Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 9/28/2025 at 8:17 PM, Gatorubet said:

Not that I think it will matter, but Trump not being smart enough to stay within a lane that would make his unilateral usurping of Congressional tariff power more palatable to Roberts and company is at least some good news.   

He has no strategy and he has no nuance. He just has a variety of sledgehammers at his disposal that he picks up and uses with his mood changes.  But the way he is using those sledgehammers actually supports the legal position that he doesn’t have the power to do everything that he’s doing.

At some point the conservative Supremes might get a clue that he’s destroying the country more than they will allow for partisan dipshittery, which might mean a key vote or two in the future as things get worse prior to the Supreme Court’s consideration of the constitutionality of his tariff debacle.

See again, not that it will probably matter, but I’m looking for any faint sign of hope.  imagine if some smart Autocrat was in charge instead of that dip shit.

What is this, year five of the Supreme Court going full regard 100% of the time?  And you and twice still hold out hope?  Cute.

Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

What is this, year five of the Supreme Court going full regard 100% of the time?  And you and twice still hold out hope?  Cute.

I think there is a chance that the Supreme Court may decide an issue that is good for the future of the GOP and so-called conservatives, while not being what Trump wants.   It is also possible that the court will protect its own power and authority if it is in conflict with TFG and a serious threat.  Note, I am not saying they will protect the people of the United States and our system of government, but they just might protect themselves.

Sometimes things are as simple as you say, and sometimes they are normally as simple as you say, with the occasional nuance.   No matter the parties involved, it’s usually a good idea to put money on people protecting their own self-interest.  

I understand that GOP politicians are too cowardly to oppose Trump’s grabbing powers that belong to other branches of government.   That does not mean they wholeheartedly agree with that, they just know they are dead if they oppose it.   But unlike Congress, the nine robes are appointed for life.  I remain hopeful that GOP members of Congress who are too cowardly to oppose Trump may back channel to Scotus that they would not mind installing some governors on TFG’s total takeover of government.    SCOTUS can survive Trump for a while by being his toadies, but that will be a short-lived relationship until he decides he no longer needs them.  They know this. That was the whole conundrum of Marbury v Madison.   How can the Supreme Court exert power and influence when they have no means to enforce their rulings absent the acquiescence of the ruled?

If me saying it “probably won’t matter”, and saying my opinion is only a “faint hope” ruffles your jimmies as overly optimistic, that just shows what a shitty simulation we are all in right now.

 

   

Edited by Gatorubet
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

I bet all a guy would have to do is lie on a form and collect a few hundred thousand in soybean subsidy money.  I'm going to look into it when the time comes.

Hell, we had an entire thread on this site about taking PPP loans during COVID with no intention of ever paying them back.

Cuban notes gif

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
17 hours ago, Macanudo said:

Or the current court, especially the MAGA judges are content to sit back, earn $300k (in salary) plus whatever other grifts they can pull down for life.   

They did manage not to immediately acquiesce to Trump firing that Fed lady on the Trumped up mortgage fraud charges.  I figured there would be some sort of shadow docket approval, but the lady keeps her job until they hear the case sometime in 2026.   At least I thought I heard that on my drive home yesterday.

Posted
8 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

They did manage not to immediately acquiesce to Trump firing that Fed lady on the Trumped up mortgage fraud charges.  I figured there would be some sort of shadow docket approval, but the lady keeps her job until they hear the case sometime in 2026.   At least I thought I heard that on my drive home yesterday.

Probably just need some time to change all their US equity positions from long to short - then they'll go ahead and give Trump the thumbs up.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, Gap03 said:

Probably just need some time to change all their US equity positions from long to short - then they'll go ahead and give Trump the thumbs up.

Given their string of bs endorsements of his other firings, this one actually surprised me.  Trump wanted to clean house at the Fed if he could.   You know that Fed Chairthing Laura Loomer would drastically cut interest rates.

