I know that people on DR and liberals in general want the US to be controlled by China's trade, but these are still considered nonrenewable resources. China's supply isn't going to last forever and as the inventory gets lower, that means China will raise prices. So why do liberals want Americans to pay more for products instead of trying to get rid of dependence on Chinese imports?

And you can't say that you don't want this to happen. That's exactly what all of you have been fighting against during this Trump term. Please, just answer honestly and do not try to contextualize how you aren't fighting for China and not for the US. It's all out there in MANY liberal outlets, on TV interviews with liberal protestors, etc. It IS happening so don't just be more sheep and try to say otherwise. Just put down your honest answer as to why you want China to control all trade regarding raw materials. It's a simple question and I'm not fighting your opinion. I just want to know honestly why that is the liberal agenda. To me, it's just "The other side wants it one way so we have to inherently fight for the other way" that both parties do. But finding someone to actually admit that is impossible because, for some reason, party affiliation is more important than ethics and doing what's right.

I already said it when Obama was POTUS. EVERY President from here on out will be impeached. It's the extreme thing to do and both sides have gone to the extremes every single day.

It's a rural town so it was already forgotten about by the left since they want to eliminate all rural towns. And their gross profit has declined significantly since 2022 so this was already the trend, especially considering the scandals they have been involved in. Trying to blame Trump for the failures of Tyson management, while truly idiotic, is not surprising coming from the left. Trump does so many things wrong that this is EXACTLY why TDS was coined. No POTUS ever needs help illustrating his failures. It is only the people who live with the POTUS in their mind rent-free that have a syndrome where they can't stop being negative all the time and demonizing everyone who thinks differently from them.

In summary, it's better to do absolutely nothing than it is to try to fix a problem. But we didn't need a new article to describe how liberals have operated for a couple decades now. Lewis Black, a liberal so you can't get mad at me for quoting him, said "Republicans have nothing but bad ideas while Democrats have no ideas."

"How you like it now?"

It's not that bad, actually. Thanks for asking. It's pretty much just about the same as Biden's tenure. The only difference you have is completely disregarding any good that could have come from any Rep legislations while praising everything a liberal does as the gold standard for the entire universe.

Ok, so we can finally put one of the myriad of topics to rest that exists only because of partisan stupidity.

By reading this article and understanding the intent, and by reading liberal reactions, we can now say that boycotting a brand based on ideological beliefs if a very sound and acceptable way to show our support, or our disapproval. Right? We can all agree on that now, correct? The argument is over. Those who boycott are not hateful. They aren't trying to cause problems. They simply want their wallets to speak to their narrative because that's how a Capitalistic society works. End of story.

So, that means all the hate liberals spread about those boycotting Bud Light has to be taken back and liberals have to apologize.

I mean, it's either that or liberals finally just accept their hypocrisy and that they spread, "Everything we think is right but everything anyone else believes is wrong" narrative. Can't have it both ways. It's one or the other.

And before anyone says that Bud Light's boycotts was out of hate for those who do not subscribe to traditional gender roles, one could as easily (with empirical and proof-positive evidence) use context from illegals raping and killing women, and the liberals defending them, as hatred. Sure, that's only if you cherry pick context and get rid of context that doesn't agree with your narrative. But that is EXACTLY what liberals are doing in this case. Which means both liberals and cons are doing the same thing, only the topic is different.

I know this won't change anything. But the bigger fight America needs to have is to fight against that narrative as it has done waaaaaaaaaaaay more damage to this country than illegals, gender opposers, etc. And since it has done more damage, it's a fight more worthy than these stupid partisan fights that both parties come up with that never get fixed so we just pile on more and more hatred.

But we can pardon (and support) Hamas for killing 1200 civilians.

If liberals didn't have double standards, they wouldn't have any standards. Would really be nice if one of the parties would come even close to practicing what they preach.

Well, while it tracks with Rep logic, it also gets rid of the gerrymandering Dems have done ever since the Act was passed by ensuring they can redraw lines that gets them more votes. All Reps are doing is trying to get rid of lines that would get them more votes. Both parties are doing the exact same thing, only Dems try to put a moral high ground in the situation by wanting to force discrimination but as a safety net. Neither side is right or wrong, they just want votes. To try to demonize it as if Reps are doing anything different than Dems is laughable. Everything is on paper for any of you to research. Dems gerrymandered so hard in the 90s that Reps are still trying to catch up today, and the facts prove it beyond any argument. Yes, Reps are fighting back by being stupid mainly because they don't have any other idea of how to counter the Dem's strategy but that still doesn't make Dems right for doing it in the first place.

