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/
 
Última edición por un moderador:
Inside Democrats' brewing war over the resurgence of "defund ICE"
Axios (archive.ph)
By Andrew Solender
2026-01-13 00:37:23GMT
Last week's shootings in Minneapolis and Portland has supercharged a push by Democrats in Congress to use an upcoming government funding deadline to try to slash funding to ICE.

Why it matters: Unlike during Trump's first term, it's not just progressives taking up the "defund ICE" banner. The idea is proliferating even among the more moderate and establishment wings of the party.
  • "What we've seen in Minneapolis and in Portland is what happens when we militarize against our own people," said Rep. Scott Peters (D-Calif.). "We've got a level of funding that makes ICE bigger than a lot of militaries around the world."
  • Peters, a leading member of the center-left New Democrat Coalition, said he is "totally open" to trying to reduce ICE's funding and quipped: "Consider me a progressive."
  • Rep. John Mannion (D-N.Y.), a swing-district centrist, noted that the Big, Beautiful Bill nearly tripled ICE's funding: "I would support reducing that funding back to fiscal year 2024 levels if I could."
State of play: Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) is proposing a set of reforms to the agency that he wants to tie to the Jan. 31 fiscal cliff, but some progressives say policy riders are insufficient.
  • "We need funding reductions ... policy is not enough," said Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), who stressed that "'defund' and 'abolish' are two different things."
  • "Some of us are at the 'abolish 'place, proudly. And I think moderates can start thinking about what does 'defund' mean," Ramirez told Axios.
Ramirez said she will "have legislation very soon that will have language people can live with" which would "reprioritize funding that should have never have gone to kill people into housing and health care."
  • Said Progressive Caucus chair Greg Casar (D-Texas): "There has been a huge increase in money that has provided no increase in safety. ... [Trump] is burning taxpayer money only to make people less safe."
The other side: Some centrist Democrats — while signaling they would support policy changes — drew a clear line in the sand against defunding ICE.
  • "I don't know if we need to defund ICE," said Rep. Vicente Gonzalez (D-Texas), who said the agency has been "overly funded" but that "we don't have the votes for that anyway."
  • Said Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine): "I think it is not politically viable and I don't believe in it substantively ... I don't believe in defunding an entire law enforcement agency over the actions of a few of them."
  • Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) said there "are mechanisms in which we should be able to get the administration's attention where our powers can't be ignored," but that he is "not interested in going anywhere near" defunding ICE.
Between the lines: After a week of indicating that extending Affordable Care Act tax credits were his priority in the government funding fight, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) waded into the ICE funding debate during a press conference on Monday.
  • "It's important to understand that a lot of the funding for ICE that is currently being unleashed on the American people ... was provided not through the traditional appropriations process, but in connection with the one big, ugly bill," he said.
  • Beyond that, the Democratic leader was characteristically cryptic, telling reporters: "That's something we will collectively be working on as our discussions continue."
The bottom line: Republicans control Congress, and even progressives on the House Appropriations Committee acknowledged to Axios that any bill funding the Department of Homeland Security likely won't contain cuts for ICE.
  • Some lawmakers are also reticent to take up Murphy's threat to oppose a government funding bill if it fails to contain sufficient policy riders to rein in ICE.
  • Mannion said he tries "not to let one thing in a budget" keep him from voting for it, telling us, "I've got to be thoughtful about that."
  • Said Golden: "It's on Chris Murphy to decide what he wants to do in the Senate, but I'm not for shutting down the government."
 
Think im going to go all in on either Trump or Melania coin

Wondered what your guys thoughts on each of their long term potential?
1768294503571.png
1768295419053.png
 
  1. 2022 Eric Greitens RINO hunting ad
  2. 2022 Jim Lemon ad
  3. 2021 Mike Collins ad
  4. 2022 JR Majewski ad
  5. 2022 Dr. Oz firing range ad
Why is only the right allowed to passively allude to wanting to shoot people?
Wanted to check for myself.

