Part of the reason I'd like to see a shift in renewable energy is so my kids will have the privileges that fossil fuels grant. Things like air travel and plastics will be a massive pain in the ass without oil.

If so, what do you think are the best ways to address it?

Canada and Mexico have always called themselves friends of the US, whereas with China it's clear they are seeking to dominate world trade and if we can take cue from recent news, perhaps technology and thereby military supremacy. Yet, Trump imposes a measly 10% on them while 2.5 times that on our neighbors. Why? What's the agenda here? 10% will do nothing to China, no one else can supply what they do at that price, even with the added margin.

Source: https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/trump-tariffs-mexico-canada-china-february-2025

I have heard constantly about how the genocide in Gaza is a red line for Democrat voters and so many Democrats sat out the 2024 presidential election and didn't vote.

I am curious what would be a red line for you that would make you sit out an election.

From my perspective it seems like right wing content and influence is everywhere. There are ton more right wing talking heads such as Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh, Charlie Kirk, Tim Pool, Steven Crowder, Candace Owens, etc. And in most communities that revolve around gaming and anime for example, have a largely right wing audience and/or creators such as Drdisrespect, The Quartering, HeelvsBabyface, Revsaysdesu, and Asmongold.

As for traditional media, Fox News is the most watched network in America, and there’s also more notable right wing news such as Breitbart, The washington examiner, OAN if you’re really out there. Also there is PragerU that is being taught in school in certain states now.

So why do you see it the other way?

For a moment ignoring the cost, legal, moral, and politics aspects, how would the military actually remove trans members and what structural/logistical effects would it have?

I wonder as there are undoubtedly members of the military who hold significant positions and who just happen to fall under the “trans” label. Would the military discharge all at once in or would they have to do a long discharge to replace those positions? What would the impact be on overall military readinesss/ability to function?

I understand that trans people make up a vast minority (last report I could find said around 10,000) but does that only include those members going through medical transitioning? Does it include anyone diagnosed with gender dysphoria? Could it even include just a blanket “anyone that identifies with a gender other than matching exactly their part” as it’s not super clear? I ask this specifically as it could pretty drastically affect the numbers that would need to be discharged?

I think it’s fair to assume that a number have significant training that can’t just be filled from recruitment, are currently deployed on ships/submarines/war zones or hold relatively significant positions such as Colonel Bree Fram of the Air Force/Space Force, so what ripple affect might this have?

Furthermore what kind of discharge would these members be getting as that would affect their ability to access VA resources naturally and when would they actually be discharged? I’m just curious from a purely logistical standpoint as we are at the point where trans members are embedded as part of the military and thus could pose logistical/structural issues for discharge?

It seems like many voters were aware about Biden's cognitive decline since 2020. They posted endless memes and commentary about Biden's cognitive function. They joked about him tripping, criticized him for saying weird things off script, shared videos him losing his thought mid sentence, and more.

Meanwhile, a record number of voters (the ones who voted for Biden originally, then some) seemed more than prepared to vote for him again, given Biden's early campaigning in 2024, then pulling out.

Where was the disconnect on this? How did it come to be that one group of people noticed his cognitive issues clearly but another large group of people seemed ready to support him as President again?

A bit of a general question i know. But it's one i feel compelled to ask to gain further insight, especially in a time where it feels both sides refuse to listen to the other.

I know changing someone's view is never as easy as showing them a graph or a news article or a study, there's often big philosophical hurdles to clear if one is in the process of reshaping their perspective.

So, what do you think would be necessary for you to change your views on some of the pressing issues of our times such as healthcare, handling of the economy, abortion, urban planning, foreign aid, trans rights and so on?

I hear many on the left who talk about Trump's felonies. Or that Trump has or is doing things that are illegal. (this is not a debate if that's true or not). There are other things with a general sense that Trump violates or does not care about our laws. If you believe these how are you against,protesting against ICE, helping prevent ICE from doing their job, or doing anything that would prevent our immigrant laws from being enforcemed?

This is not a debate about Trump. This is not a debate of if our laws are correct or not. Its a question of how you can criticize rule breaking and then support or do rule breaking yourself.

If you are a Democrat or Left-leaning, do you think it has moved too far Left? Why?

