Well, no. Just more confirmation.

Pat Summerall, the only announcer in history where the video game version of him sounded better than the real-life version.

I can only imagine how crazy the right would get if Biden had Soros sit in on a call with a foreign leader.

Every time I read Pat Summerall I hear him saying "Chris Doleman" in my head. Maybe now you do too.

Just saw in the times a judge granted Smiths request to pause the Jan 6 case for a month so they can consider moving forward. I suspect it will get dropped before Trump ever has to self pardon or appoint his own AG. Man, garland fucked is so hard.

All it did was strengthen Trumps support. They needed to go hard or not at all.

The best option now is to close the investigation and release a report before the inauguration.

What Nixon started, Trump finished. The President is above the law.

(To be fair, most rich people are above the law as well.)

Somehow Trump is both going to eliminate the Dept. of Education and also nationalize all the education standards.

Donald Trump announces his 10-point plan to rebuild America's school system,

Among others, promises to bring back 'school prayer. ' pic.twitter.com/oeEXgNRX9A

— 𝐀𝐍𝐓𝐔𝐍𝐄𝐒 (@Antunes1) November 9, 2024

Thought below was an interesting article. I didn't think it was even an option, is there enough time for Dems push through a replacement for Sotomayor?

Hindsight is 20/20. It's easy to criticize RBG for not retiring when she could. If Sotomayor was to pass away during the next 4 years, will she be viewed like RBG?

She's 70 so odds are probably in her favor to last through 2028 but then a roll of the dice who wins in 2028. I think she shouldn't be pressured to leave right now.

wsj.com

Hysterical that after decades of screaming about states' rights, every Trump video is a plan to nationalize some aspect of society and the right is cheering each of them on.

We're going to nationalize voting! Yeah!

We're going to nationalize education standards! Yeah!

We're going to nationalize gun policy! Yeah!

Trump says that he should be allowed to make recess appointments(without Senate votes) so that he can fully staff the admin as quickly as possible.

If the GOP agrees, that's basically the end of advise and consent.

No. RBG was ~75 when Obama took office the first time, Sotomayor was ~66 when Biden took office. If RBG had retired in either of Obama's two terms the court would still be 5-4, not 6-3. If Sotomayor gets replaced by a Trump appointee it'll be 7-2. I'd argue that 5-4 to 6-3 is a bigger jump than 6-3 to 7-2, especially with basically no moderates among the GOP appointees.

It's still not great, and I think she should have retired when Breyer did, but geriatrics gotta geriatric. Pelosi is still in office, Sanders just won another 6-year Senate term at age 83, Dick Durbin just turned 80, etc.... Just retire you old fucks, and let someone else have a go. They're not going to do worse than you did.

Pretty fucking rich that GOPers are pissed at Casey for not concerning in PA yet.

Judge Ho is testing out the gobbledygook that the right is going to use to end birthright citizenship. It won't count during an invasion and the President gets to decide when there's an invasion. Problem solved.

dola

Israeli minister in charge of settlements says it's time to start preparation to annex the West Bank.

Trump has picked Congressman Lee Zeldin for the EPA. Of bad choices, he at least has acknowledged climate change. Doesn't mean he wants to do anything about it.

Somehow Trump is going to eliminate the Dept of Education and simultaneously have control of primary, secondary, and college education standards.

My guess is they'll pass laws giving people the right to sue and allow right-wing judges to impose education standards.

Marco Rubio is being tapped for Secretary of State. Big responsibility for Little Marco.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

Hmmm

Be nice if he was able to somehow find a win-win and normalize relations with Cuba

The thinking is DeSantis will likely tap his Chief of Staff to fill Rubio's seat to keep it open for Denantis to take it in 2026. The last Florida governor to try this was Charlie Crist, except he ended up losing in 2010 to Rubiio.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

A f-ton better than Ric Grenell.

dola

If Trump fires Marco after Marco resigns from the Senate that would be his most alpha move ever. And we all know eventually Marco is getting fired.

I know pretty much everyone here knows this, but I'm so tired of right wingers trying to convince others that Trump ran on some message of unity. Unless you're white and male there is no interest in anything resembling unity from Trump.

These guys are lining up for administration positions thinking it will put them in position for the 2028 nomination when they have absolutely no chance because Trump already made them a joke to all of his followers.

Sane white males should have no interest either, there was a right wing non-criminal alternative on the ballot.

It continues to boggle my mind that Florida, a state full of retirees, continues to send Rick Scott, a guy who literally defrauded Medicare, back to the Senate.

