When I think about what has been the MOST destructive situations in our 250 year history which has cost the most American lives and taxpayer dollars over the last 100 years I really can't think of anything more harmful, destructive and wasteful than our wars. All while China has kept itself out of major military conflicts since WWII.

We also are breeding the next generation of terrorists by our actions overseas in the middle east. So now our children will be targets as they grow up and travel abroad one day. Terrorist cells will also grow here in America over time.

But when I hear from Conservatives they will praise Trump over and over again for his fight on illegal immigration and fraud. All while he pardons one convicted felon after another who has been found guilty of fraud and many other financial crimes. And as he spends billions of our hard earned tax dollars and vital resources which are running dangerously low on the most destructive situation for the US (based on history) and a totally unnecessary war?

How is this making America Great?

Is this article legit? It says the officials would not release the final scores and there was no scoreboard. Sounds fishy to me. What’s your opinion?

https://www.notus.org/national/america250-civics-competition

It had been my impression that the focus of Donald Trump‘s immigration efforts, on which he ran for the presidency, was to remove criminally violent immigrants who also did not enter the country legally and did not have a legal right to be here. Am I wrong in that understanding? If I am not wrong, are you speaking up against what is happening now? If I am wrong, why do you want non-violent forcibly be removed from the country?

Even granting that some states provide a free voting ID, the SAVE Act itself does not appear to require states to issue a qualifying ID free of charge or cover the cost of supporting documents such as birth certificates or name-change records. It provides for free access to copying equipment in certain government buildings, but that is not the same as guaranteeing a cost-free path to obtaining the required documents.

Should a federal law imposing these requirements also guarantee that every eligible citizen can comply without paying for documents, replacements, transportation, or other necessary steps or are those costs an acceptable personal responsibility?

At what point does requiring someone to spend money solely to satisfy a voting prerequisite become functionally too close to paying for access to the ballot?

Context: News reports suggest CIA facilities targeted by Iran using Russian intelligence. I have no idea if those reports are accurate, nor related suspicions about how the Iranians are able to grow more effective at getting missiles through US defences and onto specific targets.

My question is, if Russia is staying out of the US/Iran fight would your views be different about the US contribution to the Ukraine/Russia fight than if Russia were giving similar contributions to Iran against US interests?

I guess another way to ask the question is, would you feel happier leaving Ukraine and Europe to face Russia alone if the Russians didn't interfere with the US in its actions in Iran?

(I know it's not a direct equivalence as Russia sees deception as a force-multiplier, whereas the West broadcasts the extent of the support provided to Ukraine to try and send signals to Russia.)

This thing bugged me from the start. "MAGA" is supposed to be about America First - not only "no more wars", but also "I don't care about other countries, no matter what their perception of us is".

First Trump rambled on about Canada. Then Trump rambled on and on about "Greenland" and so forth.

The "he's joking" doesn't fly, I think he has started a fantasy of global conquest. This is a pattern of behavior from him.
And obviously the Iran war. It's that same attitude that has motivated him in his 2nd term.

But that was the motivation he got from invading Venezuela (which is also another example of global conquest but it was actually serious).

Are people telling that in his ear ? Or is he really in to global conquest. Has any noticed his attitude change on this policy ?

I think he's a disaster, and I think he's not really a conservative, at least not in the sense that we've understood that word to mean since after WWII. I'm curious to see how he's going to be received once he has to try and take the party reigns away from Trump.

Title. I am a big comics enjoyer. If you read comics, which are your favorites?

Here's my list, in no particular order, and I'm sure I'll leave some of my favorites out:

The Long Halloween
Batman Year One
Watchmen
The Dark Knight Returns
Lazarus (ongoing)
The Wicked and the Divine
The Walking Dead
The Power Fantasy (ongoing)

What are yours? If you're reading an ongoing series, which ones?

I've been really conscious about being patient and understanding with Democrats in my life — at work, family, friends, etc. I get that a lot of them are just consuming the news they trust and getting a one-sided view (including lies by omission).

Lately, I have been finding it more difficult to stand it, especially with service providers that pay for their trade. One has especially been more vocal recently about Charlie Kirk, ANYthing Trump related. This week they straight-up called Jeff Bezos a fascist.

For context: I work for Amazon and I'm genuinely proud of what the company does — providing jobs for over 1.1 million people in the US alone. Hearing that kind of stuff just wears me down.

Would I be wrong to just cancel future appointments and find someone else? Or am I overreacting and turning into the "sour" person I complain about?
Looking for honest takes — especially from people who've dealt with similar situations.

Don Jr. is a partner at 1789 Capital, which invested in Vulcan Elements, a critical minerals company, in 2025. Three months after 1789 invested, Vulcan received a $620 million conditional Pentagon loan and $50 million in Commerce Department equity, along with other federal support.

1789 also invested in Hadrian, a defense manufacturing startup which recieved $900 million in contracts less than a year after 1789 invested in the company.

Eric Trump was (is? Not sure) a chief strategy adviser to Unusual Machines, a drone company in which his investment network had a stake. In 2025, while Eric was the company CSA, the company received a $24 million U.S. Department of Defense contract to supply drone components.

Out of the 15 companies the sons are affiliated with, 11 have active Pentagon contracts, totaling $3.2 billion. 5 of those companies got their contracts directly after investment from the Trump sons' firms.

Do conservatives find it problematic that the President's sons are so deeply involved in military defense companies that seem to be striking an endless pot of gold in Pentagon contracts?

For those who don’t know: The Byrd Rule is a Senate procedure that prevents non-budgetary policies from being added to budget reconciliation bills.

Obviously this reconciliation faces many hurdles in the Senate and that’s before they even start working on what the package will fully entail.

And personally I see no way to pass the parts of the Save Act like required ID through budget reconciliation making it lose its essence.

What do you think are the most significant questions of fact (as opposed to opinion or morality or priority or similar) where the left and the right have significant disagreement?

How could those disagreements be resolved through evidence?

I ask politely for good faith in your responses, i.e. let's not talk about straw man positions or fringe internet kooks but factual positions widely held by a substantial (say 1/3 or more sort of level) of left or right wingers.

Edit: fascinatingly almost none of the top level responses to this are what I would describe as disagreements of fact, they are all about moral frameworks. Perhaps this type-mismatch is part of the reason we talk past each other?

Taylor Farms lobbied to delay the FDA's new Food Traceability Rule by 30 months, arguing the supply-chain tracking requirements were too costly and complex for businesses to implement.

Given that Taylor Farms is now linked to the ongoing Cyclospora outbreak, is this the kind of deregulation you generally support?

Do you view rolling back these tracking rules as a necessary win for business efficiency, or a step too far that risks public health oversight?

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/07/isps-long-nightmare-of-having-to-list-all-the-fees-they-charge-is-finally-over/

Irrespective of what your opinion was on getting into this situation, what do you think we should do with Iran now?

Invasion? Status quo? Leave? Something else? If you were in charge, what would you do?

Where do you want to be? When you voted in 2024, what were your aspirations for the next 4 years? Have the last one and a half years been what you expected

I get that the US does have influence on other countries somewhat, but why is that sending people all around the world into this doomer mindset?

Like obviously emotions were high when he was first elected, but it seems over time they keep talking about how the world is only getting worse just because to them it might seem like it?