Наше будущее на четыре года

[Sky]

Не надо обобщать насчет ageism . В Академии ; чем старше тем лучше, так же касается и медицины , lawyers и возможно, еще и других specializations.
А, вот IT , да , вы правы, этот сегмент очень vulnerable , чего только стоит один outsourcing

В академiю на tenure track тоже берут исключительно вчерашних выпусников, в лучшем случае с парой лет постдокторантуры. Позиции ранга associate/full professor да, для тех кому за 40, но такие позиции частенько обьявляются под конкретного человека, у которого уже известное имя и он приносит в клювике кучку денег в виде грантов

Вы путаете профессиональную конкуренцию с ageism , в академии чем старше тем больше публикаций , исследований и авторитета , в IT чем моложе тем больше свежих идей и скорость к обучению новых тех трендов от них ожидают

[BarBoss]

Скажите спасибо администрации байдена которая не только выцеживает воен помощь по каплям но и запрещает ею эффективно пользоваца.

Марш пригожина отлично показал наскока был шаток режим путина на тот момент...

Пригожин, с его большой на тот момент поддержкой, никуда не доехал и не смог бы доехать. Недавнее вторжение в курскую область показало, что даже там, где тонко, хоть и рвётся, но потери у ВСУ были весьма значительные. А попытка дойти до Москвы грозит обрезанием логистики и котлом.

Я не так про воен успехи как про зыбкость режима. Тем более пригожин не призывал к освобождению рф от пуйла а как бы наоборот. Но сам факт что народ забил на все и фоткал там селфи сказал очень многое. Откуда и застопоренное вторжение. Ведь фактически вместо "киев за 3 дня" получаеца "киев вряд ли и за 3 года". Учитывая воен возможности сторон на 2.24.22 это фактически уже поражение россии. Хотя еще не формальное. Примерно как совковая авантюра в афгане.

[Fur_Elise]

А вот от либерального профессора социологии прогноз. Букав много и читать сложно, может кто осилит. Меня удивило что он считает что не только аборты будут запрещены, но и постепенно birth control