If you are a Republican/Conservative, do you think Democrats have moved too far Left? Why?

As the title says, why is Trump obsessed with our trade deficit? Is it a bad thing to have? Is Canada actively preventing certain products that we produce from being sold there while similar products from there are sold here? I would just like to understand the rationale and why Canadians are upset.

I am a Republican who got pushed out of the party by MAGA. I am also a supporter of the FairTax, going all the way back to supporting Rep. John Linder (R-GA) in the 1990s and attending the book signings with him and Neal Boortz. So when you tell me you are getting rid of income tax, you have my attention!

I am trying to keep an open mind with Trump's tariffs, but the math troubles me for the working poor. I love the idea of moving taxation away from earning and onto spending, but a flat national sales tax is regressive, and I see the same issue with tariffs. This is why the FairTax also had the prebate; you reimbursed American households with the sales tax amount on what they spent to live at the poverty level. I don't see that anti-regressive mechanism in Trump's tariff plan.

I'll walk through the logic, and please explain where I am wrong because now you have me excited! I will use my data from the Tax Foundation (https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-federal-income-tax-data-2024/).

Trump will eliminate payroll taxes and the IRS, as FairTax would have. Using the 50% income split point, someone with an AGI of $46,637 would pay $4,204 in federal tax, $2,893 in Social Security, and $1,352 in Medicare.

Trump puts tariffs on imported goods. The importing company has to pay that tariff to the federal government. They increase the price of the imported goods by that amount and sell them to the consumer. That will increase the cost of goods by $2,600 a year for the average household (per the Peterson Institute for International Economics - https://www.piie.com/research/piie-charts/2024/trumps-bigger-tariff-proposals-would-cost-typical-american-household-over).

I don't have a doctorate in Mathematics, but keeping $4,204 more of your paycheck while having prices go up $2,600 seems like a fantastic deal, but these calculations are for the average household. Lower-income households still have a significant increase in prices, but the income amount they keep is lower, so they get less of the benefit than middle-income households. The comparison is even worse when you compare the top 1% of income. In short, this is a regressive scheme -- the less money you make, the more your percentage of pay goes to offset the tariffs.

So please help me out here. FairTax has the prebate to fix this problem. I don't see a fix in tariffs.

1) How will Trump get around the regressive nature of this federal revenue scheme?

I will also have two follow-up questions if you want extra credit, but I want to get past this first question.

2. What happens when American workers are replaced with AI automation and robots?

3. How will we make up the drop in federal revenue if manufacturing moves onshore and there is less stuff to tariff? Where will the money to run the federal government come from?

Thanks for taking the time to write a thoughtful reply.

Divisiveness in the country is at an all time high. I’m curious how all sides would feel about dividing up the USA into several independent countries. MAGA could have their own region, socialists could have theirs, and maybe 3 more regions for others including centrists. Obviously this would be a massive undertaking, but curious what people thought.

Forget national politics. Think local. Really local if you need to.

Do you think it is the duty of an elected official to do what their constituents want them to do, even if the official thinks it will hurt the constituency in the long term?

OR

Do you think it is the duty of an elected official to do what they (the official) thinks is BEST for their constituents, even if the constituents don’t see the big picture at that time?

In the UK, Brexit was driven largely by concerns over immigration, economic anxiety, and cultural change. Now, 55% of Britons regret it due to its economic fallout. Given similar themes dominating U.S. elections (border policies, economic discontent, culture wars), do you think Americans are aware of this cautionary tale? Could the U.S. face comparable long-term regrets if policies mirror Brexit’s outcomes?

I’m not asking this question to be combative. I truly want to understand the logic. Is the assumption that any minority or person of color unqualified for their job?

If so, is it solely because of their racial/ethnic background? If a department were comprised of only while males, do you assume everyone is qualified for their job?

Please explain your rational.

There was an online quiz game going around that helped players identify wonky news sources and misinformation.

I feel too preachy to my family members when they tell me about an article they read that’s totally just for entertainment, satire, and/or conspiracy theorists and tell them that’s not real. I unfortunately feel like I need to gentle parent them and give them a resource that gamifies identifying false reporting.