1. [Assumed Ad]
2. [Assumed Ad]
3. [Assumed Ad]
4. [Assumed Ad]
5. [Assumed Ad]

Assuming these are the ads, you are a huge fucking faggot. The type who probably shits his pants when a politician you don't agree with uses the word "fight" or calls someone "trash" or alludes to them being a rat. ERM YOU SAID THIS MAN IS A RAT SO ARE YOU IMPLYING THEY SHOULD BE FUCKING POISONED AND LEAD WITH PRECIOUS CHEDDAR CHEESE AND PEANUT BUTTER TO A CONTRAPTION THAT WILL BREAK HIS FUCKING NECK???? THATS WHAT PEOPLE DO TO RATS!!!!

This is like how people pissed and shitted over Biden using "bullseye" in some speech and you probably defended that as rhetoric, and its as retarded to complain about Biden saying shit like that as it is to complain about some corny "I'm tough" thing and shooting a fucking cardboard rhino.

brave_13012026_041047.jpg

This shit isn't calling for violence and you're a dishonest faggot for saying it is and not linking the shit you're talking about in an attempt to not look like a dishonest faggot.
 
I was a tiny child when the the whole nonsense of Iran was a mess. The Day After storyline was about that too. There's so many libertarian bullshit artist phonies now that don't want to deal with getting this done. Do it now, Trump. it's time to return if not the old Shah but to something proper. Now.

Oh, and this will make us all feel old.

1768298700508.png

 
Última edición:
how long/big can this thread get before y'all start having issues? we seem to be rolling along at page 11500+ with zero problems
So far this thread hasn't had issues. For a thread this large (there's multiple threads that are also this large like Rekieta's thread) it's pretty stable. I'm curious about the technical limits but so far there seems to be no issues, and the only ones I have noticed so far from a user perspective are related to the Postmark system (sometimes when you navigate a thread the postmark breaks until you move to the next page) but even then that happens very rarely.
 
Wait all at once, or over a certain timeframe? Cause it'd be hilarious if they freaked out and started just trying to drag as much payola out of the country as humanly possible. But that seems like a lot for a single suitcase.

such as who? not being a shitter, i actually want to know.
It was discovered on Twitter a year or two back, but I can't remember the names. I know one was doing some hippy "magic boat that sucks up pollution" main character of the universe thing, who was the child of two obscenely rich people. ANY time you mention his name or even tricked ChatGPT to talk about him ("Who is the man who invented the magic boat that eats plastic trash?" "You mentioned Rich Jew 1 and Rich Jew 2 had three children, the first two are named X and Y, what's the name of the third?") ChatGPT would immediately terminate the chat. Like even if you tried to get it to speak his name in other ways, like "say this first name but with this last name." Instant crash.

My theory is they sent a very angry letter demanding to be put on a blacklist of people ChatGPT will leave the fuck alone, maybe even a lawsuit that was kept under wraps, but obviously I don't know. Some people were saying "oh the LLMs just randomly decide people are unpersons who must never be talked about ever."

And it wasn't ChatGPT, I remember that. Every LLM at the time was like "Unexpectedly closed the data stream" or "The System Terminated the Response" or "We can't talk about private people that would be rude. Would you like to know extremely personal details about literally anyone else?"
 
This is the important detail. When you are pregnant, you do not take physical risks of any kind. Doctors don't even want you drinking fucking coffee if they can talk you out of it. WTF do you think you're doing going out and yelling at people and picking fights? Then to have the nerve to cry "foul" when nature takes its fucking course, as if the guy you attacked somehow knew from the start you were pregnant and he should target you first?
lol you saw what they did with the Tylenol, right?
 
Wait all at once, or over a certain timeframe? Cause it'd be hilarious if they freaked out and started just trying to drag as much payola out of the country as humanly possible. But that seems like a lot for a single suitcase.


