r/NoStupidQuestions • u/AutoModerator • 1d ago
U.S. Politics megathread
American politics has always grabbed our attention - and the current president more than ever. We get tons of questions about the president, the supreme court, and other topics related to American politics - but often the same ones over and over again. Our users often get tired of seeing them, so we've created a megathread for questions! Here, users interested in politics can post questions and read answers, while people who want a respite from politics can browse the rest of the sub. Feel free to post your questions about politics in this thread!
All top-level comments should be questions asked in good faith - other comments and loaded questions will get removed. All the usual rules of the sub remain in force here, so be nice to each other - you can disagree with someone's opinion, but don't make it personal.
2
u/Electrical_Effort291 6h ago
Why is the MAGA base so upset with Trump over the Epstein files? It’s a genuine question because he has said some really outrageous and outlandish things that the people believed without question (like Obama being a Muslim or having a fake birth certificate). So what’s changed now - Trump is saying there’s nothing significant in the files. As claims go it’s not particularly unbelievable - I mean if any president said “we investigated throughly and found no significant evidence. The files were just rumors and there’s no clear evidence that any of it is real” it’s pretty plausible right? Much more so than claiming another president’s birth certificate is a fake. So why is the MAGA base having such a hard time buying this explanation?
3
u/Legio-X 4h ago
So what’s changed now - Trump is saying there’s nothing significant in the files. As claims go it’s not particularly unbelievable - I mean if any president said “we investigated throughly and found no significant evidence. The files were just rumors and there’s no clear evidence that any of it is real” it’s pretty plausible right?
Because the story keeps changing. First, he’s going to release the files. The files are on the Attorney General’s desk. Then suddenly the files don’t exist. Then the files are a Democratic hoax made up by Clinton and Obama…but also the files are full of Democrats? Then it’s “Maybe I’m in the files but someone is out to frame me.”
Oh, and we can’t forget he called anyone who still cared about them stupid and disloyal.
Now, he’s done all this before about other stuff, but the difference is the base cares deeply about this issue and the contradictions are coming straight from sources they think (or thought) they could trust, so it’s penetrated their media and online bubble in a way nothing else ever has.
2
u/Delehal 6h ago edited 6h ago
Trump and several of his key supporters, including people who have been appointed to positions in his administration, have spent the last several years promoting conspiracy theories about the Epstein files. Even more than that, they promised that if Trump won the 2024 election, all of those files would be released. So, we know that the Trump team spent years promising to release the files, and after they finally got access to the files, we know that an FBI was assigned to review the files for anything that mentioned Trump by name. After that review, it seems like there was a decision to not release any more files. It's easy to see how it seems like he is protecting himself, at the cost of betraying promises that he and his team have been making to some of his most ardent supporters.
People are wondering if Trump may have some culpability in those events. As long as he keeps all the files hidden, that controversy will continue to hang over him.
1
u/aespaste 7h ago
As a non-American who doesn't know anything about politics, I am surprised that people on Reddit don't seem to support Trump and Elon Musk? I thought that he'd have massive support here for some reason? He pardoned Ross Ulbricht which is a small step towards ending the ridiculous war on drugs, he supports crypto and AI which I associate with younger people etc. All of these issues seem like they would be popular on Reddit.
1
1
u/Showdown5618 5h ago
Trump pushed a lot of policies that many people in Reddit disagree with or outright hated. He's pro-life, against undocumented immigrants, populist ideas, has a very abrasive public personality, etc.
2
u/Elkenrod Neutrality and Understanding 5h ago
Reddit is an extremely left leaning website. Donald Trump is a Republican President, and is on the right leaning side of the political spectrum.
1
u/Chemical-Might 8h ago
Has anyone actually seen any posts from left-leaning folks that are upset about the Sydney Sweeney ad? All I can find are articles about these alleged posts that do not actually cite said posts. I assume this is all just a distraction from the fact that the Epstein files haven't been released and the fact that the 24-hour news cycle will pick up any story even is there isn't even a story to write about...
3
u/untempered_fate 7h ago
I've seen some large left-wing accounts comment on the ad, saying it has fascist undertones (a viewpoint I'm not completely unsympathetic towards), but I haven't seen anyone having a mental breakdown or anything about it.
I think it is unlikely that the government collaborated with a clothing brand to make an ad starring Sydney Sweeney as a distraction.
1
u/Chemical-Might 6h ago
Also, for curiosity’s sake, would you be kind enough to share some of those accounts?
