Trump 2.0

So you can't answer. Fair enough.
There's nothing to answer. You are asking if a farmer was profitable and Trump did something to make it unprofitable would that be their fault? Obviously not. So where is the real question? "So you can't answer". Really?
 
The Nixon's documents were finally released some years ago. It was found that Nixon caused the agricultural production of Uruguay to be cut off in order to "protect American farmers".

Perhaps those were fake news, but in order to protect US interests, the different American administrations have imposed great influence to diminish the production of other countries to erase competition.

What about the interests of the other countries?

When other countries fight for their own interests, those countries become "the enemies".

Time to change the name "Department of Defense" by "Department of War".

"The enemies" must be crunched. (Hegseth speech)

Definitively President Trump wants to make America great again.
 
Almost all farming isn't profitable in the US. Government subsidies are all that keeps them hanging on.
No, it keeps them farming in a particular way, to promote large-scale policies like soil conservation and crop rotation (good) or how chems are applied (some good, some bad, some awful) or how land is kept in tillage when disaster strikes (mostly good, given we need a domestic food supply that is reliable). And the stupid ethanol subsidy doesn't keep anyone hanging on - remove it, and those acres would still be producing and have some sort of crop rotation. It may shock you to learn this, but most cropland will grow crops that aren't corn and do so profitably. What subsidies should be steered towards (but don't expect this from the USDA of Turnip47) is helping small farms using restorative farming methods and less reliance on Monsanto.

Yours,

Son of farm boy, grandson of farmers, nephew of seed salesman and technical consultant on seed genetics, friend to a small farmer or two, promoter of regenerative organic agriculture, and staunch opponent of broad spectrum nematode killers.
 
No, it keeps them farming in a particular way, to promote large-scale policies like soil conservation and crop rotation (good) or how chems are applied (some good, some bad, some awful) or how land is kept in tillage when disaster strikes (mostly good, given we need a domestic food supply that is reliable). And the stupid ethanol subsidy doesn't keep anyone hanging on - remove it, and those acres would still be producing and have some sort of crop rotation. It may shock you to learn this, but most cropland will grow crops that aren't corn and do so profitably. What subsidies should be steered towards (but don't expect this from the USDA of Turnip47) is helping small farms using restorative farming methods and less reliance on Monsanto.

Yours,

Son of farm boy, grandson of farmers, nephew of seed salesman and technical consultant on seed genetics, friend to a small farmer or two, promoter of regenerative organic agriculture, and staunch opponent of broad spectrum nematode killers.
I owned farmland until recently, mother grew up on a farm, bla bla bla.
 
There's nothing to answer.
"You are asking if a farmer was profitable and Trump did something to make it unprofitable would that be their fault? Obviously not."

That was not a direct answer, but I will take it.

Yes, the farmers losing their farms now are losing them due to tariffs.
 
So, US government shutdown... bad for everyone, but which political party loses most: Dems or GOP?

And any bets on how long it will last? Lest we forget, the longest in US history, I believe, was 35 days during his first term, that being after a shorter one (3 days) earlier in his term.
Are we betting on 10? 20? 30 days? Longer??
 
Yes, the farmers losing their farms now are losing them due to tariffs
What an actual functioning federal government needs to do during a tariff situation is to provide export farmers with compensation so that those farms have time to revise their business plans for a domestic market and/or alternate cropping. That means both money and technical support and research if, say, someone is going to switch from soybeans to quinoa (or whatever alternative has a market). But Turnip47 is just a toddler who likes to break things - rebuilding anything viable from the pieces is not his thing.
 
So, US government shutdown... bad for everyone, but which political party loses most: Dems or GOP?

And any bets on how long it will last? Lest we forget, the longest in US history, I believe, was 35 days during his first term, that being after a shorter one (3 days) earlier in his term.
Are we betting on 10? 20? 30 days? Longer??
What I read in Politico this morn, sounds like no one in "Congress" wants to blink first, and Democrats want to ensure as many voters as possible end up royally pissed at GOP. And see Dems as united on their fight for continuing health care subsidies. Don't know if that would work, but my guess on the time frame is at least a couple weeks. I will bet 200 quatloos on the humans.
 