  • Haha 2
Posted (edited)

Yep, already aware that I will never purchase anything EA unless it's a used disc moving forward. I don't ever buy any in-game purchase stuff so that should work until everything is download only. 

Edited by Huckleberry
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
On 10/1/2025 at 1:50 PM, Macanudo said:

I was talking to a conservative friend the other day about this issue.  When I pointed out that our exports will have a hard time finding markets, he guffawed. 

When I asked him if it made sense if Apple bought from Supplier X instead of Supplier Y in order to drive the overall price of Part A down in the long term and gain more market share from Samsung and Google, maybe even overpay in the short term if it meant more control of the industry in the long term.   Oh, and by the way, they not only hurt Samsung and Google now but they also put Supplier X in a bind down the road when Apple is the only game in town.  

Then I said "Now, realize that China is probably doing that right now with Brazilian and Argentinian soy beans the next few years because of the huge impact that would have on us."   China doesn't think about next month, next month or next election cycle.   They're looking at 10 or 20 years from now.  

He was incredulous about that idea.   

Agree completely. Only note i got is China thinks in century long goals, much longer than 10 -20. They have a long term plan to take over the world and they've had it for 5000 years

Posted
5 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

image.png.083dd93f80e6817930af457d728cd91b.png

 

Trump destroys the soybean farmers.

Joni's solution?   Our farmers were ruined by Trump; the only way to fix it is MORE Trump!


The whippings will stop once morale improves.

Posted (edited)
21 hours ago, Gap03 said:

Probably just need some time to change all their US equity positions from long to short - then they'll go ahead and give Trump the thumbs up.

I’m not sure there is a short position in the world other than hiding in a bunker full of gold that will prepare you for a Trump appointed Fed just printing money.

 

I think the Supremes will allow the tariffs to stand out of fear of roiling the bond market, which is relying on short term tariff revenue to reduce the deficit, but probably includes some wishy-washy Kavanaugh language about we reserve the right to revisit/this isn’t precedent.

They clearly care about the state of the stock market or they would have allowed him to fire Lisa Cook and Jpow.

Edited by Bateshorn
Posted

The "they don't like aid" schtick is just a bit much. They repeatedly vote for it. They don't consider it welfare, they consider it their right as farmers to be protected from uncertainty & bailed out from stupidity. It ain't socialism when it benefits R voters.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
23 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:


The whippings will stop once morale improves.

"Look at what you made me do."

Favorite line of domestic abusers.

Posted
50 minutes ago, GhostOfTomJoad said:

It ain't socialism when it benefits R voters.

Other than "OU sucks," there has never been a truer statement posted on this board.

Ironclad.  All of the Trumpers around here who love to rant about the "free shit army" look right past the fact that -- particularly in terms of total dollars -- the Republican voter "free shit army" is the largest army the world has ever seen.

But that's okay, because they are all patriots, and the backbone of America, and they paid their dues, and blah blah blah.  They're white people who voted for Trump, that's the only thing that matters, and that's why they think it's super cool that our welfare spigot is turned even higher.

Posted
1 hour ago, GhostOfTomJoad said:

The "they don't like aid" schtick is just a bit much. They repeatedly vote for it. They don't consider it welfare, they consider it their right as farmers to be protected from uncertainty & bailed out from stupidity. It ain't socialism when it benefits R voters.

 

IMG_0491.jpeg

Posted
1 hour ago, GhostOfTomJoad said:

The "they don't like aid" schtick is just a bit much. They repeatedly vote for it. They don't consider it welfare, they consider it their right as farmers to be protected from uncertainty & bailed out from stupidity. It ain't socialism when it benefits R voters.

Yeah. They got it last time and instantly started acting entitled to it as soon as things went bad for them again.

They expect it and feel entitled to it. Claiming they don't like it is ridiculous. But this is a Senator who needs their votes so of course she is going to stroke their egos.



×
×
  • Create New...