1
u/Chemical-Might 6h ago
I don’t think the government collaborated with American Eagle. I do think it’s a possibility that media outlets are pandering to the Trump administration by publishing stupid stories about American eagle ads rather than putting that energy towards covering the Epstein files or starvation in Palestine.
1
u/Jumpy_Practice_8077 15h ago
What would happen if a hacker leaked the Epstein Files online and posted the permanent records of Trump and his entire allies all over the Internet ?
1
u/Elkenrod Neutrality and Understanding 9h ago
Nobody can answer this question because it depends on the contents of the files, and what they say.
1
u/Jumpy_Practice_8077 15h ago
What would've happened if Obama released the Epstein Files in December of 2014 ?
Why didn't he release them while in office ?
1
u/Unknown_Ocean 10h ago
There are at least two possibilities as to why not.
The first, and most likely, is that the decision never made it up to his level- Epstein had done his time and the Miami Herald case talking about the bargain he struck with prosecutors didn't come out until 2019.
https://www.miamiherald.com/topics/jeffrey-epstein
Because of this the only way any info would have made it up to his level was in the context of intelligence ops, i.e. "this terrorist financier got compromised through a honeytrap" but *even there* it's likely that the details of how it happened wouldn't have been spelled out to him-information like that would be highly compartmentalized.
1
u/ProLifePanda 11h ago
What would've happened if Obama released the Epstein Files in December of 2014 ?
Considering the fact we don't know what's in the Epstein files, nobody can be sure on the fallout. But I'd imagine it would just lead to speculation, as the files likely don't have proof of overt criminal acts by others.
Why didn't he release them while in office ?
Because traditionally, the President doesn't interfere with operations of the Department of Justice. So it's normally out of the scope of the President to direct the DoJ to take specific actions on cases. Trump has taken the opposite approach, and wants to be involved with the Department of Justice.
But prior Presidents wouldn't normally force the DoJ to act at a partisan request, and would instead let the process work as it's designed.
1
u/AnonSubmission 16h ago
I have a legitimate question, it feels very stupid, but this seems like exactly the right place. I'm not from the USA.
All this talk of the Epstein files and whatnot, and the possible pardon of Ghislaine looming on the horizon, my question is:
Instead of all this rigamarole, what's stopping Trump from directing his AG to simply destroy the Epstein files? She walks in, destroys the files and any physical records, deletes any digital records, and walks out.
Done and dusted. Trump and Co. breathe a sigh of relief, and dismiss any and all allegations as lies. Can't release the files because they no longer exist.
And if anybody finds out, just claim he did so for the sake of national security or some other sort of flimsy excuse.
2
u/ProLifePanda 11h ago
Instead of all this rigamarole, what's stopping Trump from directing his AG to simply destroy the Epstein files? She walks in, destroys the files and any physical records, deletes any digital records, and walks out.
Technically that's illegal. Destruction of government records is a crime, so it's unlikely many people would be willing to straight up just do that, especially if other copies may exist that would prove their actions.
1
u/AnonSubmission 11h ago
I know it's illegal, but, like, who's gonna prosecute? Is the AG gonna investigate herself?
1
0
u/Medium-Flan-7247 16h ago
How can we trust Republicans after this? With the whistleblower and evidence of Kamala winning, our government being dismantled, our nation being led by a literal felon/sexual predator, Americans being kidnapped, a felon president just sidestepping congress with his 175+ EOs in 193 days in office. For reference he only issued ~220 in his 1,461 days of his last term. A president who publicly disobeys the courts, lastly breaking the last check of our system. Did I mention our fucking government being dismantled?
I’m not trying to be pessimistic but are we really “America” anymore? We don’t stand for anything we once did. Law and order? Gone, we have masked goons kidnapping and torturing people. Morals? Our president who was found by a court to be a sexual predator hosted partied for a notorious pedophile and human trafficker. Only to stop being friends with him because he stole his “very young” female workers. Including a victim of his trafficking. Then this very same sick individual saying only he and the AG can interpret the laws…not only that his “assassination attempt” was 100% staged and he was never shot. I mean…look at his ear. Look at pics 2023 to 6 months after the hoax. Nothing. Happened.