Has anyone caught Trump's (and drunk lapdog Hegseth's) speech to the collection of US Generals? I'm sure he effectively called them to war on the American population, saying that that is where their focus (or much of it) will be. Naturally there was a stoney silence from the Generals.

Hegseth wasn't much better, giving them a speech that could have been faxed in, but importantly ending it with a plug for his book. So, yeah, there's that. This is an ex-major from the National Guard trying to tell career Generals about the military. Went down a storm. ;)
 
bramhall-20250930-generalstrumpquantico-bw.png

War is Hell: Bill Bramhall, New York Daily News, 30 September 2025

Naturally there was a stoney silence from the Generals.

Significantly: Rules of Engagement will disregard Geneva Conventions and other human rights agreements; role of women in service to be downgraded; sexual assault rules to be loosened; adverse records to be scrubbed; Hegseth has a book; something about being on "defense" instead of making "war" on our own terms.

Spake volumes, this silence.
 
#WhatTheyVotedFor | #WhatWereTheyThinking

flcl-01-airplane-detail-bw-vg.png

It seems strange that people will still give this quote to the press:

"The last shutdown was brutal", said one federal worker, who highlighted that the impasse in 2018-19 lasted more than a month.

He added: "It forced me to withdraw money from my retirement plan just to cover my bills. Now, they've made it more difficult to withdraw from our retirement accounts, so if this goes as long as the last shutdown, I don't know how I'm going to pay my bills."

The same worker said: "I voted for Trump, but I did not vote for his abuses against us."


(West↱)

But, yeah, that part happened.

Still, one thing about the Beeb article is that for a mots story, the middling quotes are pained:

Meanwhile, a worker for Army Corps of Engineers said she was "rather conflicted" and did not mind a break from the "gruelling end of fiscal year - a year full of constantly shifting guidance and the ever-present threat" of a mass firing.

She said she would "support a shutdown if anything productive comes of it, but I'm unsure anything will".

Randall from Kansas City, who works with the Aviation Weather Center, said: "I don't like my pay being held hostage while the government fights over separate issues."

He said he believed that keeping the National Weather Service funded was something both parties typically agreed, so asked why he was "facing sudden loss of funds because Congress is fighting over healthcare or whatever". He emphasised that these were his personal views, and not those of his agency.

An anonymous US Air Force employee told us that if the situation was not resolved, he would have nothing to live on. He expressed his dilemma as follows: "I must still show up to work but won't get paid, because if I don't it's considered AWOL".

The piece actually ends with a rah-rah from a Democratic supporter at Treasury, but range in between the Trump supporter is its own little bauble: The man from the Air Force was a sort of neutral statement of a problem; the Trump supporter and the Democrat are the bookends; the woman from ACE sounds almost like an anime character, and Randall, at AWC, is the example of someone who is only looking at it according to his own needs.

But that Trump supporter is emblematic of how things have gone: The part they didn't vote for is anything that inconveniences them.

Even the white supremacist pogrom was easy enough to expect of Republicans given half a chance.

But that thing the Beeb article captures, a middling criticism of circumstance that is reluctant to criticize certain underlying reasons and arguments. Not all of these are so oriented, but there remains beneath it all a perpetual hope fallen on desperate times, a tacit article of faith expecting there is a good and just and proper way to cleanse and redeem and restore the nation, even if the current manner that inconveniences them so directly isn't it.

It's kind of like the idea that expecting a political argument to withstand basic rational scrutiny, such as not misrepresenting sources, or not contradicting itself along the way, is some manner of suppressing or silencing political views.

He "voted for Trump", but "did not vote for his abuses against us." Why are these people always abused? What did they expect when electing Trump and a Republican Congress? What part of the last twenty years of the GOP did they miss? They voted for the panda-furry lesbian porn, as long as it denigrates a liberal woman. They voted for bringing armed henchman to the office to shake the company down for money. They voted for the all-or-nothing campaigns against women, people of color, LGBTQ, and non-Christians. And they voted for the protection and advancement of sex criminals. And they voted for austerity and the culling of the American population. They voted for private prisons and corrupt law enforcers and judges who put Party before Constitution. They voted for the tax bill written in crayon. The only part of it Republican voters didn't vote for is anything that inconveniences them personally. And, yes, a lot of them have been around enough that they voted for hotter summers, stronger storms, and even giant fire tornadoes.