WHAT’S COMING
Since Tuesday, many people have taken to social media with long posts expressing their reactions to the election results, sharing their fears, and joining together in mutual dismay. As a person who makes a lot of very long social media posts, I have appreciated everyone’s willingness to write in depth about their reactions. I haven’t posted much since then, because I didn’t want my words to get in the way, and I especially did not want to compete for attention with the voices of people from marginalized groups, who are the most likely to suffer in the years to come as a result of this election.
But now that a little time has passed, I’m ready to reenter the conversation. In the wake of bad political shifts, it can be tempting—and appropriate—to respond with angry diatribes, or with humor, or with resignation. In this situation, though, I don’t think that any of those strategies will do us much good. We need to be clear-eyed about the future, understand the risks, and plan (where possible) for responding and regrouping. I don’t have a lot of optimism to offer—my view of the future is quite bleak, for reasons that I will make clear as I go on. In my view, what those of us who came out on the losing end of the election need more than anything is to be ready for what’s coming.
What’s coming is not good. I don’t think that the experience of living through the first Trump term can properly prepare us for what the next term will look like. It’s going to get much worse, and there’s very little that we’re going to be able to do stop it.
A term that gained popularity on the right over the past decade is “Trump Derangement Syndrome” (TDS), a phrase designed to minimize and mock liberals’ overblown anxieties about the harm that a Trump presidency could cause. No matter what over-the-top rhetoric Trump and his supporters used, conservatives would remind us, we did not need to worry that our society would change dramatically or that people would suffer. Much of his rhetoric was just bluster, he didn’t really mean it, and even if he did, cooler heads would prevail and institutional integrity would hold, averting the worst possible outcomes. Those who believed otherwise were “deranged” with this odd syndrome.
TDS was a real phenomenon, to some extent. Most of liberals’ worst fears did not come to pass, and in 2020 Trump lost reelection and Democrats swept into power in Congress. Yet, four years later, here we are again.
Those who speak in alarmist tones today will continue to get diagnosed with “TDS” – I’m sure this post will garner that reaction from many.
But we need to be careful, because I strongly believe that it’s different this time. You already know the reasons for that, many of which have been repeated in the media by lots of political experts. Trump has a clearer understanding of the office and the levers of power; he has already remade the Supreme Court in a way that will sanction more of his extreme behavior; he has cowed his party into submission and absolute loyalty. All of that is true.
But those experts all seem to also believe, because of his blundering, incompetence, and extremism, that the things he will do over the next four years will be unpopular, will alienate those who voted for him, and will allow the Democrats to regain power when voters sour on what Trump and the Republicans are doing.
I think that’s wrong. The reason why it’s going to be different this time is because most of what the Republican-controlled government does over the next four years is going to be very popular.
The growing popularity was already evident in the election results, where Trump earned a clear majority of the popular vote and made major inroads with nonwhite voters, especially men. All of the things that Democrats assumed would make Trump incredibly unpopular—criminal convictions, impeachments, financial improprieties, etc.—served to make him more popular among his base, and did not motivate his opponents as much as was hoped. His coalition is already bigger.
That popularity will grow. This is due in large part to the fact that many of the things that will be done will be genuinely enjoyed by a large share of the electorate. But perhaps more importantly, it’s because Trump and his movement will not be punished electorally for the negative outcomes of their own policies; they will be relatively immune from the types of thermostatic political shifts that have affected previous political coalitions.
And what that popularity ultimately boils down to is this—it’s not just the government, or our politics, that are going to shift. It’s us. Civil society is going to change. People, families, and values are going to change. You are going to change, whether you want to or not, whether you want to admit it or not. Even if you voted against it, and have resisted it vehemently in the past, and continue disapproving of it, you will change in subtle ways. You may not like it, but what you would once find shocking will not be quite as shocking, and what you once considered unthinkable will become increasingly normal, if still unpalatable. The shifts in people, values, and civil society and the shifts in our political structure will work in tandem, in dialectical fashion. Our values will be reshaped by our structures and our politics, and our structures and politics will bend in the direction of our shifting values. We who continue to vocally decry the policies that are on their way are going to become a smaller minority of the population. It’s all going to be pretty popular.
Some of what I anticipate will not come to pass, and certainly many things will come to pass that I do not anticipate. I could be wrong about some or all of this. But I genuinely don’t think so, based upon my interpretation of the president-elect’s own words, the words of his supporters and future members of his administration, the policies laid out in Project 2025, and my experience watching intense governmental conservatism in action in the state of Kansas over the past decade.