Thanks in advance, and if I see any resources while I’m searching, I’ll be sure to share them here!

I’m thinking specifically of groups that no one can argue suffer through any fault of their own—so there can be no “personal responsibility” argument. Here are two examples.

1. Impoverished children. NOT their parents. The parents may have made mistakes, but the children exist. They need their basic needs met.

2. Those with disabilities and serious chronic health issues. Maybe slightly more complicated because I know some people will still say that living a healthy lifestyle is a personal responsibility issue, but it would be impossible to deny that a lot of people suffering from serious health issues could have done nothing to prevent them.

What do you think society owes people like this? Do you believe in any Federal programs to help? Any state programs? If so, who pays for them? Taxpayers? If you do you believe there should be programs, is it about changing how they’re managed/administered? Who decides?

Or do you think there should there be no government programs to help innocent people in difficult circumstances? Do you think/anticipate that private organizations and charities would step in?

What do you guys think about this? Are you glad that he is trying to ban the federal holiday for America's most famous Civil Rights leader?

https://apnews.com/article/trump-holiday-mlk-day-pride-black-hispanic-dei-047bbdbfc12ea6e9a9731f5861d84e70

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pentagon-intelligence-agency-pauses-events-activities-related-mlk/story?id=118244237

https://www.latintimes.com/pentagon-agency-stop-celebrating-mlk-day-black-history-month-part-anti-dei-crackdown-574035

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/29/us/politics/trump-holiday-mlk-black-history-dei.html

I’m open to being wrong, and actually hope I am. Maybe I’m just in a bubble, but some anecdotal examples are as follows:

Selena Gomez posts a video on IG of her crying for “my people” (immigrants) and then deletes it, and posts a photo of simply a black background with the text: I guess we’re not allowed to have empathy anymore. The response from conservatives was everything from “shut up and sing/act” to saying she should be deported (she’s a US citizen btw).

LeBron James rallies the cause for BLM. Response from conservatives: “shut up and dribble!”

Taylor Swift posts a long message on social in 2020 encouraging and urging her fans to get out the vote, and later followed that up with an official endorsement of Vice President Harris. Response from conservatives: “shut up and sing lady. You aren’t paid for political activism. No one cares about your stupid left wing woke ideas or TDS”

Stephen King, John Cusack, Barbara Streisand and many others have been critical of Trump for years, along with boycotting his 2025 inauguration and being outspokenly critical of his early in-office actions. Response from conservatives: “I’m so sick of all these celebrities wanting to inject their stupid political opinions into everything. Shut up and entertain us! No one cares!”

Now let’s look at the other side of things:

Jake Paul was not told to “shut up and box” by anyone on the right when he endorsed Trump. Dr. Buzz Aldrin wasn’t told “go home to your space rocks old man” when he endorsed Trump. Dr. Phil endorsed Trump and even spoke at the MSG rally, yet was never told “we don’t care about your political opinions. Go back to your set”. Mel Gibson, Rob Schneider and Jim Caviezel weren’t told “shut up and act”. I didn’t see a single person tell Danica Patrick “shut up and drive, Harrison Butker or Brett Favre “shut up and play football” or even Brittany Mahomes to keep her opinions to herself.

No one told Jason Aldean to “shut up and sing”, Kanye West to “shut up and rhyme” or Dennis and Randy Quaid to “shut up and act”

In fact I distinctly remember all of these people and others being praised by right wing politicians and voters alike.

Carrie Underwood sings at Trump’s inauguration and the right is literally swooning over her. Garth Brooks refused to and is told by the right to “stop being such an activist.”

It’s one thing to say you don’t agree with left wing celebrities politics. But there seems to be a real disconnect between just not agreeing with them or even saying so, versus telling them to “just do their jobs because no one cares what celebrities think” only to prop up right wing celebrities who say things you agree with. I want to reiterate again that I’m not talking about disagreeing. I’m talking about telling them to stop saying it and that celebrities shouldn’t get into political brawls when no one seems to mind if right wing celebrities do it.

So is this every bit the blatant unabashed hypocrisy it looks like or am I missing something?

