[Lord Dave]

He'll probably just make it an exception.  Like he did electronics.

https://www.npr.org/2025/04/12/nx-s1-5363025/apple-iphone-tariff-exemption-china

Because this isn't about fixing anything, its about him not having a plan then going "Oh, this is bad for you? Ok I'll make an exception." 2 weeks after announcing it.

[Lord Dave]

Oh and DOGE has tried for reality.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-drastically-drops-doge-112308234.html?guccounter=1

From $2 Trillion to $150 Billion.

[Tom Bishop]

Oh and DOGE has tried for reality.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-drastically-drops-doge-112308234.html?guccounter=1

From $2 Trillion to $150 Billion.

From this article:

In a cabinet meeting on Thursday, Musk told Trump the group expected to slash $150 billion from the federal budget over the fiscal year, which runs from the beginning of October 2025 to the end of September 2026.

“I’m excited to announce that we anticipate savings in ’26 from reduction of waste and fraud by $150 billion,” Musk told Trump in the meeting. The world's richest man said these cuts "will actually result in better services for the American people."

The article goes on to review the DOGE website, which states and that an estimated $150 billion has been saved so far:

According to DOGE's website, which tracks canceled contracts, grants, and leases and publicly displays a sample, the team has already saved an estimated $150 billion. It's unclear if Musk meant to say the $150 billion was the final goal or just what the team had already found.

Regarding that last sentence, maybe they should have applied some journalistic integrity and cleared up that important piece of information before writing this article, because "we anticipate savings" could mean either 'so far' or 'for the year'. Since the website states the same $150 billion number as the amount which has been already saved, it casts doubt on the allegation that this number is the anticipated savings for the entire year.

Why does the author title the article that the goal was dropped to $150 billion, based on something the author admits that they are unclear about? The above statement says that DOGE has "already saved" $150 billion, but the author of the article doesn't know if $150 billion is the final goal. What kind of writing is this?

The article continues:

The White House did not immediately respond to Fortune's request for comment, however, an official told the New York Times the $1 trillion figure was still "the goal."

Okay, so if the goal is $1 trillion, how could $150 billion be the goal? Why does the the author think that they can interview officials and get a number, but still put forward a number they are unclear about in the article headline as fact?

This article is poorly written and contradicts itself from one sentence to the next. This is the sort of writing that would get a failing grade in middle school. Oddly, this whole article is based on "I thought a thing" while proceeding to present several pieces of evidence that the thing they thought is wrong.

[Tom Bishop]

"The algorithm" spat it out this morning and I thought it was interesting.

Please stop that. You are continually posting articles and content which you have barely even looked at.

All politicians lie of course, but Trump lies in an interesting way. Boris Johnson is similar in this regard. Him and Trump both lie like a young child does.

I don't see any evidence of this. In the case of Boris Johnson, when we last discussed him in this thread we saw that lies were being made about him. Pete S was sharing a media claim that Johnson hid from reporters in a refrigerator. When we reviewed this, it turned out that he was supposed to go into that warehouse for a state visit, and then came out to do a scheduled interview with reporters. The allegations of running from reporters was from a outlet upset that he walked past them as they were shouting questions for an unscheduled interview. You participated in this conversation and were embarrassed pretty thoroughly.

Based on this and a similar series of fails, I can only conclude that there is very little effort here in distinguishing fact from fiction. You are in no place to make statements on which politician you think is lying.

Before you post and argue anything you need to review it critically as if you were your own opponent. I don't see that this is being done.

[Lord Dave]

Oh and DOGE has tried for reality.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-drastically-drops-doge-112308234.html?guccounter=1

From $2 Trillion to $150 Billion.

From this article:

In a cabinet meeting on Thursday, Musk told Trump the group expected to slash $150 billion from the federal budget over the fiscal year, which runs from the beginning of October 2025 to the end of September 2026.

