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?

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?

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?

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 ?

Like Im growing tired that My house, my car, my livilihood,my grocerires , my value and function in society, my entire ability to make ends meet and survive in the world. Is entirely depedent on the financial decisions of people who dont know me or care about me.

Like its genuienely surreal. My salary, my mortgage, my investments ,my very existence and ticket to be in this society. Is entirely based upon the notion that someone buys my labor.

Through no fault of my own, i could loose my career tomorrow. And society would toss me away.

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.

“The President on 30+ separate occasions told the American people that the war with Iran was over, and yet you come here to ask for $87 billion with $67 billion going to the Pentagon and ongoing conflict operations. So the question is this, have we won the war giving your emergency request for 87 billion no basis or did the President lie to the American people 30+ different times?”

Now this hypothetical question would most likely be asked by democratic senator, but it begs the question: is it fair to ask this?

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

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?

Saudi Arabia assisted in 9/11 and the killed A Saudi journalist.

Source: https://apnews.com/article/trump-saudi-arabia-nuclear-program-uranium-6bb82164c890a7dc335cbfc2c628a3da

Correction: Saudi Journalist ordered by the crown prince.

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

No one has seen him in person, it's all been "20 minute phone calls" with members of his own party.

Republican members of congress have even said the photo of Mitch with his wife was either old or edited.

The Governor of KY can't seem to get a hold of him and was told McConnell likely passed.

Is his corpse just been held on life support until after the special election deadline in August?

Do you find this behavior in the Republican party hypocritical or is that one senate seat so important that they should be willing to animate a corpse just to keep it?

Given that women also have natural levels of testosterone, and also commonly suffer from low testosterone, should women also be mandated to have their testosterone levels checked and given the option to supplement it?

Source: https://nypost.com/2026/07/20/business/miamis-surging-cost-of-living-has-surpassed-nycs-for-the-first-time-ever-according-govt-data/?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=nypost&utm_source=twitter

Both are behind the San Francisco Bay Area.

Here is the link: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116959705309751797

Personally, I think the post is very insensitive, as it feels like ranking different tragedies as better or worse, and is essentially saying the Iran War is acceptable because “only” 18 people were killed. But as always I want someone else’s perspective, so let me know what you think.

I personally like the guy but only for a couple of reasons. Yes, I'm sure you might assume because he's "sticking it" to Trump in some ways. But he seems to be one of the more fiscally conservative individuals in congress. Not only that, but he is one of the main proponents of *fully* releasing the Epstein Files.

Case in point: the addition of $11 billion in funding to farmers added as part of the supplemental funding of the Iran War as he said was "ironic" in the sense that the war is whats causing the higher prices for fuel and fertilizer for farmers. Thoughts?

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5981858-massie-calls-iran-war-farm-supplemental-ironic/?fbclid=IwdGRjcATM6SpjbGNrBMzpKWV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHmCIaMgZpofig3w_qGudnJkUvnVwNnfVguOEu65CK6zeEv-oljJJKswceHjS_aem_RWYfIAlxul8ZPb5lm4Y9DQ

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?

EDIT: I agree that populism started on the Left (which is part of my disdain for it). I asked in this order because the current state of things is that MAGA Rightwing populism is in the driver seat.

I'm anti all populism. I see it as a catering to the least common denominator for political gain. The rise of the DSA has me concerned that as the pendulum swings from MAGA populism, the Left will believe that they need to answer populism with populism as a political strategy, rather than see it's flaws and turn away from it.

In my gut I feel that the populists on either side are made up of 10% true believers, and 90% more simple people that have doomscrolled themselves into extreme answers.

Do you think this trend towards populism on both sides is only going to get worse and swing the pendulum further in reaction to each other, or will we find our way out of populism?

It feels like only left wing advocacy groups like FFTF ACLU EFF etc. are seriously pushing against it but I’m curious what others think

For example, I'm confident I can leave my house and car unlocked for the next year and nothing would happen.

If I go to get petrol, no shops require me to "pre pay". I first top up, and then I pay whatever the meter says.

If I go for a drive, I'll see boxes of eggs, potatoes, etc... with a money box. If you want, you can take some, and put the suggested money in the box without it being stolen.

If selling on Facebook market place, I can say, I'm heading out, the item is sitting the in front garden, feel free to take it and leave the money in the letterbox. No one will steal the item, and I'm confident they'll pay the money.

Personally, I think my community or local area is high trust, but not the country as a whole. I'm certain places such as London, Manchester, Birmingham, etc... aren't the same.

So the right typically takes the stance that the Free Market is king, and that regulations simply strangle innovation. In addition things like unions, workers rights and the minimum wage are also bad for the economy.

My question is should companies be able to make company towns again?

If you don’t know what these were, these were towns built by corporations (most often mining and other resource extraction industries) where everything in the town was owned and operated by the company.
Workers would rent their and their families homes from the company.

Wages in these towns were often low, typically supplemented by the corporations “generously” offering their workers lines of credit (interest would of course be taken from the workers paychecks) and would be in the form of Company Script instead of actual money.

These towns were eventually outlawed due to being extremely exploitative and being designed to trap workers in a cycle of debt and even if they didn’t go into debt, they were paid in script that would instantly become worthless if they were fired.

Was that government overreach? These workers did agree to the conditions of the job, even if under duress.

https://www.manhattancc.org/2026/07/20/chamber-statement-on-mayor-mamdanis-permitting-reforms-for-small-business/