Given Donald Trump's fielty to Russia (and the US effectively owning NATO) not to mention Ukraine was running out of artillery and funding to defend against Russia, do you think Ukraine will eventually have to surrender to Russia, maybe even becoming part of Russia just for the bloodshed and famine to stop? Even the current peace deal would likely include surrendering Crimea, Lugansk, and Donetsk at a bare minimum.

Hello. I’m doing a research paper for my English class on the dangers of Christian Nationalism to American ideals and democracy and one of the requirements my teacher has added is for a primary source of information like an interview for example. I thought it would be really interesting to get the input of one of my states senator on the issue and just wanted to know if it would be better to write a handwritten letter or use their website to contact them if I wanted to get a better and timelier response? Thanks

I personally like to be optimistic and I don’t think trump is a “Nazi” I don’t think we will see any heinous crimes against humanity that are remotely close to what Hitler did. But for the folks who do believe that:

I’m curious what action liberals are taking to stop the downfall of democracy ?

I would think that if we believe that trump is truly a threat to democracy there would be a lot more protests and public outrage to get him out of there , I would think that Obama wouldn’t be chumming it up with him, I would think more politicians would sit out of his inaugural events.

How does the left justify the kind of cognitive dissonance of believing he is truly a threat to democracy, like the end of America as we know it , and being complacent in the downfall of the US by treating him like any other regular politician?

I’ve seen a lot of takes on this all over Reddit, from “Latinos are white supremacists and black men are nazis…” to “We had a bad candidate come in at a bad time to run a bad campaign…”

This subreddit is a lot more rational when it comes to both sides, so I want to see what democrats think here.

In my personal opinion, a bad candidate at a bad time was definitely part of it, but also the failure to appeal to young white men, (Kamala wouldnt go on Joe rogan and stuck to heavily scripted interviews, while the GOP took its campaign to where young people would see it, as well as all the ads telling white men to vote for Harris were just “vote to protect women” not “here’s what we will do for you”), and ultimately bending the knee to billionaires and corporations rather than the working class.

What companies and organizations should we be supporting? Where can we be donating money and time? What companies and organizations should we be boycotting? What should we be focusing on when we are calling senators? What else can we be doing to support our causes and make an impact?

People always point to white men being Trump supporters but I know for a fact where I live Trump had a lot of supporters who aren't white men. I know several latio, Asian and women who are avid Trump supporters. People always point to how they believe that Trumps policies are racist, sexist and discriminatory yet still has supporters who are non-white men. And from watching the news during the election stats were shown that Trumps popularity in non-white minorities actually increased. Why is this the case? Why do people say only white men love Trump when it seems that Trumps fanbase is more diverse than it seems?

To the best of my knowledge, the investigation was a nothingburger and one of the people who testified basically admitted to lying to the FBI, while my father maintains that the Republicans had overwhelming evidence and that the DOJ just didn't pursue because it was controlled by Merrick Garland.

Are there any previous questions or resources that help sort through the years of partisan back and forth on whether or not Biden actually did anything more than serve as an enabler for his son?

Donald Trump is a New York billionaire and celebrity who before his political career schmoozed with Oprah and the Clintons and Howard Stern and a bunch of typical elitist liberal figures.

JD Vance is an Ivy League finance bro who wrote a memoir about how “hillbillies” - his word, not mine - basically destroyed his childhood and how much better his life became when he left them behind for Cleveland and Yale. The book became a New York Times Bestseller and he did the morning show rounds, became a yuppy liberal darling overnight and eventually Ron Howard and Hollywood made it into a movie.

Elon Musk is a Silicon Valley tech billionaire whose biggest company makes electric vehicles, a product that is mostly sold to wealthy liberal elites in California and New York as a way of lowering their carbon footprint.

All three of them fit the textbook definition of being “elitist.” All of them have traits that just a few short years ago Obama and the Clintons were mocked and derided by Republicans for possessing. They have more in common with Bill Gates and Steve Jobs than they do with the type of rugged, bootstrap working class every man alpha male cowboy type figure that used to dominate Republican politics.

So why are you okay with these guys taking over your party? Why doesn’t it bother you? And perhaps, most importantly, why do you trust them when just a few short decades ago these are the exact type of people you mistrusted the most?