This happens at 10:06 PM EST, 11/30/2024.

What will happen next?

Idk I just wanna see how batshit this guy can be before he loses support.

Title

Call of Duty is a popular FPS franchise that began with Call of Duty (2003). Lately the past couple games in the series were criticized by gamers, but what if there was. way to save it?

So, I imagine the following: from 2025 to about 2029-2030, the Call of Duty franchise decides to surprise fans by making the next few Call of Duty franchise installments full blown remakes of Call of Duty 1 (2003), Call of Duty 2 (2005) and Call of Duty 3 (2006).

I imagine all three games being fully remade from the ground up: while those games have same storylines, the graphics of Call of Duty games 1-3 are completely updated with new voice actors, with the latest gameplay mechanics carried over from the more recent COD games (Call of Duty: Reboot Modern Warfare, Call of Duty: Vanguard, Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War, Call of Duty: Black Ops 6, etc.).

For example, you could have tactical leaning mechanics present in a remake of Call of Duty 1 and sprinting in Call of Duty games 2-3, along with reload cancelling, etc.

The possibilities are endless.

Would this be enough to save the Call of Duty franchise from the perceived downgrade in quality gamers are complaining of nowadays?

He would have a broad populist appeal similar to Obama. He’s well liked among POC and white communities of different income levels and would have the same celebrity angle Trump had

Author's note: I do not condone violence against anyone regardless of what their views are. As for why I'm so willing to make posts like this, let's say I'm just gutsy.

So, let us imagine that it's around mid-spring of 2025, the Consistent Life Ethic organization Rehumanize International debates with the abortion abolitionist group Abolitionists Rising after activists from both organizations cross paths with each other on a college campus in Oklahoma.

In this scenario, u/Abolitionist-TRuss publicly attempts to school several members of Rehumanize on "iniquitous" takes on abortion, placing special emphasis on the individual's refusal to criminalize post-abortive mothers (Remember that a large majority of pro-life organizations-I imagine Rehumanize International is one of them-oppose giving murder charges to mothers who have abortions, something that Abolitionists Rising has cited as proof that the pro-life movement is "in rebellion against God."), in addition to their attempts to twist the Bible into defending the abolition of capital punishment (Not sure what Hunter's take on nuclear weapons would be but I have met professing Christians in Rehumanize that believe the Bible opposes capital punishment).

At some point, a triggered on-looker and Planned Parenthood supporter pulls a gun on T. Russell Hunter and begins waving it around in public, threatening to shoot anyone who says anything else about prosecuting women who have abortions for murder. Both the Rehumanize International and Abolitionists Rising members attempt to de-escalate the situation, but their efforts fail: T. Russell Hunter is gunned down and killed in front of hundreds of people. The shooter is then gunned down themselves by intervening police officers before they can harm anyone else.

A criminal investigation by police reveals that the attacker was a die-hard Kamala Harris fan who deluded themselves into believing that Hunter supports Donald Trump and that he is celebrating Trump's win by spreading rhetoric about prosecuting post-abortive women for murder (when in reality, Hunter has condemned Trump on numerous occasions for REFUSING to prosecute post-abortive women for murder).

While I imagine the anti-abortion movement would condemn the murder, what would the pro-choice movement say? Would they condemn it, or quietly celebrate it?

Edit: I certainly have nothing against T. Russell Hunter. I do not intend for this to be some sort of vengeful fantasy where I'm wishing death on him simply for his views. While I take issue with his thought process regarding his opposition to pro-lifers, I do not intend to harm him in any way, shape or form. I certainly do not condone someone murdering him over his views.

JG Quintel and William Salyers, voice actors for Mordecai and Rigby from the Regular Show, abruptly surprise their fans by starting up a new YouTube channel where they do video game let's plays while providing commentary using the voices of Mordecai and Rigby.

Is this something you can see the two men doing? If so, how long do you think this will last? If not, how long would it take for their hypothetical YouTube channel to flop?

For context, let's just say this happens around March of next year.

Author's note: Apologies if this is unrealistic. I came up with this FWI while streaming episodes of The Regular Show earlier today.