Here’s what’s coming.
1. There will be camps. They will be large. They will go up very quickly—you will initially be surprised at how quickly they’re being built. As soon as a new Attorney General, DHS Secretary, Secretary of the Interior, and a few others are confirmed by Senate—and that will happen with lightning speed—planning and construction of the camps will begin. The camps will not be secrets; they will not be hidden. They will be located on public land in major metropolitan areas across the country. The National Guard, Border Patrol, ICE, state police, local police, and private forces will all be involved in arresting people. Undocumented immigrants, of course, will be the primary targets of these raids, but many legal immigrants and some American citizens will be caught up in them, as well, especially if they don’t possess or have misplaced proper documentation of their citizenship or legal status. Proceedings will run with incredible efficiency, processing thousands of people per day. Mass deportations will begin within 2-3 months of inauguration. There will be major protests of the camps, and massive demonstrations outside some of them—most likely in preplanned “free speech zones” constructed in advance for that very purpose. With rare exceptions, the protests will not turn violent. Within a year or so, the new immigration enforcement system will be seen as normal, even though tens of millions of Americans will still be furious about it. The protests will die out. Tens of millions of other Americans will not be furious about it; they’ll be ebullient, witnessing the result of a president finally keeping a concrete promise he made to his voters. Despite some concerns about humanitarian treatment at the camps, they will generally be pretty popular. Legal challenges to the camps will be quickly dispatched. Many major companies that depend upon immigrant labor will be up in arms about the new policy, and many influential CEOs will work behind the scenes to try to influence the administration to reconsider its stance. The administration—especially the new vice president, J.D. Vance, who has shown immense populist disdain for many leading business figures—will ignore such pleading, as will the attorney general (Kris Kobach?). The deportations will create a labor crisis, and will cause the price of many goods (especially food) to rise. Americans will be unhappy about this, but Trump and the Republican Party will not be punished electorally, as Biden and Harris were, for the inflation that ensues.
2. The camps (along with other mechanisms) will be used to address the large, growing, and very visible problem of street homelessness affecting cities across the U.S. Thanks to the new freedom offered to cities by the recent Supreme Court decision in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, local police in cities nationwide (aided by Border Patrol, DEA, ICE, and other forces) will commence widespread sweeps of homeless encampments and arrests of unhoused individuals. People will be taken to jail for the crime of being poor. Undocumented immigrants who are arrested as part of the sweeps will immediately go to the camps. So too, though, will other unhoused people who are unable to prove their legal citizenship, which will include many people since the homeless are less likely to have personal identifying information, especially because these materials are commonly thrown away by the police when they clear out encampments and steal the possessions of the unhoused. Again, civil liberties advocates will protest, but the protests will be largely ineffectual. By and large, the sweeps will be widely popular. Street homelessness in America will decline dramatically and will become a far less visible problem in cities nationwide. This will be trumpeted as a mark of progress by local leaders, it will be celebrated by downtown business owners and gentrifiers, and (despite some concerns about individual rights) it will be greeted with more approval than disapproval by the general urban public. Those who approve of the sweeps will include many urban liberals who never in their wildest imaginations would fathom the idea of voting for Trump. Cities will look and feel cleaner and safer. It will be popular.
3. The filibuster as a legislative tactic designed to bolster the strength of the minority in the U.S. Senate will disappear. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and other leading Republicans have said publicly that they do not intend to eliminate the filibuster. They are lying. They will dump it the first time that the Democratic minority attempts to use it, which will be probably be within the first few weeks of the new session. The attempt to use the filibuster—and the elimination of the filibuster that it will provoke—could well arise in response to the nationwide abortion ban that Republicans will attempt to pass (and succeed) in the first few months of 2025.