“I’m excited to announce that we anticipate savings in ’26 from reduction of waste and fraud by $150 billion,” Musk told Trump in the meeting. The world's richest man said these cuts "will actually result in better services for the American people."

The article goes on to review the DOGE website, which states and that an estimated $150 billion has been saved so far:

"According to DOGE's website, which tracks canceled contracts, grants, and leases and publicly displays a sample, the team has already saved an estimated $150 billion. It's unclear if Musk meant to say the $150 billion was the final goal or just what the team had already found."

Regarding that last sentence, maybe they should have applied some journalistic integrity and cleared up that important piece of information before writing this article, because "we anticipate savings" could mean either 'so far' or 'for the year'. Since the website states the same $150 billion number as the amount which has been already saved, it casts doubt on the allegation that this number is the anticipated savings for the entire year.

Why does the author title the article that the goal was dropped to $150 billion, based on something the author admits that they are unclear about? The above statement says that DOGE has "already saved" $150 billion, but the author of the article doesn't know if $150 billion is the final goal. What kind of writing is this?

The article continues:

The White House did not immediately respond to Fortune's request for comment, however, an official told the New York Times the $1 trillion figure was still "the goal."

Okay, so if the goal is $1 trillion, how could $150 billion be the goal? Why does the the author think that they can interview officials and get a number, but still put forward a number they are unclear about in the article headline as fact?

This article is poorly written and contradicts itself from one sentence to the next. This is the sort of writing that would get a failing grade in middle school. Oddly, this whole article is based on "I thought a thing" while proceeding to present several pieces of evidence that the thing they thought is wrong.

Seems clear to me.

Musk does not think he can find anything else to cut this fiscal year.


One could still have a longer term goal or even an unobtainable goal.

[Tom Bishop]

I wonder how much the tariffs will affect the price of MAGA merch.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/tg8PQzgV4ls?feature=share

The fact that this store even exists owns the libs. I'm not sure why you want to bring it up and remind us that Trump is populist king. Where is the Joe Biden storefront, or the Kamala or Obama store? Do you have the addresses for those? Outside of online gift shops, no commercial physical stores exist for them, or existed even when they were in office.

Considering that overseas goods are often sold for 10-30x the wholesale price, it is possible that even the current 124% tariff on China would barely have an affect on price, or no effect depending on the greed of the intermediary companies. Trump has made a point that some of his items are made overseas by necessity and lack of US manufacturing presence. Increasing amounts of tariffs are the remedy for this. With new factories in the US and modernized automation, it's also possible that a product could be built for cheaper than what traditional Chinese sweatshops could produce, stamping them out for nothing. Electricity and mechanical maintenance on industrial machinery is currently cheaper than overseas manual labor.

[markjo]

I wonder how much the tariffs will affect the price of MAGA merch.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/tg8PQzgV4ls?feature=share

The fact that this store even exists owns the libs. I'm not sure why you want to bring it up and remind us that Trump is populist king.

What kind of message is the MAGA leadership sending to their loyal sheeple when their patriotic merch is made in China?  Why doesn't Trump insist that ALL MAGA merch be made in the USA?  To Trump, patriotism is little more than a marketing scam.

[AATW]

Please stop that. You are continually posting articles and content which you have barely even looked at.

You are not a mod here so you don't get to tell me what to post or what not to.
The video is relevant to this thread. And of course I looked at it. To say I haven't is an incorrect accusation and ironic from someone who often posts cherry picked quotes from articles which actually say the exact opposite of what the cherry picked quote implies.

I don't see any evidence of this.

