Taro T

It is also a definitional component of far-left communism. Authoritarianism in any form gets those that don't go along with the program imprisoned if they're lucky. Mostly, those that don't go along simply end up in unmarked graves.

On immigration policy and on foreign policy (the tariff stuff is economic policy, not foreign policy), he's been much better than where we would've been had the Joyful One been elected. When / where federal judicial branch openings are available, he'll be significantly better than she would have been. There is 0.0% chance DoGE would even have been attempted under her. And continued attempts to stiffle free speech would have ramped up just like they're continuing in the EU. On the rest of it, well, he had been a Democrat for most of his life.

Yet another way still to look at it is "minimum wage" is SUPPOSED to be for those entering the labor market or those simply supplementing their other income sources. Those jobs are not meant to be careers nor for raising families. The taxpayer isn't subsidizing the HS student working to have money to afford a car and to find out just why he/she wants to go on to college nor the SS recipient that wants to be able to work part time for whatever reason(s) that usually aren't related to being able to avoid having to have dog food on the table. Yes, there are those that aren't in those starting out / supplementing categories that need miminum wage jobs. And many of them fall into the categories of individuals you mention above. And absolutely those are the people that SNAP is tailor made to help. The question(s) to be answered is how do you get those that are mulitgenerationally in the welfare system out of it. And personally believe that starts by fixing the educational system particularly in inner cities and impoverished rural areas and also by incentivizing rather than penalizing two parent families. Realizing there is no overnight fix to issues that have engulfed at least 60 years worth of people growing up in that same situation.

Still find it hilariously ironic that these same people that burn Teslas, releasing untold amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, are pretty much all climate change warriors. There's too much CO2 in the atmosphere and it is an EXISTENTIAL CRISIS and we must do EVERYTHING in our power to reduce the CO2 in the atmosphere except when our own inner demons would like to see something burn. The CO2 released from those actions have absolutely NOTHING to do with the CO2 that causes global warming. (Won't even get into how the release of toxic substances into the atmosphere from burning (the combustible portions) of cars might also be detrimental to the environmentalists causes.)

FTFY. Truly don't see how you can honestly say, as Jake Tapper and his buddy are making their mia culpa tour for the ENTIRE "mainstream" press corps, that the vast majority of ALL reporters on the national stage DON'T simply print or say what they're told to do. Get to the primary source whether the conduit happens to be progressive, conservative, "mainstream," "alternative," or what have you. And if you can't, well take it all with a grain of salt but true your own observations when you are provided enough primary source info to be able to make them.

To the bolded, winner winner chicken dinner. Regardless of who one supports or doesn't, we should ALL want that.

Well, in fairness, it's been a long time since any of the left's favorite party's politicians have done that. They might've forgotten that it can still happen. 😉

So, being kept out of the country you are a citizen (2 of the journalists are apparently German citiizens) of because you've exercised what should be a universal freedom of speech, is a perfectly acceptable "consequence" of speaking freely? And if citizens aren't allowed to return to their country then there really shouldn't be any problem with exiling citizens for speaking freely in a manner that particular place's leaders don't agree with, right? And if, as a citizen, your bank account can be frozen because you've exercised your right to free speech, why stop just there? Why not have their property and possessions confiscated as well? You honestly don't see any problems with this?

So tired of the endless preambles to these things. You really don't need to say "we're doing something about this and we'll tell you just what it is soon." Stfu until you are actually ready to release whatever it is you've found and then when you get to that point, simply release it. You aren't drumming up interest for this summer's biggest blockbuster movie. You're telling peope what actually happened over 4 years ago. Oh, and btw, when you do tell us what you've found out, release the documents you used to reach your conclusions in as unredacted a form as is possible. (Don't put anybody's SSN in the release, but that should be about the only thing we don't get to find out.) And IF there were crimes committed by those in the FBI and elsewhere, presuming the statute of limitations hasn't run out already, bring arrest warrants at the same time. And if the statute of limitations has run out, well name names and put the info out into the public. And if there were no crimes committed by those in government at that time, make that known too. But enough of the hype. Show us what you've come up with. Don't just tell us about how amazing it is.

