This, but also there is massive competition for getting Trumps favor among his minions. A public statement like this pleases Trump, and so Vance gets to be a bit closer to daddy. Trump loves this type of competition among his underlings, and so all of them attempt to outcompete each other in stupidity.
Doesn’t seem to be a difficult choice. The US is preying on its closest allies, threatening to annex Canada, and Greenland. China is not.
I really don’t think so. Putin will not give the US such a big win in the Arctic. The point about nationalism is that you can be friends with another nationalist leader, but only up to a point when there is some perceived divergence of interest. Therefore you cannot have a long term alliance between them. Putin understands this well (even if Trump does not).
Also, huge scandal breaks out and you don’t check your personal records before giving a response?
We would indeed prefer shipping to Suez. That’s why we deploy navy ships to the Red Sea. Doesn’t mean that we asked for this particular strike on Jemen (which as many already pointed out is unlikely to affect piracy much). You can’t say you do something for Europe when to my knowledge no European nation asked for this “aide”.
Not particularly technically inclined so this question may be stupid, but suppose an intelligence service found some backdoor into Signal, wouldn’t they try to keep that information hidden from Signal? So in theory the chat could be vulnerable already?
European here: we did not ask for your help, we do not particularly want you to bomb the houthis (or anyone in the Middle East for that matter).
Yes indeed, but also primaries can help to attract voters. I think the Sanders campaigns, though he didn’t win, made young people more likely to vote Democrat.
Fully agree. In fact you can apply this much wider. The only solution to the Earth’s problems is to get rid of all people on it /s.
I mean, it’s just really hard to understand why all these billionaires have decided to become so politically active. 1.) they have more than enough money for 10 more generations at least. 2.) if there is a serious tax hike or other threat to their wealth they can always quietly buy off some key politicians. 3.) if you stick your neck out like Musk (and some other billionaire cabinet members do) you run the chance that people will want to cut it off. If I were a billionaire I would make it my lives mission to ensure that the general public does not know my name.
Did they ask about “siding with Russia over Ukraine”, or “Making peace in Ukraine in three weeks”? Yes framing matters, and obviously people support policies that are framed like “eliminating fraud and waste in government expenditure “. Wonder how that position is affected if you add the subclause “by kids that come straight out of high school “.
Raising the debt ceiling requires only 50 votes I think. Besides the article is about the house. I don’t see any reason why Dems help out the GOP if they can’t stop defectors.
I don’t really get this. They don’t need the Democrats to keep the government open, since they have a majority in both chambers. Completely up to the GOP to get the votes lined up.
There are dozens of obvious ways in which Trump and co destroy the government. However, what worries me even more is the things they destroy that are not immediately obvious. For instance, say they remove building construction code, and in 30 years we find out that every building constructed since the Trump government has a fatal construction flaw.
Clearly you can do stuff to bring agricultural prices down, BUT with the bird flu going around don’t expect miracles in egg prices. If somehow, magically, high egg prices are the only negative effect we will encounter related to bird flu, we are extremely lucky.
In both situations the problem is that congress is not acting when it should. When Dems controlled congress we wanted it push through bills. Now that GOP controls congress we want them to stop Elon. In both cases congress does nothing (and this has been the steady state for decades).
Lol at “Entangled in Sharpiegate” makes it sound like this was some grand conspiracy.
That is really completely irrelevant. It’s a win to his voters (and likely to him), and worse it legitimises the negotiation tactic. If Trump threatens Greenland with a potential military invasion, the only correct negotiation tactic is to expel US soldiers from Greenland/Denmark. Why the heck would Greenland host US military when this might be an invasion force?
To be honest, I really worry about what will happen when he dies. I think the only somewhat positive feature of Trump is that he is a coward. He will back down if you push back. Vance will try to simulate Trump by copying his bluster, but he won’t back down even in the face of a war (because dear leader would not have done so either).
I don’t want to talk ethics, but as a rule of thumb, winning a war is easier if you take out strategic targets than if you target civilians. Targeting civilians is what you do if your weapons aren’t precise enough to target tanks/planes etc.