An interesting and somewhat baffling response given that this exchange started with a video which juxtaposes one of the lies with the proof that it's a lie. Of course you see not just evidence of it but absolute proof of it. Your response is interesting. You have a cult leader who you believe to be infallible and truthful. You see a video which clearly demonstrates he lies. What do you do with that contradiction? An honest response would be to change your views on the fallibility and honesty of the cult leader. It is interesting that your response is to try and reconcile the lie with the proof that it's a lie by pretending that words don't mean what you know they mean.
The only question is are you pretending to see 5 fingers when only 4 are being held up, and therefore trolling, or have you really convinced yourself somehow that there are 5 fingers. I like to think it's the former but I fear it's the latter. We have seen other examples where your response to indefensible events is not "what happened and is it OK?" but "who did it?". The response to this last question informs your response to the "is it OK?" one. This is not an honest way to assess things. The question is are you lying to us or to yourself?

[Lord Dave]

I wonder how much the tariffs will affect the price of MAGA merch.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/tg8PQzgV4ls?feature=share

The fact that this store even exists owns the libs. I'm not sure why you want to bring it up and remind us that Trump is populist king. Where is the Joe Biden storefront, or the Kamala or Obama store? Do you have the addresses for those? Outside of online gift shops, no commercial physical stores exist for them, even when they were in office.

Considering that overseas goods are often sold for 10-30x the wholesale price, it is possible that even the current 124% tariff on China would barely have an affect on price, or no effect depending on the greed of the intermediary companies. Trump has made a point that some of his items are made overseas by necessity and lack of US manufacturing presence. Increasing amounts of tariffs are the remedy for this. With new factories in the US and modernized automation, it's also possible that a product could be built for cheaper than what traditional Chinese sweatshops could produce, stamping them out for nothing. Electricity and mechanical maintenance on industrial machinery is currently cheaper than overseas manual labor.

Your knowledge of China's labor economy is pathetic.  Go learn.

[Tom Bishop]

I wonder how much the tariffs will affect the price of MAGA merch.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/tg8PQzgV4ls?feature=share

The fact that this store even exists owns the libs. I'm not sure why you want to bring it up and remind us that Trump is populist king.

What kind of message is the MAGA leadership sending to their loyal sheeple when their patriotic merch is made in China?  Why doesn't Trump insist that ALL MAGA merch be made in the USA?  To Trump, patriotism is little more than a marketing scam.

Since you argue that more purity in US manufacturing is needed, I see that you agree with Trump in his stance that manufacturing needs to return to the USA. The way the video is presented shows that some items such as basic caps and shirts say Made in USA, but other items such as bomber jackets and mugs and golf hats say made in other countries. This is an accurate representation that some manufacturing exists, and represents a work in progress.

Trump says that there is a lack of manufacturing in the USA, and that this needs to change. I am happy that you looked at this video and agree with him.

[Tom Bishop]

You are not a mod here so you don't get to tell me what to post or what not to.
The video is relevant to this thread. And of course I looked at it. To say I haven't is an incorrect accusation and ironic from someone who often posts cherry picked quotes from articles which actually say the exact opposite of what the cherry picked quote implies.

I have repeatedly pointed out that your definition of cherry picking includes things like "Yes, he says that the three body problem has issues... but we see on this other page in his book that he thinks that the earth is a sphere!! Cherry picking!!!"

These are retart arguments that a child would come up with, and it is actually you who is cherry picking something and refusing to address the actual argument being discussed. I really wish you would just follow through with your threat of boredom and leave this forum. There are these things called books, where you can learn about subjects without having to interact with people. You can work on your intellectual and emotional development on your own without having to continually embarrass yourself publicly.

An interesting and somewhat baffling response given that this exchange started with a video which juxtaposes one of the lies with the proof that it's a lie. Of course you see not just evidence of it but absolute proof of it. Your response is interesting. You have a cult leader who you believe to be infallible and truthful. You see a video which clearly demonstrates he lies. What do you do with that contradiction? An honest response would be to change your views on the fallibility and honesty of the cult leader. It is interesting that your response is to try and reconcile the lie with the proof that it's a lie by pretending that words don't mean what you know they mean.

