Due to a recent escalating of weapons fire in the wake of the weekend attack on a Jordanian base that killed multiple US Soldiers, and a threat from the Houthis targeting the Bab el-Mandeb strait, the price for a barrel of International Brent crude oil reached $95 for the first time in a month and a half. This has pushed the average gasoline price in the US to over $4 per gallon

With traffic in the strait of Hormuz ground back to a stop again, the President has gone back to threatening to destroy bridges and power plants when boats are struck

All of this comes as the Trump admin is requesting billions more dollars to cover the cost of this war, which at this point a majority of Americans expect to go on for at least 3 months

Summary: The rise of the Democratic Socialists of America is rooted less in the traditional working class than among highly educated people with modest incomes. Education and income are not interchangeable measures of class: many college graduates possess cultural status but remain indebted, economically insecure, or excluded from the professional success they expected. Voters with postgraduate degrees and household incomes between $30,000 and $60,000 are among the most Democratic and liberal groups in the country, and they closely resemble the DSA’s base of teachers, nonprofit workers, social workers, and public employees.

This explains why economic socialism and cultural progressivism overlap so strongly. Highly educated, lower-income liberals are especially engaged by immigration, race, LGBTQ rights, environmentalism, and Israel–Palestine, while successful non-college voters are often more Republican. The central political divide is therefore not simply rich versus poor, but cultural status versus economic position. Socialism gives economically disappointed graduates an explanation for their frustration, while cultural conflicts provide the moral identity and political energy that draw them into the movement.

Personal Note: This may seem like rage bait to poke at the DSA crowd, and honestly it probably is. But it is also, in my opinion, very useful and enlightening to know where the 'extreme leftist' energy is coming from, and why it won't work. People don't want priveliged PhD's that failed in the private sector being their political leaders.

https://substack.com/home/post/p-207869387

Summary: A recent Daily Mail/JL Partners poll reveals that only 32 percent of voters approve of President Donald Trump's handling of the war with Iran, bringing his overall approval rating down to 44 percent. Nearly half of respondents believe the decision to launch military action was wrong, particularly as the American troop death toll reaches 18 alongside over 100 casualties. Public optimism for a quick resolution remains low, with 58 percent of voters expecting the conflict to last over a year or unsure how long it will continue. While U.S. strikes expand and international mediators attempt to broker a ceasefire, public backing for further military escalation remains strictly limited.

https://www.dailymail.com/news/us-politics/article-15991575/americans-brutal-verdict-trump-iran-war.html

Commentary: one of the friendliest maga media publications is reporting on the huge split among this administration's supporters. They feel furious about the war they were promised would never happen. They are furious they never experienced a single second of economic relief before being volunteered into a war on behalf of another country, according to our current department of State. They are furious about being crushed by the current economy, the billions and billions going to foreign countries and the slow moving agenda even with complete control of the house Senate sc and presidency. People aren't happy.

This is specifically for folks who struggle to choose between MAGA conservatives and liberals, as many centrists I know tend to lean to "one party is insane and one is simply unappetizing" but for those who struggled to choose between Trump and Harris, or would struggle in elections between MAGA aligned conservatives and democrats, I have always been curious about your value system. What makes the choice hard, and what do you admire about MAGA to make that choice hard OR why don't you stress about their actions as threats to democracy and human rights like many of us do?

SPECIFICALLY this wouldn't be about non aligned/rogues (Romney, Massie) but as most conservatives in major elections are MAGA aligned, I am speaking about them.

I strongly struggle to understand it and want to see where the logic is coming from.

Also hoping folks don't blindly downvote, I feel like we rarely see this perspective and I don't want to discourage folks from sharing it.

Neutral summary: Multiple sources are raising alarms about US strategic oil reserves, which have fallen to around 300mm barrels of oil. For reference, this is the lowest level since 1983. A chart reflecting historical US strategic reserve levels can be found at this link: US Crude Oil in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve Stocks (Wee….

While it is true that Trump seems to have never seen a "footgun" he did not love, this aimless Iran war must take the cake even beyond the tariff "misadventure." The "bill" for this one will be huge, and I predict the vast majority of Americans do not feel they should have to pay for any of it, nor are most able to pay any more for goods and services than they do today. We are looking at a collision with reality in the very near future for pretty much everyone in the USA.

To level set, Trump inherited an economic mess. That is objectively true. But Trump has come to so many forks in the road since taking office and primarily chosen to go "off-roading" and in the case of both the (illegal) tariff scheme and the Iran war, just driven right through the guardrail to see how steep a cliff lies on the other side.

US debt markets continue to heave and buckle, and while that is a complex topic, it has fairly simple (and unpleasant) effects for every American. Markets do not require many things, but some level of predictability is required for the economic and social systems our lives are built around to function at all. The net effect of this level of chaos and "strategic unforced error" on Trump's part is increased costs to do ANYTHING. It costs more for Americans to borrow. It costs more for us to transact, to gather, to organize, to celebrate, to mourn, the list goes on. There is nowhere in our lives the net costs economically and socially are not coming back to find us under this administration.