Decrying redefining words, decrying censorship, decrying vilifying those that you politically disagree with. Interesting. Didn't hear him say 1 single word against any of it the past 4 years. Absolutely, these are things that people should be wary of. But, he's perfectly fine with it when it's his side doing it. And am old enough to remember when journalists weren't supposed to take sides; they were merely supposed to side with the truth and then let the chips fall where they may.

Well, guess he showed you. He gave it the laugh emoji instead of the x. 🙄

You don't stand for those things, nor do you know any progressives that stand for those things, but you continually vote for people that DO support those things. You honestly don't see how you defacto support them? Your party didn't reach white men, non-elderly white women, Latinos in the country legally, and young people and also lost ground among blacks and other groups. Continue, as your party seems determined to do, to view the D's problem in the last 3 elections as only being a "we don't reach white men" problem and you will end up with either President Vance or President Rubio in 4 years. Funny how you're fine with politicians lying to the populace. Because the continued lying by your favorite party's politicians and the cover run for them by the established media is a BIG part of why your favorite party has problems with all those groups listed above. How do college educated voters react to attacks on NPR/PBS? Depends upon whether they're of a libertarian bent or more satisified with authoritarianism. Those with a libertarian bent don't necessarily see a reason for the government to be providing TV and radio and the beaurocracy's take on daily events when there are literally hundreds if not thousands of sources available to everyone. (The media landscape has changed quite a bit since 1970.) Of course, the authoritarians would like for the "dangerous" and "fake news" sources to be silenced so only approved "good" sources will be heard. You know, like cancelling the voices of anyone who dared to say 46 was turning into a kumquat before our eyes as opposed to those heroic noble voices telling you not to believe your lying eyes and ears but to rather trust them as they saw him nearly daily and knew he was sharp as a tack.

Somebody's political challengers have just come up with the knock out punch of campaign ads. Really, how did you decide it was a good idea to say on camera that you represent this guy? Pretty sure all your challengers will say they represent the citizens that no longer have to worry about getting harmed by him. Citizens such as his wife and kids for starters.

NYS was STILL forcing university students to get double boostered to enroll/attend classes in the summer of 2022. Queen Hochul rescinded that order about a week after classes started. THAT BS didn't save a SINGLE life but instead may have taken several. What was done to kids in the name of "science" is absolutely reprehensible.

Gee, the network that brought us Dateline and exploding gas tanks (well, of course they explode when you rig them with explosives and put those in front of your cameras) is still at it? Shocked. Absolutely shocked. (Well, maybe not exactly shocked.)

You have to understand, the GOP didn't want him any more than the D's did. But their rank and file DID want him. And after 4 years of hearing every day how he was going to destroy the country and cause WWIII during his 1st term, with neither actually occurring and after 4 years of watching the world burn during 46's term with inflation and illegal immigration running wild and his VP saying literally "nope, wouldn't change a single policy" independents held their noses and voted for him too. The GOP would MUCH rather have had a Romney or Jeb Bush as the president, but they didn't get their way either. And yes, his over the top NYC trash talking is beyond cringe way too often. And totally don't get his tariff centric economic policy. But his foreign policy is leaps and bounds better than what the D's have been putting forth for the past decade or so. And that fact that he believes we should actually have borders is also leaps and bounds better than anything the D's have put forth in at least the last decade.

Oh, in that case, their oppressors should simply carry on. 😒

Why not both. It IS on brand.

So, you're saying if the D's ran an R they might've won. Interesting theory.

THE person with the singularly BEST medical team in the entire world available to him 24-7 and somehow they missed his having prostate cancer for a few years. Yeah, not buyin' it. Wish him well in his battle, but we are not getting anywhere close to the whole story on this.

How can you say "NOBODY (emphasis mine) believes anything they say" when every single day you are responding to at least a handful of people here that profess they believe what D's say?

Good luck w/ it.

You forgot Patterson. (Who, by NYS Governor standards, actually did a good job as Governor.)

Pretty sure 47 found out the resistance to his rightful and glorious annexation of the 51st state was being formulated ENTIRELY at Harvard U and that is the REAL reason he's coming after them so hard. 😒

So, in other words, no, you won't give what you claim is the definition of "facilitate" under "the art of immigration law." And, btw, 47 asking for him to be released into US custody, is effectively pretty d*mn near the same thing as saying we'll have a plane ready to take him back. Which was already suggested as the definition of (or more precisely an example of) "facilitate" upthread.