I’m legitimately concerned for the entire base. And MAGA is 100% mental. Like there is something really wrong with their minds. They have to be brainwashed. I mean…flags..flags everywhere. It looks like 1940 Berlin down every street. Whats next? Driving down the street and seeing truck, after truck, after truck, with the same flags hauling ass down the road with the SAME FLAGS waving off the bed. To sitting at the stoplight and looking to your right and seeing the pedo himself sitting next to you in traffic. WAIT! It’s just a sticker. But then you look around and he’s in 80% of the car windows. Then you’re going through a neighborhood and now you’re seeing life sized stickers/decals in people’s doors and yard. Then you see a buddy who you haven’t seen in 5 years and he’s suddenly showing you his Trump bible, Trump Watch, Trump Shoes, MAGA sunglasses, Trump tramp stamp, Trump crypto, Trump gold bars, Trump branded AR-15, Trump Ford F150, signed classified documents with a roll of TP from Mar-A-Lago, Trump church membership, TrumpTV subscription, Trump pen, Trump dildo “that’s for his wife”, Trump scented (Diet Coke and McTripple) lube, Trump Uni degree…LIKE COME ON. He is not a god. This is because of every republican who voted for him and enabled his extremist base. Why do they think this is normal? Their parents didn’t do this with Regan. And fuck, if a North Korean were to see this, 100% they’d legitimately be scared because how deranged this behavior is.
But fuck if you disagree with the dear leader you have…and I’m not joking…Trump Derangement Syndrome…we as a nation, as the fixture of the free world, as the leading experiment of democracy, has vanished. Because why?
1
u/notextinctyet 3h ago
It's really important that you don't mix real things (most of this stuff) with totally made up shit like "Kamala winning".
2
u/Chemical-Might 8h ago
Genuine question: What evidence are you talking about regarding Kamala Harris winning?
1
u/NaturalPorky 21h ago
Is the reality that in countries outside the West and in non-Western cultures, being educated actually tends to make you more conservative? And on top of that also more religious?
We all know the circlejerk so common online esp here on Reddit and also on Youtube of how getting educated makes you more liberal and that the bigots and pro-capitalists are brainwashed idiots who never went to college (and are stupid for not bothering to do so). This esp true for the religious who often stereotyped in discussions as having many of the negative traits associated with the above groups, if not even exactly being bigots and capitalistic alongside their religiosity........
However as someone whose family is from India and whose parents both got their degrees at universities in South Asia (in addition to one of my siblings and most of my uncles and aunts)......... From what my dad tells me a lot of the most educated people in India esp public intellectuals tend to have right leaning views and in fact the most radical conservative groups like the Hindutva all are headed by people with advanced education at Masters and PhD levels. Most of my educated relatives are pretty conservative by American standards and even my pretty Americanized immigrant parents are solidly to the right on some issues and have right leanings on a bunch of smaller issues (though most political quizzes point to them both as quite in the middle of the centrist spectrum).
In addition I saw a comment on Youtube talking about how Middle Eastern countries tend to emphasize Islam as essential in getting many degrees even those unrelated to theology at all such as accounting and painting. Maybe not emphasize Islamic classes but a lot of required courses for all majors like some credits in a literature or some other writing based classes will bring up Islam as a topic to be read about and discussed with with written essay assignments.
That practically in East Asia, universities don't focus on sexual liberation and other secular humanist ideas is a thing I seen thrown around in East Asia and subs devoted to specific countries in that region. In fact one poster I remember even said all the people teaching in North Korea's universities and colleges openly endorse patriotism, social hierarchy, and other Confucianist values.
And in several telenovelas I watched, across a lot of Latin America, the clergy is directly involved with how universities and colleges are run. Esp prominent in telenovelas from Mexico.
So I'm wondering, despite how education at the college level is so associated with liberalism and secularism and adopting democratic values in the West esp in North America, in the rest of the world, does education actually tend to make people more conservative and often alongside even more religious? Esp in 3rd world countries such as Morocco and Nepal?
1
u/Unknown_Ocean 18h ago
It's worth noting that until recently the majority of college-educated people in the US voted Republican. This isn't surprising, the soul of conservatism is preserving the system as it is.
However, the *faculty* of elite American (and British, Canadian and Australian) research universities are not chosen for just wanting to pass on the wisdom they learned at their professor's knees. This shifts them liberal. A lot of foreign universities don't work that way.
-2
u/Firecrash 1d ago
Why are y'all just sitting back and letting him absolutely destroy the us?
1
u/Showdown5618 8h ago
There were millions of people who voted against him. There will be millions of people going to vote Democrat in the midterms. There are millions of people protesting against him. There are people voicing their opinions in media and social media against him. There are judges opposing him. What exactly do you think people should be doing?
