this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2024
413 points (98.6% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2159 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Donald Trump’s allies, including Elon Musk and John Paulson, are advocating sudden, unspecified spending cuts, likely targeting healthcare and social programs if Trump wins.

Despite strong economic performance under Biden, Trump’s agenda could double the national debt, raising taxes for most Americans while benefitting the wealthy. His policies may cut essential programs, lowering living standards in the short term.

Trump’s campaign has been a bait-and-switch, promising economic restoration while hiding the dire consequences of his proposals.

all 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MyOpinion@lemm.ee 105 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (7 children)

Let me break it down. They will WRECK the economy, democracy, women's rights, religious freedom, and anyone who stood against them. But you will have easy access to as many guns and ammo as you like.

[–] Atom@lemmy.world 80 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

I wouldn't bet on that gun part*...he wanted to take guns away in his first term through executive action. I doubt two assassination attempts will have mellowed him out in that.

"I like taking guns away early" Trump said. "Take the guns first, go through due process second."

Source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/02/28/trump-says-take-guns-first-and-worry-due-process-second-white-house-gun-meeting/381145002/

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 37 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

They are going to keep the guns thing wide open as long as elections are a thing. Once they’ve gotten to a place where they’ve cemented their power in a way where voting doesn’t really matter anymore, they’re gonna take ‘em away right fucking quick.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 16 points 3 weeks ago

Bingo. There are very few that understand this. Conservatives feel safe and liberals think guns will be a free for all. Both groups are morons.

As you said, if Trump gets in, they're taking the guns from all of us. Ironic that our gun rights are safer under a Harris administration.

[–] Arbiter@lemmy.world 16 points 3 weeks ago

Ultimately the republican establishment wants strict gun control, they just know it’s a wedge issue with a lot of their voters.

Kings hate the serfs being armed.

[–] tryptamine@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 3 weeks ago

After Trumps assassination attempt, allowing you to buy as many guns and as much ammo is as you want is not a certainty.

[–] Snassek@lemm.ee 10 points 3 weeks ago

By wrecking the economy, it makes it easier to buy up the property.

A win for the extremely rich.

[–] SelfProgrammed@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

Don't forget vaccines

[–] vividspecter@lemm.ee 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Don't forget the climate. And that will have far greater long term effects to humanity than anything else.

[–] zephorah@lemm.ee 3 points 3 weeks ago

Idk, 2 people tried to shoot him. I think he’s going to backpedal on that one.

[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 46 points 3 weeks ago

It’s the private equity playbook. Sell all the real capital assets to cover existing debt, rent replacement assets from the owners themselves using new debt, run operations so lean that you burn out 100% of your labor force, then declare bankruptcy and settle your own debt while keeping all the assets.

It has already destroyed swaths of the private sector, and now they wanna do it to the entire economy.

I do not think that his core supporters identify with these sorts of arguments. I made some images with topics that I think connect more with his base. In the last couple days before the election, maybe you could share them with groups you know, in more populated places like Facebook and X (ignoring the problems with those places for the time being).

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 20 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

raising taxes for most Americans while benefitting the wealthy

this was literally always the agenda from day one 10 years ago. why is this still being presented as "news"?

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 22 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Because younger voters have no clue on most of this. A lot of them never even heard the “grab her by the pussy“ comment, and they were subsequently appalled, apparently.

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

never even heard the “grab her by the pussy“ comment

this should irreversibly torpedo anyone's career, political or otherwise. i still have a hard time believing it didn't

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 8 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

At the time I legitimately thought he was done. Just done. I could not conceive of anything else. Certainly not what actually happened.

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 9 points 3 weeks ago

it really opened my eyes to the fact that yes, there are indeed that many people who think it's ok for someone who has no problem with assaulting women to run the whole country

[–] zephorah@lemm.ee 9 points 3 weeks ago

Because as a cluster B personality disorder, the primary statement made when negative but truthful statements are made about them is: nuh-uh. To be clearer: no, they are doing it, not me. “They” being whomever the cluster B personality disorder deems their enemy at the time. (They always have an enemy, of sorts.). Sometimes it’s a vehement: no, YOU are doing this, not me.

It’s a playbook of behavior with cluster B personality disorder that occurs like clockwork.

Cluster B is borderline psychosis due to the alternative realities they present to self and others, which is simply where they exist. There is also high dysfunction for relationships, but not enough life dysfunction to get them institutionalized, most of the time. They are deeply sick individuals in need of help, in need of long term therapy.

So here we are. A vehement denial of behaviors, and a demonization of the ones daring to describe negative behaviors out loud.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

Ever since Reagan.

[–] DogPeePoo@lemm.ee 17 points 3 weeks ago

”Believe them…”

—Maya Angelou

[–] Minarble@aussie.zone 13 points 3 weeks ago

“As Election Day approaches, however, Trump’s supporters in the business community seem to have realized that his proposals are unworkable and would wreak havoc on the financial system. The only way to make the numbers add up is to pair higher taxes on the bottom 80% with big cuts in programs such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, federal aid to education, and so forth. The exact balance of such cuts is unclear, though Johnson is clearly interested in cutting health programs.”

Good article…Trump will trash the economy for no reason other than tax cuts for billionaires

[–] Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

The only way to cut 2 trillion is by cutting Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. Literally. All of the rest of the government only totals up to 1.7 trillion in spending.

[–] LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

Oh Bloomberg, please tell us how Trump was an economics genius