Proof, as if it were needed, that most voters are very low information indeed.

Haven't seen it anywhere else but thehill.com has made the call.

Access to this page has been denied

A clean sweep. The Dems misread the room pretty significantly.

Beyonce is 0-2, Taylor 0-1. How do you lose the first time voters with those 2 on your side?

Saw today that google searches for "tariffs" are up like, 500%. This has a real Brexit feel.

Hide your puppies, Kristi Noem is being named Secretary of Homeland Security.

I have zero illusions about this administration being anything other than a disaster but at least he is picking people who have actual experience in governing.

On the second part, because celebrity endorsements just don't mean much in politics.

I would actually say Democrats as a whole didn't do terribly in this election. They didn't have control of the House before, and at worst the margin there is going to be slightly more Republican than before. They won most of the Senate elections in the swing states, losing control there is just a function of which seats were up for re-election, things like Manchin being replaced which was always going to go Republican, and so on. Governor balance stayed the same.

The fact that Harris lost all the swing states but it appears PA is the only senate race that isn't going to the Democrats and the generally close nature of the election indicates that it isn't Democrats in general who failed. Not a red shift, but a Trump Shift; there was something about the Harris-Trump matchup that made people object to Harris more than other Democrats.

Do people realize that Biden kept a vast majority of Trump's tariffs from 2016-2019? He also added a bunch on China in his term (esp on semiconductor, steel and EVs).

In fact, Biden has new tariffs on China going into effect in 2025 and 2026 on things like batteries, medical goods, solar cells, etc. At the end of the day, tariffs are always a short term drag on the US GDP but they do offer strategic support for US industries to compete (esp in areas where we don't want to be reliant on China).

Both parties have supported them and there's a good chance Harris would have continued and even extended many of the Tariffs under Trump and Biden had she won. This issue a big red herring for the election that people are making some new disaster coming in with Trump. He certainly wants more, but this was more of an issue to rally his base with nationalism against China.

If you looks at the numbers, the US generated $89 billion in additional taxes from tariffs under Trump's first term. In Biden's term, they generated $144 billion in taxes from tariffs. You are crazy if you think Harris was shutting down that source of revenue (and not expanding it to pay for a lot of what she wanted).

Again, Trump benefits from everyone assuming he's lying.

He's the one who said blanket tariffs. He's the one who said maybe we'll eliminate the income tax and replace it with tariffs.

Yeah, Trump has made a ton of promises he's never kept. I could see easing of social security tax with tariffs, but I can't see all of income tax. In two years, I think people are going to be amazed at how little these "extremely dangerous tariffs" have impacted things - partially because 60+% were already in effect in the Biden administration. :D

There is a difference between strategically using tariffs as negotiating chips and saying they will solve all out financial woes.

If you take him at his word he is going to deport our migrant workforce which is basically 100% responsible for our supply chain of food while also claiming he will put a 20% tariff on all goods from Mexico. That's assuming they will even sell us their goods once remain in Mexico goes back into effect and we start using the US military on Mexico soil.

I'll choose to trust the word of 23 Nobel winning economists over the guy who bankrupted 3 casinos.

Trump's word is about as reliable as broken clock. He's right 2 out of of every 24 attempts just on accident.

He will continue what Biden and him had setup and he will probably extend the China ones. He will try to do some strategic ones on Europe and Japan specifically, but those are mostly on steel and semiconductor items we make in the US. As an aside, my day job is working for a US semiconductor company that has a brother/sister relationship with a big Japan exporter. They simply send their products to us, we house them for a period of months and distribute them to avoid the tariffs (we have been doing this even before Trump). Again, I don't think this will be as dire as people are making it out to be.

The question isn't have they impacted things but has he kept his promises and made things better?

His solution to everything was tariffs and drill baby drill. It isn't just that he promised to remove income taxes. What about no taxes on tips? Subsidized child care? Cheaper good across the board, lower inflation, cheaper gas, affordable housing, etc...

All promises he made based off tariffs that he claims other nations will pay for despite corporations already having plans in place to raise the cost of consumer goods. People elected him FULL WELL KNOWING everything else that comes with it because he convinced enough low information voters he can fix it. IF two years from now it is status quo he has failed on that promise and we will be suffering all the other BS.

Jesse Watters mom didn’t invite him to thanksgiving. lol.

Good.

It's just different when the politician has a D as opposed to an R next to the name.

They're going to make Lara Trump the new Senator in Florida is my guess.