But at least they finally got a Supreme Court to put women back in their place, and has interracial marriage in its sights. Priorities, people. It's what they voted for.
____________________

Notes:

West, Stephen. "'My pay is being held hostage': Federal workers on US government shutdown". British Broadcasting Corporation. 2 October 2025. BBC.com. 2 October 2025. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvg0z2dx7w1o
 
So, just catching up on the whole Trump and Argentina thing, with the Trump administration looking, once again, to bail out Argentina.
I believe this thing is all being done by Scott Bessent, who during 2016-2023, when the S&P 500 made c.160% return, lost c.90% of the assets of the hedge-fund under his management, being a mix of actual losses and clients withdrawing their money due to poor performance (e.g. in 2019-21 when the S&P gained c.20% per year, his fund had minimal gains at best. So, always good to know that the US' economy is in the hands of someone who really knows how to make the most of the winds.)

Anyhoo - so the US is bailing out Argentina... again. Why? They represent c.0.5% of US exports/imports.

But the "doh!" moment is all about soya beans.
It's harvest time in the US, apparently, and China, usually the top export destination, has bought very little, if not actually nothing. Instead, they've tapped up supply from the US' biggest competitor: Argentina.
Now, here's the thing. The US promise to prop up the Argentinian currency to the tune of $20bn actually had the effect of making Argentinian exports more attractive (by bringing some stability to the currency). So Bessent has pretty much screwed American soya bean farmers by propping up the currency of their biggest competitor.

The thing is, Argentina is effectively the test-bed for what Trump and project-2025 are trying to do in the US. Milei has a 2-year head -start on Trump, but he's pretty much going through the same right-wing playbook. But he's failing. The Argentine economy is tanking, so Trump almost needs to prop up their economy so that they don't fail, and so the opposition in the US don't point to it as a clear failure of the right-wing policy. The analogy being used is that they "need to keep the canary singing".

Basically, if you want to know where the Trump play-book is heading, look to Argentina. It's not a pretty sight.
 
He "voted for Trump", but "did not vote for his abuses against us." Why are these people always abused? What did they expect when electing Trump and a Republican Congress? What part of the last twenty years of the GOP did they miss? They voted for the panda-furry lesbian porn, as long as it denigrates a liberal woman. They voted for bringing armed henchman to the office to shake the company down for money. They voted for the all-or-nothing campaigns against women, people of color, LGBTQ, and non-Christians. And they voted for the protection and advancement of sex criminals. And they voted for austerity and the culling of the American population. They voted for private prisons and corrupt law enforcers and judges who put Party before Constitution. They voted for the tax bill written in crayon. The only part of it Republican voters didn't vote for is anything that inconveniences them personally. And, yes, a lot of them have been around enough that they voted for hotter summers, stronger storms, and even giant fire tornadoes.
And they voted (much like that sobbing disfigured woman who voted for the Leopards Eating Peoples Faces Party) for that RW Holy Grail, Smaller Gubment, cause they know that all those gubment programs are a scam bureaucracy created by Radical Leftist Democrats which do nothing. The Atlantic reports today....

He said to reporters at the White House, “We’d be laying off a lot of people that are going to be really affected, and they’re Democrats; they’re going to be Democrats.” Had there been any ambiguity about his plans, he also said that the shutdown would allow his administration to “get rid of a lot of things that we didn’t want. And they’d be Democrat things.”

Although upwards of 600,000 federal employees have been furloughed, some were drafted into the partisan battle just before they were sent home. At the Small Business Administration, furloughed employees were told to adjust their out-of-office message to say that they would not be working “for the foreseeable future because Senate Democrats voted to block a clean federal funding bill,” according to a copy of the email we reviewed.