4. There will be nationwide abortion ban, probably around 15 weeks, though it could be as early as 6 weeks (where Florida currently stands) or as late as 20-24 weeks (where many states’ current bans begin). Trump previously floated 15 weeks as an appropriate time frame, and I suspect that will be where it ultimately ends up. This will be seen as a “compromise” between the hardline right-wing Republicans and the moderate Republicans in the U.S. Senate who will vote to approve it with a bare majority, not the 60 votes currently needed. It will quickly pass the Republican House and be signed into law by the president. At the end of the presidential campaign, Trump believed that abortion was his biggest liability, and he backed off on the idea of pledging to ban abortion. But he won, and the Republicans took both houses of Congress, and they’re going to do it. Trump is singlehandedly responsible for the overturning of Roe v. Wade, and many worried that this would cause women to defect in large numbers and oppose his election. That didn’t happen. Republicans have learned that abortion is not the political liability they worried about. States, of course, will be free to impose stricter bans, and many states will continue to ban abortion altogether. In the states with the most liberal abortion laws, though, it will become harder to obtain an abortion. Enforcement of the state bans and the nationwide ban will escalate. Many, many people will be arrested for trying to obtain an extralegal abortion. There will be major protests about it. They will die down, though, and Republicans will not pay a major electoral price for this radical change to the reproductive landscape. Other restrictions on reproductive rights beyond abortion will come later.
5. The way the federal government collects revenue will shift dramatically. The administration will vastly expand the use of tariffs. In the early days of the Republic, tariffs accounted for nearly 100% of federal revenue, but that number dropped well below 20% by the beginning of the twentieth century, and has been barely above 0% for the past eighty years or so. New tariffs on imports from China and other countries will significantly raise that proportion. This will bolster federal revenues, though it will totally upend global trade and diplomacy. These tariffs, as economists have long predicted, will cause the prices of consumer goods to skyrocket immediately. They will also (in conjunction with the deportation of millions of immigrant workers) lead to a decline in the quantity and variety of goods available to American shoppers on store shelves and at the grocery store. This will upset many people. We will see a huge spike in inflation, which will place a major financial burden on American families. In this year’s election, inflation was mentioned over and over again by voters as the primary reason that they voted against Harris and the Biden administration. As I wrote in USA Today, those concerns over inflation were real, but I think Republican voters were mostly dissembling regarding the impact of inflation on their votes, and if President Trump had overseen the same level of inflation, they would still likely have voted for Trump. As such, they will remain loyal in the future, and they will support the Republican administration in spite of the financial pain that inflation will cause them. In large part, they will justify (to themselves, to the media, and to pollsters) paying higher prices as part of their civic duty to support President Trump in his efforts to fix our country. This ability to divorce inflation from electoral preference will be aided by the fact that the increase in tariffs will allow the Republican administration and Congress to reduce income tax rates for taxpayers at all income levels. The tax cuts will be generous, and they will be noticed by workers. Workers will appreciate the extra dollars in their pocket, and they will excuse the price increases caused by the tariffs. (They would not be so forgiving to Joe Biden, or any other Democrat, who engineered the same scheme. After all, they’re not actually voting based upon “economic anxiety,” any more than they were 2016, despite what they tell pollsters and the media.)
6. These first five points are some of the major moves that I think will happen (or at least begin) in the first year of the new administration. They will get the ball rolling well before 2026 midterms. There will be a lot of protests, but no widespread mass movement of resistance. No riots. Many people will be livid about these moves, but many, many people will be pleased, and not just the MAGA base. By November of 2026, the Republicans will be able to boast that they have saved American jobs by deporting “illegals,” that they have delivered major tax relief to American working families, that they have “saved” thousands of “babies” while also being “reasonable” about protecting women, that they have managed to stop China from ripping us off, and that they have cleaned up city streets across the country and made our cities safer than they’ve been in years. Many people will be persuaded by these arguments. In the 2026 midterms, Republicans will buck the trend of the incumbent party losing seats, and they will expand their majorities in the House and the Senate.
7. In doing so, they will demonstrate that they have a clearer mandate than ever to proceed with their agenda. We can expect them to ride that mandate to implement major changes to the administrative state. The Department of Education, under its new secretary (Christopher Rufo?) will dramatically shrink its role, though I doubt it will be abolished altogether. Federal oversight of public schools will all but vanish, and will devolve to the states. In tandem, federal funding for public schools will mostly disappear. State governments, facing higher educational funding burdens, will begin to unwind their public education systems over time. This process will occur first in very conservative and rural states. It will occur in conjunction with an augmented public relations campaign explaining to families and young people that education is not the essential path to adult financial success that they were previously led to believe. There are plenty of good jobs out there (in the growing Border Patrol and ICE, for instance) that don’t require much education. The Department of Education will shift its focus over