2 off prompter speeches... extended weaves... and you know how much he loves straying from the main point of a speech onto every single tangent in his oration

he gets the 250th birthday too (which to be frank will probably be a big win for him)

For context, please see the following links:

• Osama bin Laden's letter to the United States justifying 9/11
• The fatawas Osama bin Laden wrote in the years leading up to 9/11.

On Valentine's Day, 2025, one or more Zionist Americans decides to spend the romantic holiday encouraging acts of violence against the people of Palestine through the publication of a manifesto in which he/she not only justifies the Israeli military's war crimes against the Palestinian people, but proceeds to paint the Palestinians as colonizers, invaders, occupiers, etc., rather than the Israeli people.

Regarding what this Islamophobic manifesto would look like, it's basically a copy-and-paste of Osama bin Laden's letter to the United States justifying 9/11, except with the Islamic rhetoric replaced with Judaeo-Christian rhetoric and the mentioning of American support of oppressive regimes in Muslim countries replaced with the Palestinian people's support of oppressive Islamic regimes in the Middle East.

The manifesto would accuse the Palestinians of being guilty in Hamas' attacks on October 7, 2023, simply on the basis of being Palestinians (Think of it as "guilt by association") and that, as such, the Israeli military has every right to exterminate them. In addition, the manifesto would use very dehumanizing language to rationalize the extermination of the Palestinian people (The sort that would make the Americans harken back to Adolf Hitler and his rhetoric used to rationalize the Jewish Holocaust).

In addition, the manifesto would rationalize the killing of Palestinian civilians on the basis that because they desire to steal the land promised to the Jewish people by God under the mindset that they "own it", it makes every single Palestinian living in the region of Palestine "terrorists by proxy".

The manifesto would also condemn the UN for siding with Palestine, when in fact, Palestine was the invader/colonizer/occupier in the first place. It would also condemn pro-Palestine Americans as "traitors".

The manifesto concludes with a call to Americans who support Israel to either enlist in the US military or volunteer to fight alongside the Israelis against the "Palestinian infestation" in Gaza, and a twisted "Happy Bloody Valentine's Day" directed at the people of Palestine.

In any case, the manifesto-which in my hypothetical goes by the name "Happy Bloody Valentine's Day, Palestine"-goes viral on social media. How would Trump and his cabinet react to the manifesto? Would they condemn it, or would they defend it? What about the rest of the international community?

Author's note: I do not condone Islamophobia or the war crimes committed by Israel in the slightest. I see them as just as horrendous as October 7, 2023. I also empathize and defend the Palestinians' pleas to be treated as human beings (and I do not see Hamas as representative of the entire Muslim population of Earth).

Elon has

[FWI] The Commonwealth of Australia temporarily halts the granting of 99% of all visas, work and travel permits - including most tourist visas - for three weeks "following an anomalous national emergency".

Title

Lets say there is damnable evidence that Trump sold classified documents to foreign countries (Saudi Arabia or Russia)

What happens? Does he still become president?

In Africa and Southeastern Asia, there are heat waves going on and millions of people are dying each few months to a year.

Glaciers in places like the Arctic, Alaska, and Antarctica are melting at rapid levels. This changes marine life forever.

Levels of carbon dioxide and other chemicals in the atmosphere are at levels never seen before.

Many countries have gotten out of political conflicts and formed new unions at this point (if the current political issues progress) and Climate Change will alter that.

American cities along the Gulf of Maine through the Mid Atlantic down to the Gulf of Mexico are at risk of being submerged. The UK is dealing with their own crisis.

Places like Maine, Minnesota, and Alaska have not seen a lot of snow in many years.

How do nations come together to battle this crisis or how do they deal with it?

A professor wrote a blog about the CPP/QPP divergence. You can read more for background information.

