Right, he did, but here’s my point: Project 2025 doesn’t actually come out clearly for or against tariffs. So in so far as “they wrote it all down in Project 2025 and told you exactly what they’re going to do”, that’s just not the case for tariffs. And even the guy in favor of tariffs wasn’t talking about such broad and strong tariffs all at once.
In other words, this is Trump’s plan on his own.
I mean, that’s basically what US Social Security is. It also has a cap, and poorer people actually get a little more out of it than they put in, while higher earners get less. It’s just that it doesn’t pay enough to work on its own.
The old idea was that the US would have three legs of retirement: Social Security, 401k’s, and traditional corporate pensions. Each of these has downsides, but a failure in one can be propped up by the other two. However, Social Security is being pilfered, corporate pensions rarely exist unless you have one of the unions that has maintained power until now, and 401k’s are too subject to the wild rides of the stock market.
What does Project 2025 have to say about tariffs?
Bush II had an approval rating around 25-30% at the end of his time in office. Consider that the bottom for how many people will still support a complete and obvious failure.
Washington warned against political parities, period. The problems of first past the post creating a two party duopoly weren’t understood at the time.
It’s not a very practical approach to nationwide electoral strategy, IMO. Washington himself was allied with Hamilton’s Federalist party in practice, even if he never officially declared for it.
The argument against the M16 right now is that an intermediate caliber rifle can’t do anything against modern body armor (Edit: and to the other poster, this also applies to the HK416). Works if you’re shooting poor brown people, but not anyone with a well equipped military. The US itself is in the middle of replacing the M16 for this reason.
When the XM7 was being developed, there was a chance the whole thing was a mistake if a near-peer war never happened. Now the likelihood of a near-peer war is looking more likely.
Chess is a game that dumb people think all smart people are good at. That’s why they keep bringing up these chess metaphors.
That’s at the federal level. Wisconsin supreme court justices are elected for 10 year terms, and are officially non-partisan. In practice, everyone knows that the candidates are supported by one party or the other.
The Milwaukee Zoo Interchange cost $1.7B.
Wisconsin currently has $4.5B sitting right there in the bank. This happened because Republicans don’t want to give the Democratic governor a win by doing, say, a big infrastructure project, paying for school lunches, or just giving it back to citizens as a tax credit. The good news is that the Supreme Court win means nobody is going to try to push through ultra gerrymandered maps again, and Democrats have a chance to take control of the legislature next election.
I’ll copy something I wrote up in another thread.
This is one of those things that needs some context. Lots of nations have ID requirements similar to this, and people from outside the United States are often confused as to why it’s a problem. The issue is that it’s a backdoor to voter disenfranchisement.
Not everyone drives, and therefore, doesn’t need a state-issued ID. But now you need one to vote. So you have to go to the DMV to get an ID that’s not a drivers license but functions the same way for ID purposes. Except the DMV is only open during working hours, has long lines, and the nearest one may not have public transportation going to it.
It’s often minorities who don’t have drivers licenses to begin with, and they tend to vote for Democrats.
In practice, there was never significant voter fraud at all. Not enough to change the outcome of any race. Even on the surface, it’s solving a non-problem.
Here’s the thing about that email server: it was standard operating procedure for the White House at the time.
Email starts to be used for official communication under Bill’s administration, but everyone is still trying to figure out this Internet thing back then. It was standard for the Secretary of State to run their own email server all through the Bush II administration. Hillary was simply following what was already established. It was only when John Kerry took the office that this was changed to bring their email server under White House IT staff control.
Which is what should have happened within a few years of Bush II’s first term. As someone who has managed their own email server before, it’s hard to setup an email server that works correctly. It’s even harder to set it up in a way that doesn’t immediately become a spam gateway and security hazard. As soon as the government was getting a handle on this Internet thing, all staff email servers should have been run by government IT directly.
That isn’t on Hillary alone. It’s a decision that crossed three different Presidential administrations and both major parties.
FOIA was followed, though. The DOJ got plenty of Hillary’s emails by way of FOIA.
Why would you need to go to the Department of Motor Vehicles for an ID though?
Well, now you’re seeing the issue. You go to the DMV because that’s the only place allowed to give out state IDs. This is not an accident.
If (nearly) everyone has an ID, it cannot be used as means for voter disenfranchisment.
You’re forgetting that the entire point is to be disenfranchising. Yes, this is 100% fixable, and Republicans will fight to make sure it doesn’t get fixed.
Surely, a leftist used to studying intricate theory and picking apart the layers of capitalist control to see the rot at its center would be able to see why voter ID laws are a problem. I have it under great authority that .ml is filled with such users. Can’t think of any possible reason why they’d be for it. None at all.
It’s been part of WI state law for a while. Putting it in the state constitution makes it harder to repeal.
This is one of those things that needs some context. Lots of nations have ID requirements similar to this, and people from outside the United States are often confused as to why it’s a problem. The issue is that it’s a backdoor to voter disenfranchisement.
Not everyone drives, and therefore, doesn’t need a state-issued ID. But now you need one to vote. So you have to go to the DMV to get an ID that’s not a drivers license but functions the same way for ID purposes. Except the DMV is only open during working hours, has long lines, and the nearest one may not have public transportation going to it.
It’s often minorities who don’t have drivers licenses to begin with, and they tend to vote for Democrats.
In practice, there was never significant voter fraud at all. Not enough to change the outcome of any race. Even on the surface, it’s solving a non-problem.
Tech journalist outlets have been the best at reporting on Trump’s shit. Wired figured this out better than the New York Times.
For Wisconsin itself, it’s huge. It keeps breathing room available at the state level.
Another bad investment by the Muskrat.
Not really. When you frame it in a way where you don’t sound like a right wing nutter, I find people tend to accept it.
Lol at directly quoting Keynes.