time toward implementing stricter regulation over institutions of higher education, writing new rules about what can and cannot be taught and imposing major new hurdles to receiving federal funding for colleges and universities. In conjunction with the declining emphasis on education in the popular culture, which will lead to a major dropoff in college enrollment among young people, these financial burdens will cause institutions of higher education to engage in massive layoffs of faculty members, and hundreds of colleges will close across the country. Prestigious private institutions will persist, though they will offer a much more conservative curriculum aimed at training wealthy elite youth to take leading roles in the corporations and the government. But public higher education will be a hollow shell of what it was in the twentieth century. For most students who continue to want to achieve a college degree, they will attend defunded public institutions where they will receive online instruction from AI bots, a contemporary version of watered down “correspondence courses.” It won’t matter, of course. The value of a college degree will decline severely, as most companies will declare that higher education is not necessary for most of the jobs available. The technical jobs can be done by AI.
8. In the long run, the decline in education will transform the culture in major ways. To an extent, this will simply be an extension of trends already underway, but there will be new developments, too. Democrats, increasingly written off as the weird party for people with useless college degrees, will become more and more alienated from the typical American voter, and their vote share will decline. Reading as a recreational hobby will continue (and accelerate) its existing slide. As a result, many bookstores and libraries will be shuttered. Presses, publishers, academic journals, and magazines will fold in staggering numbers. Most newspapers will disappear, especially smaller local newspapers. A few major newspapers will persist. The New York Times, in particular, will remain the bulwark of liberal ideas, and while it will be assailed for its bias, its strong financial backing will make it hard to kill. Other papers, including the Washington Post and the L.A. Times, will continue to exist, but their political coverage of the activities of the Republican majority will be neutered, and they will not offer any critical editorial commentary. Nearly all news content will be delivered to consumers via social media, especially YouTube, which will be overwhelmingly dominated by hypermasculine podcasters and alt-right commentators, who, despite their uncontested dominance over voters’ eyeballs, will continue to portray their message as edgy and iconoclastic. In the absence of opposition media voices, this reorientation of the media (along with the persistent dominance of right-wing voices on talk radio) will have a major impact upon the prevalent ideological valence of the average voter. The whole country will move substantially to the right, whether they realize it is happening to them or not. The MAGA movement will not be fringe; it will be more mainstream than ever.
9. The strength of the federal government will aid tremendously in this transformation of the media. Along with causing major media owners to capitulate to the Trump agenda (as has clearly already happened with Bezos and Musk, among others), Republicans will use the FCC (once again under Ajit Pai, most likely) to chasten recalcitrant media sources. All funding for public media (PBS and NPR) will be eliminated, and public media as we know it will disappear over time. MSNBC will either cease to exist or will reposition itself in line with mainstream conservative values. CNN, hemorrhaging viewers and advertisers, will probably disappear within a decade or two. Fox News and Newsmax will continue, but they will actually be less relevant than they are today, because most eyeballs will have migrated permanently to viral conservative commentary videos on X produced by people like Nick Fuentes.
10. As mentioned above, colleges and universities will shed huge numbers of faculty. As a result, progressive ideologies, which have been cultivated primarily in the landscape of institutions of higher education, will retreat to the shrinking radical ideological fringe. You will see much less mainstream coverage of issues related to race, sexual orientation, and gender identity. Terms like “BIPOC,” “colonialism,” “anti-racism,” and “transgender” will largely disappear from public discourse, except when they are resurrected every couple of years as threatening bogeymen in conservative political ads. Democrats who believe that their party lost the 2024 election because it paid too much attention to the issues facing minoritized groups will generally be pleased with this trend. They will continue to lose elections anyway.
11. As the popular conservative mandate expands, Republicans will go after not just abortion but also contraception. Some forms of contraception, like LARCs, will be banned outright or heavily restricted. Tariffs will be used to dramatically increase the price of internationally manufactured condoms. This effort to increase fertility will coincide with a highly publicized campaign to indoctrinate people in “traditional” monogamous heterosexual sexual norms. Marriage incentives (or non-marriage disincentives) for federal benefits will expand. Acceptance of homosexuality will decline, and the weak protections offered by Obergefell could come under threat. As young men are increasingly disincentivized from attending college in order to enter the workforce, young women will increasingly be disincentivized from pursuing higher education in order to pursue marriage, motherhood, and homemaking. The ideal of the “tradwife” will move from a fringe online idea to official government policy, incentivized by new income tax deductions for families with wives who work as homemakers. Many taxpayers will love this, especially heterosexual married couples. It will be popular.