Canadians, permanent residents of Canada and people with work permits in Canada who are employed or self-employed (other than those who are incorporated and pay themselves dividends exclusively) must contribute to the Canada Pension Plan (if they live anywhere in Canada, except Quebec) or Quebec Pension Plan (if they live in Quebec). The contribution rate is currently 5.95% of employment earnings. While the first $3500 is exempt, the next $65000 is subject to contributions. Maximum contribution for 2024 is $3867.50 for both employees and employers. Sole proprietors and business partners must also contribute the employer's portion, meaning their maximum contribution is 11.90%, up to a maximum of $7735 per year (however, the "employer" portion is deductible from business profits for tax purposes).

The Quebec Pension Plan functions in much the same way that the Canada Pension Plan does. While the $3500 exempt from contribution and $65000 subject to contribution are the same, the contribution rate is higher, at 6.40% for the employed and 12.80% for the self-employed. This means an employee must pay a maximum of $4160 and a self-employed person must pay a maximum of $8320 instead.

While the difference between the 2 plans, at least for contributors, is small ($292.50 for employees and $585 for the self-employed), this difference is rooted in the past, as well as demographics. During the Dot Com Bubble, which resulted in a severe crash of all stocks, the Canada Pension Plan had not yet started investing its trust fund in the stock market. However, the Quebec Pension Plan had. Due to this financial misfortune, the QPP lost a substantial amount of money. Adding to those woes, Quebec has an older population than other provinces of Canada and as such, it is not as well-funded as CPP. Moves by the Quebec government, such as Bill 96 (imposing French language requirements on businesses), definitely drive out non French speaking young people to other parts of Canada, strengthening the CPP and weakening the QPP.

Here is some additional context: the CPP underwent major changes over the years. From the time it was created in 1965 until 1997, it was largely a pyramid scheme, like many state pension plans. Contributions were low, but are being gradually increased. In 2016, under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the CPP underwent further changes to increase contributions and benefits (over 5 years, from 2018 to 2023, the contribution amount increased by over 20% from 4.95% to 5.95%. Over the next 40 or so years, the benefit will increase by about 33%. That is to say, retirees who apply for CPP retirement benefits in 2060 should receive 33% more money, inflation adjusted, compared to retirees who applied for it in 2018, given the same income and number of years worked). Although this is federal law, it acts similarly to the Constitution. This means provincial governments (mostly Ontario, as Quebec doesn't use the plan) have to agree. There must be at least 7 provinces (out of 10) containing at least 2/3 of the population to agree before this federal law can be changed.

With this context in mind, what if demographic problems cause the 2 plans to diverge further and further, to the point where that 0.45% difference widens, perhaps to 1% or even greater? Due to the nature of compounded investment returns, a 1% difference in the annual contribution rate, over decades and millions of workers, is a substantial amount of money. Just to give you some perspective, assuming an annualized return of 4%, the difference between contributing $8320 (the maximum in QPP) and $7735 (the maximum in CPP) is $55589.93 for the employee over a 40 year career. If the contribution rates between the 2 plans differ by 1%, the difference widens to $123533.17.

In this scenario, if Quebec requests a bailout, which, if adopted, may require the contribution rate of everyone paying into CPP to rise in order for the plans to equalize, what is likely to happen? Would the rest of Canada's federal politicians, as well as provincial politicians, cave in to their demands, since they would have lower QPP benefits if the request is denied, placing more Quebecors on Old Age Security and Guaranteed Income Supplement than other Canadians? Or would this be deeply unpopular because Quebec already gets a lot of "exceptions", equalization payments, etc... that other provinces don't get, and Quebec would then be left to its own devices?

Let's set the scene: Approximately three days after Trump is sworn in as the new US President, a well-respected news writer with either Politico or the New York Times publishes an article reporting that unknown PMCs have been spotted in Mexico collaborating with Mexican law enforcement in carrying out mass arrests of suspected drug cartel members across various cities across the country. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum does acknowledge that Mexican law enforcement is collaborating with foreigners to crack down on the nation's drug cartel problem, but refuses to disclose any further details.

The identity of the PMCs or their employers remain unknown but that doesn't stop the public from going wild with their speculations, with conspiracy theorists arguing that the PMCs were part of a false flag operation involving the US government while others speculate that President Sheinbaum is trying to hide something.