One does wonder how much further this all must go before there is yet no one who can defend or stand behind the actions of this administration. Trump wants to point the finger at the last administration now that his economic woes are coming home to roost. Fine, there was mismanagement then. But every move Trump has made since then has been ruinous to the nth power. Saying the building already had foundation issues which you campaigned to fix for your constituents can hardly excuse burning the entire place down, and that is what it appears to me that this President is bent on doing. Not to worry, of course, because Trump is hard at work undermining confidence in the election that placed him in the White House for a second term, so we know he is laser focused on preventing an energy supply shock that would bring our entire domestic economy to its knees...

Trump to hit Canada with new 50% tariff

Neutral Summary: President Trump announced new 50% tariffs on many Canadian imports, arguing Canada unfairly discriminates against U.S. goods through measures involving alcohol, dairy and auto trade. The tariffs would use a different legal authority than his earlier tariffs, which were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court. Canada says its measures were retaliation to earlier U.S. tariffs and has indicated it will keep negotiating while considering its response. The move escalates the ongoing trade dispute and raises new legal and economic questions.

Let me get this straight.

Trump's started tariffs on Canada (which were ruled illegal). Canada retaliated (legally). Now Trump is pointing to Canada's retaliation as the justification for a new 50% tariff under a completely different law. (Section 338 was meant to deal with countries that unfairly discriminate against US goods, not countries responding to tariffs a US court already said were illegal).

So he's basically putting a different illegal tariff because his original illegal tarrif caused reciprocal tarrifs.

Does that sum it up?

I don't want this to sound like a snark post. If you like Hasan, I'm sorry, these are my opinions of him. I do not want this to devolve into streamer drama. Assuming we are all adults here.

I have been growing increasingly concerned with HasanAbi, his brand of politics, and the cult following of teenagers he has groomed into a fairly powerful voting block, that will continue to grow in size.

I don't even know where to start with this man. It's just bad. We are at the point now where he is essentially reading off Qatari-scripted propaganda speeches to his audience of tens of thousands of children, who view him as the capital T Truth, as a deity, and as an absolute compass of morality and truth. It is truly bizarre. Every single sentence that comes out of his mouth will be whatever most weakens the USA and the west. It is calculated, it is sinister, and I genuinely do not believe he is writing these speeches.

And then when you meet people who subscribe to this brand of politics, it genuinely comes across as if they are suffering from religious psychosis. I have received a wide eyes, blank stare, "that's not what Hasan says".

It's scary, the anti-western sentiment in young leftists is truly scary to me. It concerns me to see Hasan having positive relationships with other popular political figures.

I live in Seattle. The politics of young people in this area are BONKERS. They truly believe we are headed toward a prisonless, policeless, anarchist, communist, islamic society. Like this is truly what the majority of young people I talk to in this city envision.

Submission statement:

This video features a conversation between Krystal Ball and Representative Adam Smith (the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee) regarding the state of the Democratic Party, U.S.-Israel relations, and policy disagreements with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).

Key discussion points:

• U.S.-Israel Relations & Military Aid: Adam Smithdiscusses his evolving views on military aid to Israel. While he maintains that Israel has a right to defend itself against threats from Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran, he explains his recent vote for the Thomas Massie amendment (which sought to block aid) as a necessary message to the Netanyahu government (10:33 - 11:15). He also outlines his opposition to specific NDAAprovisions that would further integrate U.S. and Israelimilitary co-development programs given the current political climate (0:31 - 2:44).
• Divisions within the Democratic Party: The discussion delves into the tensions between the Democratic establishment and the DSA. Smith expresses frustration with what he characterizes as "illiberal" tactics used by some activists, such as shouting down speakers at town halls or protests (39:18 - 40:10). He also critiques the DSA platform on issues like defense spending and immigration policy, while clarifying that he remains open to some economic populist ideas (22:35 - 25:10, 27:36 - 28:58).
• Economic Populism and Governance: Smith highlights his agreement with some socialist-aligned governance, pointing to Zoran Mandani in New York City as an example of effective, practical problem-solving that focuses on tangible results like infrastructure and child care rather than strictly ideological exercises (33:24 - 36:30).
• Campaign Finance: The conversation concludes with a debate on the influence of outside money in Democratic primaries, specifically mentioning the role of AIPAC. Smithadvocates for reforms to limit independent expenditure groups (42:22 - 44:10).

Submission statement : The proportion of Black and Hispanic students enrolled in Harvard College’s freshman class dropped in the second year after the Supreme Court overturned race-conscious undergraduate admissions, according to data released by Harvard on Thursday.

Summary: Two US service members were killed and several injured in an Iranian attack. One service member is missing. These are the first U.S. deaths since the cease-fire. The US is retaliating with attacks on Iran to 'punish' the Iranian regime. The Iranians have adapted their tactics to counter US defenses, resulting in the success of this attack.

Neutral Comment - A subject carrying either BB guns or airsoft guns set off an incendiary device outside of the Federal Plaza in New York City. Four people suffered minor injuries. According to the article, sources described the subject who did this as an "anti-ICE activist." The cart that he had with him had "ICE off our streets" written on it.