A banner on the Department of Agriculture’s main website says that the page will not be updated “Due to the Radical Left Democrat shutdown,” echoing similar notes on the websites of other departments, including Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, and State. Critics have fumed that the messages violate Hatch Act regulations that limit the political activities of federal employees who work with taxpayer-funded programs

Democrat things!!

It's pretty clear that the Project 2025 which Turnip had never read or had anything to do with back on the trail in 2024, has become another bible he can hold upside down while shredding the government. Let's see how Republicans respond when all this starts to inconvenience them more fiercely and leopards start crossing over into red districts and eating their faces.
 
Basically, if you want to know where the Trump play-book is heading, look to Argentina. It's not a pretty sight.
Man's an expert on Argentina. He watched clips from Evita several times on YouTube. Anyway, screw the farmers, the leopards are in Kansas and Nebraska and Iowa and they need faces to eat. And the big agribiz companies will be fine, they can just buy out more failed family farms and turn them into biodiesel plantations for all those fine American trucks that won't be switching to electric now.
 
Once Again Reminded

As South Carolina falls into a full-blown measles epidemic, we are once again reminded that yes, there is a difference between the parties.

Yes, there is a difference between voters.

Those who insisted conservative voters had other priorities than supremacism and conspiracism and tyranny are once again reminded what they helped promote.

Congratulations, ye who hate science.

Congratulations, ye who hate humanity.

You must be so proud.

(Don't tell us this isn't what you wanted. This far along, that's disqualifying for pretending you were lying to people the whole time. And think about it: If your excuse is that you were just fucking with people the whole time, then you can fuck off for the rest of time.)
 
Probably one of the most dangerous EO from Trump yet, it gives them full power to do just about anything they want to anyone they want. This is fucking scary shit. Authoritarianism. Your rights are gone.

 
Probably one of the most dangerous EO from Trump yet, it gives them full power to do just about anything they want to anyone they want. This is fucking scary shit. Authoritarianism. Your rights are gone.
More performative than effectual. There is no actual criminal offense called "domestic terrorism" in the US. You can only use the definition to pinpoint already criminal acts like murder or assault or kidnapping (or incitements to such), and then issue charging documents based on the actual prosecutable offenses. Basically if a criminal act is shown to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or a governmental body, or disrupt operation of a government, then it would be passed to the feds. Or something. I don't see this successful in being used to go after peaceful protestors or talk show hosts - you still need a charging document which cites an actual statute being violated. Even Trump-appointed federal judges have been rejecting charging documents which specify no actual statutory violation or where plaintiffs have no legal standing.

This is the fist-shaking of a petty, vengeful, and weak man who likes intimidating people to coerce them into submission. Problem is, there are too many of us in America who aren't so easily intimidated. Millions of us will be marching and demonstrating peacefully in the next No Kings rally on October 18. If the FBI doesn't like that and wants to track us all down, come and get us, motherfuckers.
 
Has anyone caught Trump's (and drunk lapdog Hegseth's) speech to the collection of US Generals? I'm sure he effectively called them to war on the American population, saying that that is where their focus (or much of it) will be. Naturally there was a stoney silence from the Generals.

Hegseth wasn't much better, giving them a speech that could have been faxed in, but importantly ending it with a plug for his book. So, yeah, there's that. This is an ex-major from the National Guard trying to tell career Generals about the military. Went down a storm. ;)
Do you remember Portland in President Trump's first administration?


Portland was ravaged by violence in 2020 as liberal protesters, Black Lives Matter activists, Antifa anarchists and others converged on the deep blue stronghold following the death of George Floyd during an interaction with Minneapolis police on Memorial Day of that year.

Those protests caused lots of trouble and at the end fixed nothing. Daily looting, destruction and more.

I guess President Trump is trying hard to avoid such kind of vandalism in his second administration. I guess if this is his intention, then he is in the right path. The criminality observed in Portland in those years cannot be tolerated and neither accepted anymore.

US army walking in city streets doesn't bother me at all, but looters, vandals and violent people are problem in the streets, yes indeed.
 
