ID). I'm also against one more federal registry, this time of voters, in that I feel it can be used adversely against the public.

 

[TheLoveBandit]

One good thing about Trump getting in is that it has actually made Republicans online differentiate between prices and inflation. Inflation had been brought down for some time Nov. 2024, but prices remained high.

Small clarifiction - the 'rate of inflation' has been down, but inflation continues nonetheless. You are spot on, there is a difference between inflation and prices, a significant difference. Economists prescribe a standard inflation rate around 2%, whereas Biden had inflation rate peaking at around 9% in 2022.

Deflation is actually a bad economic sign if there is much of it at all. Not a good thing. The proper way to solve the problem would be to temper inflation and then work on bringing wages up.

Yes, deflation is bad, goes hand in hand with stagflation and recessions. From what I'm hearing, the way to address this situation is as you outline - temper inflation and bring wages up. Inflation is recorded monthly? And I see from your link the 3/12/25 inflation rate was expected at 2.9% and came in at 2.8%. I'm not going to give Trump credit for beating the expectation because 1) I don't think he's been able to create a significant impact that fast, and 2) those numbers seemingly are always adjusted afterwards. Let's see where it moves once we get 6-9mo down the road.

 

[brokedownpalace10]

Small clarifiction - the 'rate of inflation' has been down, but inflation continues nonetheless. You are spot on, there is a difference between inflation and prices, a significant difference. Economists prescribe a standard inflation rate around 2%, whereas Biden had inflation rate peaking at around 9% in 2022.



Yes, deflation is bad, goes hand in hand with stagflation and recessions. From what I'm hearing, the way to address this situation is as you outline - temper inflation and bring wages up. Inflation is recorded monthly? And I see from your link the 3/12/25 inflation rate was expected at 2.9% and came in at 2.8%. I'm not going to give Trump credit for beating the expectation because 1) I don't think he's been able to create a significant impact that fast, and 2) those numbers seemingly are always adjusted afterwards. Let's see where it moves once we get 6-9mo down the road.

What do you consider the difference between inflation and rate of inflation? They are both used to specify rise in prices over a specified period of time, although rate of inflation is commonly over the previous year.

Regardless, many economists and others said it was ̶a̶n̶ ̶e̶m̶p̶t̶y̶ ̶p̶r̶o̶m̶i̶s̶e̶ a lie before the election. People are just pointing that out now.

Once he got into office, he actually said it wasn't a priority for him, saying...
“They all said inflation was the No. 1 issue. I said, ‘I disagree, I talked about inflation too, but how many times can you say that an apple has doubled in cost?”

Whereas, a couple months previously he said...
"I won on groceries. Very simple word, groceries. Like almost — you know, who uses the word? I started using the word — the groceries. When you buy apples, when you buy bacon, when you buy eggs, they would double and triple the price over a short period of time, and I won an election based on that. We’re going to bring those prices way down."

 

[alasdairm]

I'm not having much faith in holding both houses and getting much permanent change implemented by them via law. History has proven, repeatedly, the Republicans in congress are weak and squishy.

so it's either he can't get anything done because democrats have the house or he can't get anything done because he has both houses but republicans in congress are weak and squishy. he sounds pretty weak and ineffectual as president in that case.

and, in either case, if he's not capable of getting things done regardless of who controls congress, maybe he should be a little less hyperbolic about what he's going to get done on day 1. i.e. he should lie less.

I don't get the reference or follow what you are speaking to on this one.

it's a reference from the presidential debate with kamala harris.

in his first term he made it a central campaign promise to repeal obamacare and replace it with something much better. he did nothing. and blamed the democrats.

the subject of healthcare naturally came up at the trump/harris debate and, when asked about his plans, well you can see:

The point being this 'elimination' is removing beauracrats, not scientists and real impact players.

but is it?

if it really is, it's hard to imagine anybody being opposed - i am certainly not.

but, elsewhere, the doge axe is coming down with very little focus on what people do, and how well they do it.

i have a friend who works for the u.s. forest service. where i live, the forest service isn't just some hippy-dippy, outdoorsy park ranger thing. they do shit that saves people's lives. i lived here through the caldor fire in 2021 and it was pretty fucking scary.

my friend was not a new hire but she was a 'probationary' worker as she had recently moved roles and been promoted. she was not a bureaucrat. i might describe her as a 'real impact player'.

no matter. she was fired and, although some fired forest service workers were rehired, she was not.

she had an exemplary work record and was fired for her performance.

firing and rehiring wastes money - better to just not fire people in the first place.

yes, this is just one case. it's anecdotal. i understand that. but this shit is happening all over the country and it seems incredibly poorly planned and executed. what a fucking surprise.

alasdair

 

[4DQSAR]

What do you consider the difference between inflation and rate of inflation? They are both used to specify rise in prices over a specified period of time, although rate of inflation is commonly over the previous year.

To the best of my understanding 'Inflation' is simply defined as 'the increase in the average price of goods and services' whereas the 'inflation rate' is the amount of inflation predicted or experienced over a specific time period.

Is it worth my repeating the fact that the promise of an immediate price drop in goods and services within the US may well best be described as враньё (vranʹjó) or indeed the middle-way I suggested? IF the MAGA core does indeed indulge in magical thinking, they may view it as vranʹjó? Maybe it's worth asking what the intention of the message was and who the message was directed at.