12. This migration from a “live-and-let-live” libertarianism to an aggressive moralizing mandate will be just one example of the Republican Party’s shifting relationship with the U.S. Constitution and civil liberties more broadly. In recent decades, the party has championed portions of the Constitution that prioritize civil liberties—particularly the 1st, 4th, and 10th amendments. That will change.
13. Regarding the 1st Amendment, you will see a lot less emphasis on “Freedom of Expression” from Republicans than you have seen in recent years. Conservative forces have pushed for “Freedom of Expression” largely because they have believed (rightly or wrongly) that their conservative views have been excluded, marginalized, or omitted from spaces of public discourse—especially institutions of higher education and the media. Many colleges and universities across the country, including my own, have implemented “Freedom of Expression” policies largely in response to conservative whining that their speakers were being “deplatformed” (though there was little evidence to support that idea). In reality, “Freedom of Expression” policies were designed to give radical right-wing voices carte blanche to say hateful things with few repercussions. As I recall, I was the only person on the faculty of my institution to vocally oppose the adoption of a “Freedom of Expression” policy, because I saw through the transparent craven partisanship underlying the whole endeavor. As they take control of most institutions influencing ideological trends, especially universities, you can expect those institutions to rescind those (now unnecessary) policies. More broadly, Republicans’ attitudes toward the 1st Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech—imperative when they believed their views were in the minority across the culture—will transform when they believe their views are in the majority. New restrictions on speech, targeted primarily at vocal left critics of the conservative orthodoxy, will emerge, and liberals and leftists will be punished, ostracized, and fired for the statements they make. This will be done in the interest of preserving “public safety,” a concept widely mocked and ridiculed by conservatives when left voices on campuses aimed to create “safe spaces” for vulnerable students.
14. The 10th Amendment has been used as the jurisprudential backdrop for Republicans’ “states’ rights” initiatives for a long time, particularly on the idea of returning abortion policy “back to the states.” With total control of all three branches of the federal government in the hands of far-right conservatives, we can expect a dizzying reversal on the idea of state-level autonomy. Along with the federal nationwide abortion ban, we will see federal bans on “sanctuary cities,” the overruling of state policies related to things like drug enforcement, and a reduction in state attorneys general’s powers to challenge and sue the federal government. Strict obeisance will be enforced by greater strictures regarding the disbursement of federal funds to states.
15. Going back to #5 above, the changing distribution of federal revenue sources will not reduce the federal debt. If anything, the debt will continue to grow. Republicans will not be blamed for this, as Democrats often are, and they will not face electoral consequences for it. Trump, who has a half-century-long reputation for ignoring his own debts, stiffing contractors, and escaping debt via the mechanism of bankruptcy, will attempt to do the same thing with the federal debt. Republicans in Congress will hold firm in their opposition to raising the debt ceiling, and the country will default on its debt for the first time. Trump will shrug. Most Americans will not know what that means, they will not understand how it will affect their lives as consumers, and they will not care, and Trump and his allies will not suffer electorally as a result.
16. Many, though not all, of the policies outlined above will be very popular with the voting public. Policies and campaign ads that target and restrict women and members of the LGBTQIA+ population will be quite popular with a growing and broadening interracial and cross-class coalition of conservative cisgender men, who will solidify a difficult-to-overcome voting bloc in elections to come. The Democratic Party will grow increasingly irrelevant to groups that had formerly formed the core of its voting base. Democratic minorities will shrink in both houses of Congress and in state legislatures, and Democrats will control a shrinking number of governorships nationwide. Progressive candidates will sense futility and will be less likely to try to run for office. Within another one to two decades, conservative presidents will have appointed eight of the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court, as Justice Jackson will remain the lone liberal voice on the bench.
MAGAism will prevail as American political orthodoxy for a generation or more. It will prevail because it will entrench itself in the courts and the institutions, it will dismantle progressive institutions, and it will wear out opponents. But above all else, it will prevail because—for all its failures, blunders, and atrocities—it will not become unpopular. A governing coalition of voters will find something to appreciate and enjoy in it, and it will continue on long after the 47th president leaves office.
Trump is the MAGA movement’s Lenin. We have yet to learn who will become its Stalin.