Do you remember Portland in President Trump's first administration?

MSN
Portland was ravaged by violence in 2020 as liberal protesters, Black Lives Matter activists, Antifa anarchists and others converged on the deep blue stronghold following the death of George Floyd during an interaction with Minneapolis police on Memorial Day of that year.

Those protests caused lots of trouble and at the end fixed nothing. Daily looting, destruction and more.

See "Trumplicans" #169↗, January, 2020:

Here's an example: A story broke last year about antifa attacking people in NYC for no reason. It got some coverage, again, later, when the assailants in the incident were charged and convicted; it wasn't antifa, but Proud Boys.

This was pretty much a recurring phenomenon in Portland, Oregon, last year, such as stories about antifa chasing and attacking a man and his twelve year-old daughter, but it turned out to be people fending off right-wingers, namely a known provocateur named John Turano and his adult daughter Bianca, who rightists have repeatedly claimed is a young girl victimized by antifa. And it really is that stupid: Provocateur and his adult daughter pick a fight, people film them running away, say antifa is attacking a little girl; you'll find there just isn't much of a both-sides issue between rightists and antifa.

See, we've been through the rightist scaremongering make-believe, before.

So, yes, there is a reason I disbelieve certain typal stories when I hear them; to the other, that I should have such practice in the first place is itself problematic, but this is America, these are right-wingers, and history reminds we are fools to expect better from them.

And Portland is significant for certain reasons. We don't have the same kind of controversies up in the Seattle area. There is much back and forth between rightists and pretty much everyone else, including antifascists, but it just doesn't go the same way. Even more, Seattle is home to a notorious police department that has, variously over the years, been caught committing racist crimes, and on at least one occasion argued through their union that cops can't do their jobs without breaking the law; still, Seattle isn't Portland, the place where the White Aryan Resistance was defeated. And if you've ever wondered how James Dean's lone wolf became a term associated with terrorism, the answer is time and tide, and the White Aryan Resistance. After they were broken in Portland, leader Tom Metzger advocated lone wolves, the unorganized, ideologically linked individuals doing whatever they needed to protect the white race, such as the bomb threat against a video rental store in 1994, in Rhode Island. And if it looks like the lone wolves have come out to play, in Portland, sure, why not. They've been there the whole time; the breaking of the White Aryan Resistance is fundamental history in understanding why Portland makes a nearly perfect example compared to your story, Yazata. There were even rumors that the cops were helping antifa, and what the evidence revealed was that the Portland Police Bureau was in deep, aiding and abetting rightists.

And it goes like that. Claims arose that some antifa attacked a woman, blindsided her, and knocked her unconscious. That one didn't get far, as I recall, before the video emerged, and when a man marching with Proud Boys and Patriot Prayer was arrested for the attack, both groups quickly disavowed not only him, but any participants in the Cider Riot incident, as not current members ....

.... Using Portland as a comparative example to wherever you're describing, we see examples of why such typal claims as you have posted meet such skepticism. People have been through versions of this before.

And if there is a general trend some people perceive wherein conservative and rightist rhetoric against liberals and leftists turns out to describe what conservatives and rightists are actually doing, the mess in Portland, last year, was actually a frenetic demonstration ....

.... Rightist histrionics in Portland really are an extraordinary iteration. But there is a recurring pattern of hearing horror stories like yours that just don't pan out.

On that occasion, someone was promoting some "no-go zone" make-believe that used to be popular among conservatives.

(By the way, look closely: The "MSN" story you quoted is wire copy from FOX News. You know how I could tell, or, as such, why I thought to check? The statement that Portland was ravaged by violence in 2020 as liberal protesters, Black Lives Matter activists, Antifa anarchists and others converged," is right-wing posturing. The only violence that ravaged Portland in 2020 came from rightists and law enforcement, including masked snatchers [DHS] driving rented vans. And even that stretches the word "ravaged". It was a dumb, shitty, fascist pain in the ass, and a hint of what Republicans are willing to do, and seems pretty mild compared to the race raids ICE is carrying out now.)
 
Back
Top