Trump/Zelensky deal turns into Jerry Springer episode

[DesRicardo]

I thought of that. That's one of the issues with expansive governments. Too many people directly or indirectly have a vested interest in government employment.

In reality, most of Federal bureaucrats probably support Democrats. It's also likely their immediate families do as well. Friends that generally support Republicans or who are truly independent likely won't vote in sympathy.

Waaaaayyyyyy too much biased thinking here. You say "in reality", but what's that based on?

I can't even respond because there are too many flaws in your thought process.

When Trump says he wants to lower military spending, I don't think you understand how many people, on both sides, support the military.

 

[The Oracle]

People have noticed that he's just trying to bail out his friend.

Although Saagar has interviewed him a few times I wouldn't call them friends.

 

[nottyboi]

The GDP of EU is 20T. 10 times that of Russia.
I think EU can very well support Ukraine and hold its own against Russia.

But a single artillery shell costs 9K euro in EU land and about $400 in Russia

 

[WyattEarp]

Trump says counties are taking advantage of USA with bad trade deals with zero evidence. He points to the free trade agreement between USA, Mexico and Canada.

President Donald Trump is outraged that Americans are footing an unfair financial burden, citing a 2020 trade deal called the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement that he signed.

Yes, Trump signed it and he should wait until next year's review to raise his concerns unless there is a major breach of the agreement.

I will just throw something out there. Politicians liberally throw out a concept like free trade agreement. NAFTA was 1700 pages long. The USMCA is 288 pages long.

In the context of these trade agreements, I think what it actually means some things maybe even most things are traded freely. Then some things trade with conditions. Certain industries have significant limitations.

 

[danmand]

But a single artillery shell costs 9K euro in EU land and about $400 in Russia

The war is lost. Get used to it.

Ukraine cannot find any more soldiers willing to be cannon fodder, and I doubt any other European country will supply troops.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

But a single artillery shell costs 9K euro in EU land and about $400 in Russia

Because it is sourced from North Korea with half the powder and even then half of them are duds.
I guess you get what you pay for.

 

[WyattEarp]

But a single artillery shell costs 9K euro in EU land and about $400 in Russia

It's because the European artillery shell is designed to not accidentally blow up in the handler's face.

 

[Valcazar]

Although Saagar has interviewed him a few times I wouldn't call them friends.

But since from what I understand, Saagar has said for years they are friends, (he's best friends with Vance's chief of staff or something) it doesn't really matter what you would say, now does it?

 

[nottyboi]

Interesting.
I didn't think you would go all in on "no peace deal is worth the paper it is printed on" given you constantly saying they need to make a peace deal with Putin, but here you are.

Every peace deal is based on trust and can include disarmament and pull back of troops etc. All peace deals are breakable. The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact is one wih Germany breaking the deal and attacking Russia. There is the JCPOA deal with Iran and Western nations, broken by both the USA and EU. The there is the MCUSA broken by the USA leading to a trade war, (looks like it). The there is the Minsk 2, broken by Ukraine, France and Germany. So year peace deals are not a guarantee. They are a framework that creates an end of hostilities that can build a peace. And if that work is not done (as was the case of the Budapest memorandum) war will return.

 

[WyattEarp]

Waaaaayyyyyy too much biased thinking here. You say "in reality", but what's that based on?

I can't even respond because there are too many flaws in your thought process.

When Trump says he wants to lower military spending, I don't think you understand how many people, on both sides, support the military.

This last point is fair enough. It definitely depends on the agency and expenditure.

Let's just say the DEI directors and managers are likely not Republicans. Same goes for today's USAID employees.

I still think a very large percentage of Federal employees that will be impacted are Democrats.

 

[Valcazar]

Every peace deal is based on trust and can include disarmament and pull back of troops etc. All peace deals are breakable. The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact is one wih Germany breaking the deal and attacking Russia. There is the JCPOA deal with Iran and Western nations, broken by both the USA and EU. The there is the MCUSA broken by the USA leading to a trade war, (looks like it). The there is the Minsk 2, broken by Ukraine, France and Germany. So year peace deals are not a guarantee. They are a framework that creates an end of hostilities that can build a peace. And if that work is not done (as was the case of the Budapest memorandum) war will return.

Absolutely.
So you agree no one should put any trust in a Russian peace deal or cease fire, since they are totally breakable and it would be silly to believe one would be adhered to.

 

[Valcazar]

This last point is fair enough. It definitely depends on the agency and expenditure.

Let's just say the DEI directors and managers are likely not Republicans. Same goes for today's USAID employees.

I still think a very large percentage of Federal employees that will be impacted are Democrats.

I'd still like you to base that on anything other than a hunch.
Unless your point is that Trump and Musk are deliberately trying to fire Democrats and purge the Federal work force entirely based on politics, which does seem plausible, I would grant you.

 

[shack]

It's pretty obvious regardless of political perspective who is merely aping talking points and who has distinctive viewpoints.

Agree.

 

[Butler1000]

Although Saagar has interviewed him a few times I wouldn't call them friends.

He is apparently good friends(admitted by Saagar) with his chief of staff. That does give him access to the WH but he is, imo starting to fall prey to carrying favor to keep that access.

He may shake himself out of this. We shall see.

 

[Butler1000]

I'd still like you to base that on anything other than a hunch.
Unless your point is that Trump and Musk are deliberately trying to fire Democrats and purge the Federal work force entirely based on politics, which does seem plausible, I would grant you.

I think I saw a star where D.C. and area vote above 90% Democrat. It's why the GOP block statehood.

 

[The Oracle]

He is apparently good friends(admitted by Saagar) with his chief of staff. That does give him access to the WH but he is, imo starting to fall prey to carrying favor to keep that access.

He may shake himself out of this. We shall see.

So he's good friends with Susie wiles?

 

[WyattEarp]

I think I saw a star where D.C. and area vote above 90% Democrat. It's why the GOP block statehood.

For reference, the more affluent Arlington and Fairfax Counties of Virginia across the river have voted 78% and 66% Democrat respectively. Senator Tim Kaine slightly outperformed Harris. This of course can change some election to election.

Arlington County has 240,000 people. Fairfax County has 1,150,000. D.C. has 690,000 people.

On election nights, commentators typically discuss how the rest of the less densely populated Virginia will offset the Northern counties that our suburbs of Washington D.C. Democrats carry large margins in Northern Virginia. Republicans have advantages elsewhere. It's a competitive state.

The also populous Maryland counties surrounding D.C. gave 80 plus% margins to Harris.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

 

[WyattEarp]

I think I saw a star where D.C. and area vote above 90% Democrat. It's why the GOP block statehood.

True. If you go back through history, it's been easier to introduce two new states with dissimilar party preferences. Alaska and Hawaii in 1959 would be a good example. Nixon carried one and Kennedy carried the other in 1960. One could argue Hawaii and Alaska statehood was also a strategic decision to extend U.S. boundaries in the Pacific and the Arctic.

I think there would be broad support for D.C. statehood if we brought in Alberta simultaneously.