Again, the problem here is completely on your part. There are different ways to interpret statements, and you consistency take the most disingenuous and hack partisan approach, from the lowbrow leftist websites you are subscribed to. What you post is mostly trash from the scummiest journalists in media.

[markjo]

Since you argue that more purity in US manufacturing is needed, I see that you agree with Trump in his stance that manufacturing needs to return to the USA.

Not really my point.  Just pointing out the mixed message that the MAGA leadership is sending by having patriotic merch made outside of the USA,

The way the video is presented shows that some items such as basic caps and shirts say Made in USA, but other items such as bomber jackets and mugs and golf hats say made in other countries. This is an accurate representation that some manufacturing exists, and represents a work in progress.

Which of those items cannot be currently made in the USA?  I could be wrong, but I'm guessing that every single one of those foreign made MAGA items could be made in the USA.  So why don't they?  Greed, of course.  More profit from cheaper foreign goods.

Trump says that there is a lack of manufacturing in the USA, and that this needs to change. I am happy that you looked at this video and agree with him.

As a consumer, I'm not entirely sure that I do agree.  Sure, I'd like to buy American whenever possible, but, like so many Americans, I'm also a cheapskate.  If American made products can compete on price, then great.  If not, then cheaper foreign alternative it is.

[AATW]

I have repeatedly pointed out

You repeatedly point out lots of things which are wrong.  You generally then walk away from a thread declaring yourself the "winner".
Multiple people have picked you up on the way you cherry pick. I'll ignore the rest of your trolling.

There are different ways to interpret statements

Generally true, but the meaning here is clear.

you consistency take the most disingenuous and hack partisan approach

Lol, yeah. Assuming that when someone says "I never said..." they mean "I never said...". How disingenuous   
It's quite amusing to watch you repeatedly do mental backflips and take things out of context to pretend things mean anything other than what any reasonable person would understand them to mean. I guess that's easier than admitting that your cult leader is a liar, a grifter and a fraud despite having been proven to be all of those things. It's quite interesting, psychologically. I like to think you're just trolling rather than actually being this deluded, but who knows?

The comment about scummy journalists is interesting and telling. That's another trick your cult leader has pulled with depressing efficacy. Convince his cult members that he speaks the truth - even though he is repeatedly proven to lie, far more than any other president in history. That way all the criticism of him, all the people who should be holding him to account - they're the bad guys, they're the liars. The more they criticise him the further you can entrench yourselves in the position that he's the one telling you the truth.
He isn't.
And all the flailing around with tariffs, constantly changing his mind about things, shows he has no plan for the country. Because of course he doesn't. He doesn't care about you.

[Action80]

He doesn't care about you.

^Uttered by the most caring bot on the site.

[Action80]

If not, then cheaper foreign alternative it is.

^ The king of equitable outcomes, ladies and germs...

[Lord Dave]

If not, then cheaper foreign alternative it is.

^ The king of equitable outcomes, ladies and germs...

Its called capitalism, communist scum.  Maybe learn it?

[Action80]

^The word, "Capitalism," generated by an Occupy Wall Street supporter...

Will wonders never cease?

[AATW]

He doesn't care about you.

^Uttered by the most caring bot on the site.

I think that's whataboutism, which is always irrelevant. Whether I care or not has zero impact on your life.
Whether Trump cares about the American populace does, given that he's your president and making decisions which affect your lives.

[Lord Dave]

^The word, "Capitalism," generated by an Occupy Wall Street supporter...

Will wonders never cease?

Bitch, commenting on something almost 20 years old, that you don't even KNOW what I supported,  just makes you look pathetic.

[Lord Dave]

So Trump was told by the Supreme Court to get the accidentlaly deported man back.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/14/trump-doj-return-man-wrongly-deported-el-salvador

Trump said "Nah, thats not my job.  Thats the guy I'm paying to keep people in  his country's decision.  I don't care."

America, it seems, has run on the honor system and now we have a president with no honor.