That would mean Desantis is not interested in being a Senator and is only eyeing the White House in 4 years. No way he puts someone in that position that he thinks will run again if he his planning on running for it.

I mean, it might be that we were talking about universal tariffs vs. targeted tariffs, but sure, just throw out stupid one liners like an asshole.

I think he wants to be Senator but he's also too much of a pussy to stand up to Trump.

Yeah, I agree with this. The 10% tariff across the board is a very bad idea in my opinion and I doubt it would ever pass. That's just stupid. I do think that having targeted tariffs to allow US companies to stay competitive and active in key industries isn't a bad idea. Especially since China basically pays for their companies to initially make things at a loss until they run out all the competition and then they slowly raise up prices after.

Sure, they were targeted to eliminate competition from companies that donate large sums of money to Democrats. An added boost of exacerbating climate change too. We're at the point of defending crony capitalism.

Why is it the US governments responsibility to eliminate competition for companies? Why can't those companies just create a better product or lower their prices? This is just corporate welfare packaged as populism.

And the tariff talk doesn't mention retaliatory tariffs. Maybe you help the shareholders of auto companies a bit. But these other countries will put a tariff on corn, soybeans, whiskey, wine, etc. So you helped one industry and fucked over others. I get that politicians like that because now industries will have to fight to give more donations to stop that, but you're also just reaching a point where the government chooses what businesses get to win and which ones get to lose.

People have been using the "chicken little" export tariffs on US goods forever. They rarely occur (outside of maybe China). The US has had tariffs on Europe and Japan before and didn't get nailed there. I don't think we should have tariffs on Europe or Japan, and usually the ones we have done in the past are pretty minimal.

If Trump starts putting a 10-15% tariff on everything imported, I will be right beside you guys against it.

A wizard sits alone, high in a tower of gold, calm and confident.

He whispers to himself, "I'm always right," picks up a pen and drafts a new tome of wisdom.

We literally had to do a $25 billion bailout for soybean farmers because of retaliatory tariffs.

Trump's massive farmer bailout failed to make up for the 'self-inflicted' trade damage

92 Percent of Trump’s China Tariff Proceeds Has Gone to Bail Out Angry Farmers | Council on Foreign Relations

I'm just trying to see how these auto tariffs benefit us.

1) American pays an extra $20,000-$30,000 for an inferior car.

2) Auto makers make more money as they can keep margins high and don't need to innovate or price competitively. Banks make money on the additional loans to cover that higher price.

3) High prices keep people in gas powered vehicles which are cheaper. Good for the Saudis, Iran, and Russia. Not so great for the climate.

4) Extra profits are used to buyback stocks boosting the share price for the wealthiest Americans and executives of these companies. No real tax revenue here since we don't tax unrealized capital gains (well for rich people) and buybacks reduce the company's corporate tax liability.

5) ???????

6) Americans somehow come out on top?

I'm just trying to see where the tariffs benefit the average American. Who makes up for that extra price I have to pay for a car? Because to me it seems like a workaround for a regressive national sales tax and elimination of income tax which overwhelmingly benefits wealthy people.

at least for the ones that didn't commit suicide...

Fox News anchor Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense. The first nomination out of left field. Or Right field, I guess. I guess we should be glad he didn't nominate a war criminal.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

Because we're stuck with the bane of consumer existence, the fucking labor unions.

Oh. He was the guy that lobbied Trump to pardon the war criminals. Now, he can direct the military to commit those crimes on American soil. Cool. Cool. Cool.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

Nah, labor costs have gone down as a percent of revenue and profits. But that's some next level bootlicking.

Some of you guys need to pace yourselves if you're going to get through the next four years without a coronary.

Lol A guy who thinks germs aren't real.

Sounds like business interests have gotten to Trump or his people because all of a sudden I'm seeing a couple articles about Trump softening his "mass deportation" plans to focus on illegal immigrants who commit crimes.

Looks like the plan is for the House to use tariffs as a way to lock in the Trump tax cuts permanently. The problem is it will take universal tariffs of maybe 20% to make the math work for reconciliation.

Trump taps Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to lead Department of Government Efficiency

Honestly it sounds like a good idea but with these clowns it will probably be counter-productive.

I haven't listened to any talk radio/news/etc...since it was called. I can't stomach it. I'm going to try and not pay attention the next 4 years and hope the world doesn't end

I've always read there would be a prioritization. Focus on illegal felons, national security people (fentanyl) has been on the top of the list. After that, it's been cloudy on plan/logistics.