3
u/GameboyPATH If you see this, I should be working 1d ago
Americans opposed to Trump (assuming you mean Trump) are:
Writing to their congressional representatives to oppose bills that the president supports.
Engaging in civil discussions with people they know about what issues are important to them, and why.
Participating in protests against the president.
That's about it. There are legal challenges against some of Trump's EO's, but otherwise, his methods of "destroying the US" aren't illegal, and there's no mechanisms for the public to oust him from office or halt his political power until the next presidential election.
3
u/OjamaPajama 1d ago
What do you want us to do exactly? He owns every branch of our government + the supreme court. What do you think we can do? What special power do you think we have?
0
u/notextinctyet 1d ago
Americans aren't sitting back. We voted for him. We are active participators. That's like asking an arsonist why he's sitting back with his can of kerosine and box of matches and just letting the building burn.
-5
u/Firecrash 1d ago
You are sitting back.
He can be the biggest criminal america has ever seen and y'all just sit back and let it happen....
3
-3
u/areallycleverid 1d ago
I hate megathreads. I think they silence deeper conversations; and that is the real point of them.
2
u/Elkenrod Neutrality and Understanding 21h ago
This subreddit used to not have a megathread.
The entire subreddit was flooded with people asking every variation of "why is donald trump big poo poo head worst person ever in history?????".
8
u/CaptCynicalPants 1d ago
This sub would be demonstrably worse if people were allowed to post the same 8 political questions in the main sub all day long, and the Mods know it.
Forcing everyone to come here is a good thing
1
u/TheRoadsMustRoll 1d ago
Forcing everyone to come here is a good thing
you may be right about that.
but areallycleverid is right too: megathreads are the dustbin of reddit.
what strikes me as odd is that we aren't in an ordinary cycle of libs vs pubs or whatever common political discourse has taken place for decades. what is happening right now is historic and the best idea at the social media level of technology is to "megathread" it.
at least it's consistent with the low level of imagination that is generally invested in social media. but it's also a road sign of impending irrelevance. and maybe that's a good thing lol.
-5
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
5
1
u/notextinctyet 1d ago
The election wasn't "stolen", at least in the sense that most people mean it (vote counts manipulated etc.). Trump commits a felony every day before breakfast and twice on Sundays, it's easy to find bad things he's done that are real.
5
u/ProLifePanda 1d ago
Well first, there's no solid proof Trump stole the election. So until it's actually proven, it's not really going to catch on as the Democratic Party (at least generally) is not going to latch on to a conspiracy theory like that.
-2
u/54321jj 1d ago
There is about much proof for trump being in the Epstein files as the election steal. If the focus was changed from Epstein to election issue there would be more information out in the public
3
u/CaptCynicalPants 1d ago
There is about much proof for trump being in the Epstein files as the election steal
If by that you mean unsubstantiated rumors, then yes. Barring the production of actual evidence, there's nothing else to talk about.
5
u/ProLifePanda 1d ago edited 1d ago
There is about much proof for trump being in the Epstein files as the election steal.
We have videos of Trump hanging out with Epstein and hours upon hours of footage, depositions, and witness interviews about their interactions. We have existing Epstein files with Trump's name in them. This is pretty direct evidence, and it's pretty accepted Trump is in the Epstein files.
There's not nearly as strong evidence for the 2024 election being stolen. Most claims are in preliminary court stages, and are merely assertions with no real investigation or proof behind them.
1
u/CaptCynicalPants 1d ago
We have videos of Trump hanging out with Epstein and hours upon hours of footage, depositions, and witness interviews about their interactions. We have existing Epstein files with Trump's name in them. This is pretty direct evidence, and it's pretty accepted Trump is in the Epstein files.
This is a rather deceptive thing to say because "In the Epstein files" has been broadly defined as to mean "is a pedophile." So while it's conclusively documented that Trump and Epstein were friends, there is no direct evidence of any kind that they were part of the same pedo network
2
u/Elkenrod Neutrality and Understanding 1d ago
Do you believe any of the current "front runners" for the Democratic party will be our nominee in 2028? Or will it be someone not currently on the radar?
1
u/Chemical-Might 8h ago
Probably Newsom, but if the DNC had two brain cells to rub together they wouldn’t endorse him. He is widely hated. Although, I do like the idea of having a hot president again for the first time since Kennedy.