In fact, the 90s gerrymandering Dems did was right before I left the Dem party and I still consider it the last great strategy Dems ever had. I personally think they outsmarted Reps so bad that Reps had no choice but to actually get less dumb or face extinction, given that Clinton was so effective as a leader. So Reps did that and Dems haven't been able to keep up, instead they have resorted to using woke politics and hypocrisy as their platform.

This is how all religion has been since the beginning of religion. Hell, the Dark Ages was nothing but religious people doing whatever they wanted.

That being said, I remember after 9/11 the people with left ideologies were absolutely gung-ho about "Don't judge an entire demographic based on what a small minority of extremists from that demographic do". And that is still good advice today, even though liberals don't subscribe to their own ideologies when their poligion gets in the way.

I mean, I know liberals today own hypocrisy like it's their skin but now you are going a step farther and bringing in hypocrisy from 20 years ago.

And, of course, the inevitable reply from you DR lib kids is "but it's most Christians." Well, as of 2023 according to a quick Google search, over 200m Americans identify as Christian. And, if over 200m Christians were guilty of what you are claiming, this country would look a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOT different right now, so that is not a valid statement.

"Those miners can thank Der Dotard for putting them out of work..."

And they can blame liberals for dying of black lung disease. Instead of shifting some money to create cleaner coal, they completely ignore coal worker work environments and spend all that money on other sources of energy. Reps can't shift money towards cleaner coal because liberals are too busy using that money elsewhere. Which is really sad, especially considering your only solution is to take their jobs away from them. Well, I guess that is actually one way to stop coal miners from getting BLD...just take their jobs. Great solution, libs!!!

Also, black lung disease hasn't seen higher upticks at all yet, and it's been a known risk for decades. But after decades of problems, this one minute of a few coal miners complaining that enough isn't being done is all of a sudden a national emergency caused by Reps.

Can't make this amount of absurdity up even if you tried.

He's not wrong. Crypto was a fantastic idea when it started. It was all about decentralization and deregulation, and it worked for a time. But, as usual, the wealthy took control of it and now it's no different than any stock or ETF. 10/10 proved this beyond any doubt now. There was no reason for BTC to dip. In fact, its entire existence is due to the want of creating a currency that operated outside of markets and economies. But, sure enough, enough wealth got their hands involved and tied the asset to their companies, making their stocks react proportionally to the economy. People like Saylor and others destroyed any hope for crypt being the answer to fiat.

I love how Biden's weaponizing of government departments was OK but when Reps do it all of a sudden it's a bad thing.

Partisanship has truly created Idiocracy in America.

That's nothing. Dems refuse to spend money helping the homeless because they want to spend money on illegal immigrants. They want homeless people to stay homeless while they divert that money to facilities and workers to manage the open borders they so desperately want.

Sucks when politicians do this. It sucks even more when a party does it but then whines and cries like babies when the other party does it, too.

Here are some numbers someone just posted elsewhere. I'm not validating them but, from what I know regarding county lines, this is at least 80ish% accurate if not 100%. Please don't argue over the facts and resort to name calling or demonizing just because you don't like the facts. Argue over how we can make it right for the country and not do just what is best for the party. Both sides need to make changes but that won't happen if both sides are also doing everything they can to ignore why the changes are needed.

California:
Democrat votes: 60% 42 seats 83%
Republican votes: 40% 9 seats 17%

Texas
Republican votes: 58% 25 seats 65%
Democrat votes: 40% 13 seats 35%

For Texas to reach California's already gerrymandered level of proportional seats to votes,

Texas would have to have:
Republican Seats: 32
Democrat Seats: 6

Is this a surprise? This is what Dems do and have been doing for a very long time. They gerrymandered like crazy in the 90s. Reps are still fighting to get things balanced again. So then Dems gerrymander even harder acting like it's a national emergency.

Again, this is just typical Dem behavior. Ego and emotions rule liberal minds. And while that provides many positives for the party, it also causes many damaging trends. And this is one of them. Try reading other outlets that don't stroke your ego and ideologies, try other outlets so that you hear balanced news.