Honestly, just as I believe MSM has been conflating legal & illegal into just immigrants (and now the delineation is coming back in MSM), things are getting more clear now as next steps are happening.

I've watched a couple Homan YT videos. We can argue about his stats; his pro-Trump, anti-Joe bias; but it's obvious to me that he is very passionate in wanting to stop illegal immigration (and I mean "very"). Pretty hardcore guy, looking forward to his plan and the inevitable confrontations with lawmakers and MSM.

You're looking forward to them deporting US citizens and dreamers?

Er, no? I can see how you read the below as looking forward to (whatever being done). I meant it as looking forward to reading/understanding his plan ...




Specific to re: deporting US citizens. Not in any plan that I've read other than for fraud. I'll refer you to post #6301 to 6305 below.

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - POTUS 2024 - Harris vs Trump - General Election Discussion

The new border czar literally said families can be deported together if certain members are here illegally when asked about it

And yet the vast majority of farmers I know still vote Trump.

I believe the below is where this stems from below. If there are others, please provide source.

Access to this page has been denied

How I read that is, the US citizen family members can stay if they wish, but if they want they want to stay together, then the legal (voluntarily) & illegal (involuntarily) family members can leave together.

But yes, if there is forced/involuntary deportation of US citizens (non-fraud), that would be very bad. But no, I don't believe that is in the plan.

I read somewhere (not sure where?;) )that policy wise the parties are basically the same so not voting D wouldn't make a difference. I'm not even sure why this thread is here? :lol:

Having to choose between deportation or being permanently separated from a loved one is de facto forced deportations.

If you don't see the absolute cruelty and inhumanness in it you need to get a soul.

It is not forced, it is voluntary. There is a choice. Hard choices, but still a choice.


I'll use the Bill Maher quote. Not taking the GOP and the broader public's concern and not acknowledging it is a crisis has resulted in below ...


I absolutely do not deny its tough choices, no doubt. And Holman will probably take it further right than I would prefer, but yeah ... here we are.

JFC it’s not a choice and the cruelty is the point.

IIRC you immigrated here. I’d be nervous if I was you. No idea how far they will take this.

They could be flung out of fucking planes without parachutes afaic, preferrably into piranha infested waters.

That'd be a good start at least.

Stephen Miller has told us the plan. De-naturalization turbo-charged. They are absolutely planning to strip citizenship and deport some number of current Americans.

Yes, it's definitely a tough choice.


Naturalized citizens that went through the legal process don't have much to worry about. The de-naturalization, from what I've read, is from "fraud".

Yes, there may be some exceptions here and there e.g. how "fraud" is defined, but that'll work itself through the courts. But vast majority of naturalized citizens can sleep well.

You realize they want to remove birth right citizenship? What makes you think they won’t denaturalize people who came here legally? Though I’m sure you’re safe because your skin isn’t brown.

I can easily believe Holman/Miller want to increase the review of fraudulent citizenship cases. That is my understanding but admittedly, I might have missed something. But if not, what's wrong with de-naturalizing people that got citizenship under fraudulent pretenses?

See link of de-naturalization.

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Trump's Immigration Reform

If you have links that say they want to do de-naturalization for non-fraudulent cases (or A-D in my link above), provide the source.

re: birthright, see below, posts #6301-6305.

POTUS 2024 - Harris vs Trump - General Election Discussion - Page 127 - Front Office Football Central

In summary, we know there'll be a fight about it. If it works itself through the legal system (and it'll have to eventually), I'm okay with the final decision even though I personally prefer limits to birthright (e.g. one parent is a citizen or PR).

Because I've not seen any reports of plans to do it for non-fraud cases? There may be some extreme situations (see below) about but it's certainly not going to be widespread.

If you have something, provide a source that is not Twitter/X/TickTok that I can read in its full context.

I've provide link to my source above. But I'll requote the key stuff

Quote:

A) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if he or she procured naturalization illegally B) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if there is deliberate deceit on the part of the person in misrepresenting or failing to disclose a material fact or facts on his or her naturalization application and subsequent examination. C) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if the person becomes a member of, or affiliated with, the Communist party, other totalitarian party, or terrorist organization within five years of his or her naturalization. D) Other than Honorable Discharge before Five Years of Honorable Service after Naturalization

You sure about that?

You entered your yearly income as 68,000 but your W-2 for that year indicates that you only made $67,139.17. That's fraud, you're deported.