What do you think the reaction from the rest of the public would be? What would Trump say about these sightings? Would he admit to something, or would he try just as hard to conceal something from the American people? What can you imagine US allies saying about the news bulletin? Would they acknowledge it as real, or dismiss as misinformation?

That's it. That's the challenge. Is the sub just empty and abandoned? Has reddit been bought by investors and the servers are off? Perhaps there is a freemason cult that profits magically off of the repetitive posts of djt dieing or ending the world and when the posts stop the cult loses power?

Blackrock, State Street, and Vanguard three financial management agencies that own each other and own combined atleast 15% of every major corporation. Larry Fink ceo of Blackrock has publicly stated we have to force behaviors. They force behaviors through funding our politicians and helping to financially incentivize passing certain bills. What if they’re allowed to keep letting 2008 repeat until they own all the homes? What if we keep voting their candidate in office until our leader is literally blackrock the corporation that in the future might be ran by AI. Why do we keep trying to vote these corporate shells of human beings into office all under the guise of “equality”

just what if?

This is sort of related to my previous FWI about California governor Gavin Newsom nullifying and interposing against Trump to "Trump-proof" it.

Inspirations:

https://cd4.lacity.gov/press-releases/city-council-votes-to-establish-los-angeles-as-a-sanctuary-city/

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gx7rd4nj7o

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/19/us/los-angeles-sanctuary-trump.html

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-military-mass-deportation-plan-legal-limits-experts-2024-11

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AdhtwUfFf4

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trump-plan-use-military-deportations-should-stand-up-court-2024-11-26/

Please see this link for context: https://www.fairus.org/issue/do-you-live-1-11-sanctuary-states

So here's the short version: Trump immediately enacts his plan to use the military to deport illegal immigrants within days of being sworn in as the new US President. Gavin Newsom of California urges any city in California that declares itself a sanctuary city for undocumented immigrants to "fight back against Trump's tyranny at all costs."

Newsom deploys the California National Guard as part of a bid to protect the undocumented immigrants from being deported by the Trump loyalists in the US Armed Forces, and urges other sanctuary states in the nation to follow his example. Emboldened by Newsom's stunt, various state legislators in sanctuary states across the globe vow to fight Trump's deportation operation by any means necessary. National Guard troops in these other sanctuary states are similarly deployed to help assist the people in protecting the undocumented immigrants from deportation. Perhaps we see an "underground railroad" of sorts formed by people who oppose Trump's deportation agenda and vow to fight it by any means necessary.

Then the deportation begins, with military forces deployed to Los Angeles with orders to apprehend any undocumented immigrant they see. Unfortunately, the people of Los Angeles have other ideas: with the support of National Guard members loyal to Newsom, armed vigilante gangs attack the US military soldiers deployed as part of the deportation effort.

Similar incidents unfold in other sanctuary states across the nation.

Thus, the opening shots of the Second American Civil War are fired.

How does Trump react? How does the rest of the country react?

Initially the incident is seen as a funny little bit of slapstick comedy to lighten the mood after a divisive election until it is discovered that Trump is fatally injured

During its lunar flyby in 2025, the craft suddenly seems to go off its course, and indications of distress are received from the crew. Contact is lost shortly afterward. Despite feverish efforts to re-establish contact and save the crew, all four ultimately perish.

What is the tragedy's impact back home? Does the Artemis program survive, and if so how much of a delay can be expected before a re-attempt? Does this affect China's space program in any way?

Feels like an inevitability, will probably happen by 2026.

I’m writing a video game fanfic about fighting drug cartels and I’m thinking about getting China’s People’s Liberation Army involved.

Except I can’t think of a plausible motive behind a Chinese military deployment to Latin or South America to fight drug cartels.

What sort of plausible motive can you imagine China having (whether real or fake) to deploy military forces to Central or South America to fight drug cartels?

Challenge rules:

Your motive can either be genuine or an invention of the Chinese Communist party. The only rule is that it must be PLAUSIBLE!

What happens if both the House and Senate flip in 2026(with NC and Maine flipping to D in the Senate among several other staets)???

What if Trump takes up go kart racing, names himself Dastardly Don and starts chucking banana peels all over the track to wreck other racers?