We are 16 days in the Trump presidency and he has announced that he will clean the Gaza Strip from Palestinians. So within the first 16 days he has proven that the GOP has a radically different Middle East policy than Democrats, and you still continue to lie and state that both sides are the same. I am guessing you will keep this BoTH SiDeS conviction even if Trump nukes Gaza.
I agree in principle, but in practice it’s tricky. You must have courts that are strong enough to throw out election results if foreign interference can be proven. This has recently happened in Romania, but there are also many examples in which these laws were meaningless. The US is the obvious case where the 2016 election result should have been thrown out, but nothing happened. For the Brexit vote I think some pretty meaningless fines were handed out.
Another question is what should happen with foreign interference that is not financial in nature. For instance, Musk speaking at AFD, or the Meta algorithms pushing political content.
I don’t actually think the US would survive such a war. The trouble is that many states would defect. Can you imagine CA footing the bill for an invasion of Canada? Already a trade war is extremely dangerous. How easy would it be for, say NY, to sabotage the border controls?
When your main identity is nationalism it just doesn’t make sense to work together with any foreign leader.
Two things can be true at the same time. German soldiers were incredibly cruel in non-combat situations, and at the same time highly competent in combat.
The strength of the Germans was that I.) they had a really good industrial base, and ii.) the traditions within the army meant they had extremely well trained soldiers. Both of these predate nazi-rule. For instance, Germans also arguably had the best (equipped) army in WW1.
Clearly not. Business calls should happen during business hours only. BUT, it is also pretty clear that direct speech is the most efficient way of communication when you don’t need a written record, so calls definitely have a purpose.
It must be horrific to talk to Trump in person. He smells horrible, his moods swing constantly, he has incredibly stupid takes on issues you are an expert in, and he requires constant praise. If you take your hot wife with you he’ll be ogling her constantly. Nurses probably go out of their way to see another patient when he’s at the hospital.
Now you are one of the richest men in the world, and you have to pretend you like him. I mean, something must be seriously wrong with you if you got fuck-you money and still degrade yourself to those levels.
The EU should prepare for a trade war, but it shouldn’t take the first shot.
It’s ridiculous to think that there would still be an alliance of “Western Countries”. The Greenland thing, the threats related to NATO, tariff threats, techbros weaponising the US government to escape regulation in Europe etc etc. China is the FAR more reliable partner for Europe and South America. Good luck blocking the Chinese software in the US, but I think you will find no friends with your new leader in place.
That’s the thing: if the cost of AI goes down , and AI is a valuable input to businesses that should be a good thing for the economy. To be sure, not for the tech sector that sells these models, but for all of the companies buying these services it should be great.
Actually to me this doesn’t sound so bad. Yes OP is rejected and that sucks. Beyond that they ask you to fill out a survey which they hope will improve their future hiring process. I am sceptical that they will get anything useful out of the survey, but I really do not see the problem tbh.
Being a bit pedantic here, but the president cannot change the law as the article asserts.
Also, because these investments are long-term when the tariffs are likely to only be short term.
Couldn’t have happened to a nicer bunch of people.
Yes, to add you cannot impose targeted tariffs on Danish goods, as these are typically traded within the EU before going to the US.
If European countries somehow manage 5 percent, it’s Europe that should step out of NATO. At this moment I am half convinced it’s better to have a strategic alliance with China than with Trump.
This is not just an issue in translation. Anybody who summarises his speeches in English will struggle to extract the meaning. Reporting should always mention this issue in the first line. A disclaimer like: «it’s difficult to make heads or tails from Trumps speech do to his incoherent speech. Below is our best attempt.» should be a preface to all reporting.
Mostly agree with this take. I just wanted to add some nuance. I was talking to a friend about Gaza/Israel-protests in my country and said that the media doesn’t show everything. He then told a story about the protests that was supposedly not covered in the media. However, I had literally just read about that story in my newspaper.
Point is, there is some freedom of press (at least in my country) and the press is fairly pluralistic. However, to really find out what’s going on you need to read i.) several sources, and ii.) continue to focus on events after journalists took the effort to dig down. That’s a big ask for many people. And the stories that come out first tend to be most biased.
You ask for a concrete action when we are no more than 16 days in. Ok let’s ignore that and pretend you are acting in good faith.
Let me ask you a question in return. It is my impression that you suffer from confirmation bias where you sat out the election because both sides were equally bad. I therefore think it would be good for you if you set a threshold. At what point will you accept that Trump is really worse than Kamala would have been?