My Take - I'm sure that there will be people, even in these comments, who try to downplay the incident saying that it was "only fireworks." Sorry, no. This is where it starts. The non-violent left strikes again.

Summary:

Mayor Zohran Mamdani stated in a New York Times interview that he is still evaluating whether he has the legal authority to order the NYPD to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he visits New York for the U.N. General Assembly. He believes Netanyahu should face charges at the International Criminal Court, though legal experts note the U.S. does not recognize ICC jurisdiction and that Netanyahu has head‑of‑state immunity. Mamdani said he is in active discussions with the city’s Law Department, acknowledging uncertainty about whether a mayor can legally detain a foreign leader. The article also covers broader political topics, including Mamdani’s views on Israel, national politics, immigration, crime, and media scrutiny of his wife.

Analysis:

Federal supremacy and federal diplomatic immunity statutes make it flatly illegal for a mayor or local police to arrest a protected foreign leader. Under the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, federal law overrides state or municipal authority, and diplomatic immunity (including head‑of‑state immunity) is governed by federal statutes and international agreements administered by the State Department. Even if a mayor ordered an arrest, federal law would render the arrest unlawful, and federal authorities could intervene immediately. Nor does the US recognize the authority of the ICC, or acknowledge its jurisdiction. Furthermore, the US has its own laws that would allow it to use military intervention to extract Americans held by the ICC.

All of this means that this is pure demagoguery from Mamdani, aimed at feeding red meat to his base of anti semitic and DSA extremists. He can later throw up his hands and use it as a critique of US policy to score points with his fans.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/trump-says-these-documents-prove-his-false-claims-of-election-fraud-heres-what-they-really-say

Neutral summary

President Trump in an attempt to provide a factual basis for his most recent speech that was widely criticized for lacking any factual basis releases a number of released a number of documents that allies had hyped as a smoking gun that would prove his long-debunked allegations of mass voter fraud.

This article investigates the documents and nothing in them backs up the Preston’s claim. In fact, there are some previously unreleased documents in there for confirming that Russia was helping Trump win.

My question for the sub is where is their red line on a politician or political nominee on this? I believe anyone still supporting Trump’s clear lies here should not be in office. I believe anybody afraid to say who won in 2020 should not be in office.

I initially thought that political education can cut partisanship and to ensure centrists are more representative and vocal. But in reality however, it certainly looks otherwise.

Of course, we are in a democracy, we can have any views as long as they are ethically justified and not dangerous (e.g. fascist level). However, it does feel like some partisanship is being indirectly placed on students.

Here in the UK there is the Education Act of 1996, in which sections 406 and 407 address the issue. Nevertheless it looks like classes are forming part of the us vs them action. I have an A-Level Politics teacher who acts, quite frankly, very charismatic and in a partisan tone, because the way she speaks and acts does sound like she has an indirect political perspective and often generalizes things e.g. all negatives of dictatorships - don't get me wrong, dictatorships these days are dangerous and corrupt, this is a cause of undevelopment in many nations but historically there were some dictators that kept the country stable and progressive for example Bangladesh's Hasina regime was one prominent example. Some irony is there because I remember one time when our lesson discussed about voting behaviour, she asked us to put our hands up if we are more centrist and i proudly admitted to say so and I was the only one to admit, likely most of the others are left leaning. Again, not an issue, but I seem to be treated like the third wheel because of this.

On another occasion, someone in my Politics A-Level class made an allegation against me of apparently searching up far right content and advice on google. This was obviously not true because I know what I was doing, because as a moderate I have a mix of both right and left wing views and I frankly have right wing views on immigration, multiculturalism and the economy (I believe in a multi ethnic society than a multicultural one while favouring progressive meritocracy) and I googled to ask if I would get sanctioned if I were to express a view that is centre right or right wing. Likely my teacher was the one behind it because she had gotten so condescending towards me whenever she speaks to me - on top of talking over me when I did not even finish my spoken statement. And whenever we contribute, classmates often speak as if they want to go against other nations. I understand many other nations are dangerous but soapboxing makes things worse and it looks like my teacher has favourites on the soapboxing partisan ones.

I picked politics because one of my careers is to be a home affairs or social affairs news reporter, not to forcefully become an MP or to join a political party - besides, there are no political parties that match my political perspectives, I thought the Liberal Democrats or the Conservative Party under Kemi Badenoch would do so but the Lib Dems favour more open borders while the other party is more paternalistic and patriarchal.

This is also why in the United States there is the divide between democrats and republicans, as if the borders are like the electrical telephone wires on the London Underground - if a republican or democrat date one another, riots will occur likely.

Really, being educated does not necessarily mean you would become a good person. I guess your centrist views remain intact if you choose a variety of subjects for your careers because I do Politics, Sociology and Economics A-Levels - many economic students are centre to right wing. Even though Sociology is mainly left leaning students and teachers, my Sociology teacher, who is very lovely and supportive, understands my perspectives, both left and right wing views so this is not an issue.