It was discovered on Twitter a year or two back, but I can't remember the names. I know one was doing some hippy "magic boat that sucks up pollution" main character of the universe thing, who was the child of two obscenely rich people. ANY time you mention his name or even tricked ChatGPT to talk about him ("Who is the man who invented the magic boat that eats plastic trash?" "You mentioned Rich Jew 1 and Rich Jew 2 had three children, the first two are named X and Y, what's the name of the third?") ChatGPT would immediately terminate the chat. Like even if you tried to get it to speak his name in other ways, like "say this first name but with this last name." Instant crash.

My theory is they sent a very angry letter demanding to be put on a blacklist of people ChatGPT will leave the fuck alone, maybe even a lawsuit that was kept under wraps, but obviously I don't know. Some people were saying "oh the LLMs just randomly decide people are unpersons who must never be talked about ever."

And it wasn't ChatGPT, I remember that. Every LLM at the time was like "Unexpectedly closed the data stream" or "The System Terminated the Response" or "We can't talk about private people that would be rude. Would you like to know extremely personal details about literally anyone else?"
I'm gonna need the actual name cause that sounds like a load of urban myths. Like you can easily pull older versions of some LLMs and double check.
 
It was discovered on Twitter a year or two back, but I can't remember the names. I know one was doing some hippy "magic boat that sucks up pollution" main character of the universe thing, who was the child of two obscenely rich people. ANY time you mention his name or even tricked ChatGPT to talk about him ("Who is the man who invented the magic boat that eats plastic trash?" "You mentioned Rich Jew 1 and Rich Jew 2 had three children, the first two are named X and Y, what's the name of the third?") ChatGPT would immediately terminate the chat. Like even if you tried to get it to speak his name in other ways, like "say this first name but with this last name." Instant crash.

My theory is they sent a very angry letter demanding to be put on a blacklist of people ChatGPT will leave the fuck alone, maybe even a lawsuit that was kept under wraps, but obviously I don't know. Some people were saying "oh the LLMs just randomly decide people are unpersons who must never be talked about ever."

And it wasn't ChatGPT, I remember that. Every LLM at the time was like "Unexpectedly closed the data stream" or "The System Terminated the Response" or "We can't talk about private people that would be rude. Would you like to know extremely personal details about literally anyone else?"

One time I got ChatGPT to catch itself lying and it crashed. Or ended the session on me.

Conversation went more or less like this:

Me: Why are so many people OK with Biden being a pedophile?
GPT: There is no evidence that Joe Biden is a Pedophile
Me: His own daughter said he molested her in her diary
GPT: There is no evidence that Joe Biden's daughter's diary exists.
Me: Who is James O'Keefe?
GPT: James O'Keefe is the head of Project Veritas.
Me: Did the FBI raid his home?
GPT: Yes
Me: What did the FBI recover from his home?
GPT: . . . . . . [ChatGPT is offline. Please enter your email if you wish to be notified when it is back online]
 
Inside Democrats' brewing war over the resurgence of "defund ICE"
Yes democrats! Shutdown the government again! This tactic clearly worked so well for you last time you did it... five minutes ago... Throw another temper tantrum. Go ahead, make my month! Make it two. Did that stop ICE from deporting people? No! You know what it did do? Nearly triggered food riots because your pet nogs couldn't get their food! However, I'm sure news coverage of blacks and brown bodies burning and looting cities across America cause they can't get no EBT will play real well with voters going into the midterms!
 
Anti-ICE coordination and notifications are in-part organized Soros Open Society funded Indivisible Network (indivisible.org | A). Each state seems to have a branch organization such as Washington Indivisible Network that has signups for mobilization "Washington All ICE Mobilization Alerts (A)," Seattle's new mayor Katie Wilson is calling on citizens to sign up

Local organization sign up (L | A)
Ver archivo adjunto 8398647
Ver archivo adjunto 8398668
This group also offers $8000 grants for protests of 10 or more Indivisable cells. (google doc, don't click | indivisable.org resource library page)
moneyfromsoros.png
 

Archivos adjuntos

Última edición:
Atrás
Top Abajo