America pulled itself out of the great depression by becoming the worlds largest weapons manufacturer and staying out of WW2 until the very end.

They feel that they have been doing their allies a favor by having military bases in key locations that have allowed these nations to spend less than 2% of their GDP on defense.

This administration would like to reset the world order so that these countries pay for their own defense. Isolationists like JD Vance strongly believe in this.

They also know that allies will likely buy weapons from them which will help balance trade imbalances.

Here’s the problem - there is no situation where this does not lead to nuclear proliferation. It’s essentially inevitable if America continues down this path.

Also, when nations invest more in their militaries, they are more likely to use them, with or without adequate justification. The US is a prime example of this.

Perhaps the post WW2 period of relative peace and prosperity is about to come to an end, along with the concept of the Western world - leaving a power vacuum that I’m sure China and Russia are eager to capitalize on.

You better listen otherwise I’ll crash my economy!

I wouldn’t blame an ordinary person for having money in this index ETF, but it is funny that he made a big deal out of it while having money invested in Brooksfield also.

I certainly wouldn’t use it as a point to discredit Poilievre. There are many other ways to do that.

I think those outside the US figured it was only a matter of time. The US voting population has only become more disengaged and the country has created and is the epicenter of most social media misinformation campaigns.

The US pulled itself out of the great depression first through regulation via the new deal and then by selling military equipment to allied nations during WW2 (essentially leveraging its geographical isolation during the war). Its been addicted to making and selling military equipment since then, in part due to the cold war but I think we can all agree there have been a few wars along the way that were essentially treated as test runs.

Hoover’s nearly 50% tariff on agriculture stretched the depression out by a few years. If we take history as any indication, tariffs are typically either a buildup to complete economic collapse or to a public bailout. One of those seems more likely than the other now. What would a 21st century ‘New Deal’ even look like?

You can’t JD. The rest of us absolutely can.

Sure but even Obama, who did not have to deal with gender based prejudice and was generally a well liked populist, could not pull a majority of the white vote. A lot of white voters just could not bring themselves to trust him because he looked different and had a different name. It’s incredible he ever got elected.

Identity politics are baked into American culture unfortunately and I wonder if a female PoC has a real shot with where things are now. If they do, other PoC would really have to show up for them, like they did for Obama.

It’s hard to imagine a majority of white voters supporting AOC. Obama managed win two elections despite 43% and 39% of the white vote due to strong PoC voter turnout but I doubt that would play out well in the current political climate. AOC would be even more divisive, in a way, by being a woman.

Immigrants did still vote for Kamala as a majority (55%).

I wasn’t aware of the massive jump Trump had achieved with young men. Looks like it was especially true with young white men, with nearly two thirds voting for Trump. Less than 30% of young men from other racial demographics voted for Trump with the exception of Latinos (45%).

Overall the biggest jumps were with Latinos and young white men but he saw an increase in nearly of every demographic except older white people with whom he has historically had majority support.

The 9/11 firefighters bill is evidence that Jon doesn’t have the stomach for day to day politics. He handled it well but he has spoken repeatedly on how frustrating the experience was. I doubt that, at this stage in his career, he’d want to do that everyday.

I don’t think Jon would make a good politician. He’s an exceptional communicator and has all the ideas that progressives want to see get attention but the day to day of politics is soul sucking and doesn’t seem like it’s his cup of tea.

She’s a young, outspoken woman of color. Old white people would never let it happen, even if half are in a nursing home mainlining Fox News straight into their frontal cortex and can barely walk on their own.

A lot of folk are still recovering from Obama being elected twice.

At least Bernie looks familiar to them, so the hatred will be tampered.

Apprently he’s turned a few companies around before. Intel stock went up last week so people seem to have some confidence in him.

He’s a great communicator, but putting forward a gay candidate, even if he’s white, would be a guaranteed loss at this point. It would galvanize the opposition. We’re still feeling the backlash to a half black man (Obama) being elected twice.

The Democrats should be thinking about putting forward the most visibly bland candidate possible. Think Biden but hopefully much, much younger.

I hate that identity politics has this much of an effect on American politics but given the nations history, its not suprising.

Yeah, no. Even if Kamala just continued whatever Biden was doing it would have been better than this.

Which part?

Can you imagine if Republicans approached Trump this way?

If he did this and muscled lower rates through then the value of the US dollar would plummet and cost of living would become even more disastrous. This is how you put the US on the same path as Argentina and Turkey.

He doesn’t give a shit about rural, working class white people.

Vance will be writing Hillbilly Eulogy a few years from now.

It’s fair to blame him when he shuts down the CDC in the midst of an avian flu outbreak.

China is already ahead on EV production and adoption.

The US has space and AI and the latter hasn’t produced anything meaningful, besides accelerating enshittification.

According to a Leger poll, 64% of Canadians would vote for Kamala Harris, while 21% would support Donald Trump, with 15% undecided. Conservative voters in Canada were nearly evenly split, with 42% supporting Harris and 45% backing Trump.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/majority-of-canadians-would-vote-for-kamala-harris-in-u-s-election-poll-1.7086714

Trump would lose the election if Canada were a state, barring any electoral college shenanigans.