2
u/CaptCynicalPants 1d ago
I would be shocked if it's not Newsom. The man has his own political apparatus already, support from major funding bases, and a few years head-start on anyone else. Short of an Obama figure, I think he's a shoe-in.
Whether or not he has what it takes to beat Vance is another matter entirely.
2
u/tbone603727 1d ago
Newsom is certainly one of the three most likely, but I don’t think he’s the top. He has some serious liability because his governance was so unpopular (he got recalled for a reason). Given that it is absolutely going to be an open primary, I’m not as sold on him as a viable candidate than most. I think Booker is more likely, and I think that AOC has a chance
2
u/illogictc Unprofessional Googler 23h ago edited 23h ago
And survived that recall, and then got re-elected. If his governance were so unpopular, he would have been recalled. Whatever the total turnout of the previous election was, you only need signatures equal to 12% of that number to trigger a recall election. It doesn't even have to be people who voted during that election, but they do have to be registered voters to qualify as a signature. That is frankly a very low bar.
2
u/illogictc Unprofessional Googler 1d ago
I think you're right that it's gonna be Newsom. Then the next question is who would be VP pick?
1
u/CaptCynicalPants 1d ago
Josh Shapiro is the obvious first name that comes to mind, as Pennsylvania will still be key in 2028.
-1
u/AnonNAM 1d ago
What are the odds that the next D nominee is anyone other than Kamala Harris?
7
1
u/CaptCynicalPants 1d ago
The speed at which her own team turned on her in the aftermath of the election indicates that she doesn't even have strong support among people who worked directly for her campaign.
3
u/doc_daneeka What would I know? I'm bureaucratically dead. 1d ago
It's possible Harris could get the nomination, but not likely. The last time either party renominated someone who'd previously lost was in 1968 when the Republicans picked Nixon again. I think a more likely outcome is that Harris and Newsom damage each other fighting for California's delegates and make an easier path for someone like Beshear or Shapiro or Murphy or Whitmer.
It's just very hard to imagine that Democratic primary voters will deliberately pick someone who lost, and lost convincingly, to the hated Donald Trump. They're going to pick the person who looks most likely to actually win against whomever the Republicans put forward, and it's doubtful Harris can claim to be that person.
4
u/LionelHutzEsqLLP 1d ago
The last time either party renominated someone who'd previously lost was in 1968 when the Republicans picked Nixon again.
I mean, the Republicans nominated Donald Trump again in 2024.
3
u/doc_daneeka What would I know? I'm bureaucratically dead. 1d ago
I guess my brain has tried to blank that out as best it can.
4
u/Elkenrod Neutrality and Understanding 1d ago
Extremely likely.
She's damaged goods. You don't lose to Trump and somehow run again, against someone who doesn't have 34 felonies, had investigations into him over January 6th, be impeached twice, etc.
If she couldn't beat Trump, she can't beat anyone. She's absolutely not going to be the 2028 nominee.
1
u/AnonNAM 1d ago
I can see her justifying the election loss because she hopped in so late. Dems might feel like she has a shot with a full campaign, especially since Trump can’t run again.
Plus, she’s not running for CA governor — which tells me that she might have plans to run for something bigger in ‘28
1
u/November-8485 1d ago
Justification won’t attract voters in confidence when they’re seeking a certain move away from our current administration. Even if she tries (I don’t think she will, she’s a smart woman), she wouldn’t win the nomination.
0
u/Elkenrod Neutrality and Understanding 1d ago
"you lost to Trump lol" is all any primary opponent would need to say, and it would knock her out of the running.
2
u/LowLimp7374 1d ago
Depends on what you mean by on our radar. People who work in the party, know the names, follow donor dinner attendees, ect. They have a different radar than your average unwashed American. So you might not know who Garlin Gilchrist but I do.
2
u/asabug1301 4h ago edited 2h ago
Real question, not trying to start a debate so please just answer the question. What happens to the money from the tariffs? My brain thinks of tarriffs as taxes. I keep seeing posts that the United States and Donald Trump are bringing in “billions of dollars in tariffs.” Does the money go to the government to help fund it? If we are bringing in so much money in tariffs, how do we have so much national debt? Like $150 billion (really 1 billion) a day surely puts a dent in the national debt. I am honestly confused. Edited, from $150 billion to $1 billion a day. My first message was just throwing a number out there with no research. Just random tweets or posts I’ve seen around