Nope, not as far as de-naturalization goes. See link below.

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Trump's Immigration Reform

Here's the conditions of "fraud" as it relates to citizenship.

Quote:

A) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if he or she procured naturalization illegally B) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if there is deliberate deceit on the part of the person in misrepresenting or failing to disclose a material fact or facts on his or her naturalization application and subsequent examination. C) A person is subject to revocation of naturalization if the person becomes a member of, or affiliated with, the Communist party, other totalitarian party, or terrorist organization within five years of his or her naturalization. D) Other than Honorable Discharge before Five Years of Honorable Service after Naturalization

So yes, Melania "may" fall under these conditions. Prince Harry also (whenever he becomes naturalized). But we all know the rich and powerful get away with things regular folks don't.

I don't know what Miller is planning, but turbo-charged is not a word I would use to describe uses in cases of documented fraud. There are going to be very few of those.

When there is widespread de-naturalization of US citizens beyond the A-D conditions I've quoted, then you can tell me how wrong I was.

Yes, there will be screwups and extreme cases but I stand by my statement that legally naturalized citizens, that don't fall under A-D, won't have to worry about getting de-naturalized.

In terms of DOGE priorities, certainly subsidizing a company's travel to Mars should be low on the list, right? High cost, low benefit to US citizens.

Immigration is an issue that both sides agree needs to be addressed. Just trying to find and deport illegals that commit crimes will take more than four years logistically. The idea that Trump is going to hamstring a bunch of businesses that supported him by tossing out legal and illegal workers seems pretty far fetched. He didn't do that from 2016-2020, so I doubt he starts now.

But, again, when we look the other way on a big problem -you have to understand that the people may elect someone who promises to come in and clean it up. Initially, that cleanup may be messier that most wanted - but I can't see this administration ever having the resources to start mass deporting legal citizens. There's no way that ever stands up in court and you will have millions of civil rights attorneys chomping at the bit to defend them (as they should).

I voted for Harris and wanted no part of Trump. I can't stand the guy. But I also have some perspective and understand that we survived the first Trump "reign" and will also survive the second one. My main concern is that the SC judges hold on for another four years.

That said, I think people were so invested in Trump losing and so angry that they almost want massive "dire consequences" for the country because they voted for him. So anything that comes up over the next 3-4 months (tariffs, immigration, tax cuts, dept of education) is going to be framed as an unmitigated disaster that this country will never recover from. It sucks that he's president, but the die has been cast by the awful process and campaign the democrats ran. Now we just need to take a breath and realize everything will be OK. Worst case, if he really fucks things up, we can just vote someone in to fix it in four years.

Eh, what does he care? He's not going to have to face another election, he can do whatever he wants.

(This is why I kind of find it amusing if people still think Putin "has stuff" on him. What could possibly matter at this point? Whatever he could have won't matter with the electorate and wouldn't lead Republicans to do anything to him.)

I can clearly see him "tossing out illegal workers". From what I've read, Homan will do some level of worksite raids (e.g. chicken processing operations).

It's certainly possible, but I would guess the initial focus will be on illegals that have committed crimes.

Boy, if people were complaining about their eggs being 50 cents more, wait until they see the price of chicken when the robber barons have to pay their workers...

Trump says he'll do something vague.
Centrists say he won't do that.
Trump does it.
Centrists say, well he won't do that other thing...

It's been like this for 8 years but sure, this time he won't do the thing he says he'll do.

My best guess, we have 12 weeks till our Reichstag Fire.

8 years later the Democrats run supporting that thing.

Nah, trailer trash gonna learn where they stand in the new future.

Now Tulsi Gabbard, lol.

This feels like a real-life governmental version of the Empty Cupboard Challenge.

Looks back at the 2016 rhetoric on what Trump was going to do and then compare to what actually happened. He has no "core beliefs" and the moment something becomes unpopular or he doesn't benefit from it as much as he planned, he drops it like a bad habit. He promised things like repealing Obamacare, building a wall that Mexico paid for, invest $550 billion into US infrastructure, renegotiate the Iran deal, cancel funding for "sanctuary cities" and (of course) deport all people here illegally.

Know how many of those promises he kept? 0, nada - none of those things happened.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...s/trumpometer/

Matt Gaetz for Attorney General lol

He did ask if the military could shoot protestors and had to be denied by the Pentagon.

lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Remember when he committed rape on a minor and the DOJ shrugged their shoulders despite mountains of evidence including testimony from his good friend.

This is very likely true. In the short term.