[Sky]

Караваны иммигрантов последний кусок welfare отнимают у советских иммигрантов

у меня ничего никто не отнимает. Мне не нужен велфер. Но 10М+ свежих нелегалов надо выкинуть отсюда нах .. надеюсь что это произойдет.

Что же вас так держит в Бруклине ? .. ответ, я знаю , субсидированное жилье !!! .. Это вечный плачь советских иммигранто потенциальных welfare, про то что Америка больше не та , и караваны мигрантов перетягивают на себя федеральные ресурсы, и преступность растет .. Да, все так ! .. В Штаты не иммигрируют из благополучных стран , здесь аккумулируется весь shitholе countries, лучше, не будет, не надейтесь!

[Sky]

А вот от либерального профессора социологии прогноз. Букав много и читать сложно, может кто осилит. Меня удивило что он считает что не только аборты будут запрещены, но и постепенно birth control

WHAT’S COMING
Since Tuesday, many people have taken to social media with long posts expressing their reactions to the election results, sharing their fears, and joining together in mutual dismay. As a person who makes a lot of very long social media posts, I have appreciated everyone’s willingness to write in depth about their reactions. I haven’t posted much since then, because I didn’t want my words to get in the way, and I especially did not want to compete for attention with the voices of people from marginalized groups, who are the most likely to suffer in the years to come as a result of this election.
But now that a little time has passed, I’m ready to reenter the conversation. In the wake of bad political shifts, it can be tempting—and appropriate—to respond with angry diatribes, or with humor, or with resignation. In this situation, though, I don’t think that any of those strategies will do us much good. We need to be clear-eyed about the future, understand the risks, and plan (where possible) for responding and regrouping. I don’t have a lot of optimism to offer—my view of the future is quite bleak, for reasons that I will make clear as I go on. In my view, what those of us who came out on the losing end of the election need more than anything is to be ready for what’s coming.
What’s coming is not good. I don’t think that the experience of living through the first Trump term can properly prepare us for what the next term will look like. It’s going to get much worse, and there’s very little that we’re going to be able to do stop it.
A term that gained popularity on the right over the past decade is “Trump Derangement Syndrome” (TDS), a phrase designed to minimize and mock liberals’ overblown anxieties about the harm that a Trump presidency could cause. No matter what over-the-top rhetoric Trump and his supporters used, conservatives would remind us, we did not need to worry that our society would change dramatically or that people would suffer. Much of his rhetoric was just bluster, he didn’t really mean it, and even if he did, cooler heads would prevail and institutional integrity would hold, averting the worst possible outcomes. Those who believed otherwise were “deranged” with this odd syndrome.
TDS was a real phenomenon, to some extent. Most of liberals’ worst fears did not come to pass, and in 2020 Trump lost reelection and Democrats swept into power in Congress. Yet, four years later, here we are again.
Those who speak in alarmist tones today will continue to get diagnosed with “TDS” – I’m sure this post will garner that reaction from many.
But we need to be careful, because I strongly believe that it’s different this time. You already know the reasons for that, many of which have been repeated in the media by lots of political experts. Trump has a clearer understanding of the office and the levers of power; he has already remade the Supreme Court in a way that will sanction more of his extreme behavior; he has cowed his party into submission and absolute loyalty. All of that is true.
But those experts all seem to also believe, because of his blundering, incompetence, and extremism, that the things he will do over the next four years will be unpopular, will alienate those who voted for him, and will allow the Democrats to regain power when voters sour on what Trump and the Republicans are doing.
I think that’s wrong. The reason why it’s going to be different this time is because most of what the Republican-controlled government does over the next four years is going to be very popular.
The growing popularity was already evident in the election results, where Trump earned a clear majority of the popular vote and made major inroads with nonwhite voters, especially men. All of the things that Democrats assumed would make Trump incredibly unpopular—criminal convictions, impeachments, financial improprieties, etc.—served to make him more popular among his base, and did not motivate his opponents as much as was hoped. His coalition is already bigger.
That popularity will grow. This is due in large part to the fact that many of the things that will be done will be genuinely enjoyed by a large share of the electorate. But perhaps more importantly, it’s because Trump and his movement will not be punished electorally for the negative outcomes of their own policies; they will be relatively immune from the types of thermostatic political shifts that have affected previous political coalitions.
And what that popularity ultimately boils down to is this—it’s not just the government, or our politics, that are going to shift. It’s us. Civil society is going to change. People, families, and values are going to change. You are going to change, whether you want to or not, whether you want to admit it or not. Even if you voted against it, and have resisted it vehemently in the past, and continue disapproving of it, you will change in subtle ways. You may not like it, but what you would once find shocking will not be quite as shocking, and what you once considered unthinkable will become increasingly normal, if still unpalatable. The shifts in people, values, and civil society and the shifts in our political structure will work in tandem, in dialectical fashion. Our values will be reshaped by our structures and our politics, and our structures and politics will bend in the direction of our shifting values. We who continue to vocally decry the policies that are on their way are going to become a smaller minority of the population. It’s all going to be pretty popular.
Some of what I anticipate will not come to pass, and certainly many things will come to pass that I do not anticipate. I could be wrong about some or all of this. But I genuinely don’t think so, based upon my interpretation of the president-elect’s own words, the words of his supporters and future members of his administration, the policies laid out in Project 2025, and my experience watching intense governmental conservatism in action in the state of Kansas over the past decade.
Here’s what’s coming.
1. There will be camps. They will be large. They will go up very quickly—you will initially be surprised at how quickly they’re being built. As soon as a new Attorney General, DHS Secretary, Secretary of the Interior, and a few others are confirmed by Senate—and that will happen with lightning speed—planning and construction of the camps will begin. The camps will not be secrets; they will not be hidden. They will be located on public land in major metropolitan areas across the country. The National Guard, Border Patrol, ICE, state police, local police, and private forces will all be involved in arresting people. Undocumented immigrants, of course, will be the primary targets of these raids, but many legal immigrants and some American citizens will be caught up in them, as well, especially if they don’t possess or have misplaced proper documentation of their citizenship or legal status. Proceedings will run with incredible efficiency, processing thousands of people per day. Mass deportations will begin within 2-3 months of inauguration. There will be major protests of the camps, and massive demonstrations outside some of them—most likely in preplanned “free speech zones” constructed in advance for that very purpose. With rare exceptions, the protests will not turn violent. Within a year or so, the new immigration enforcement system will be seen as normal, even though tens of millions of Americans will still be furious about it. The protests will die out. Tens of millions of other Americans will not be furious about it; they’ll be ebullient, witnessing the result of a president finally keeping a concrete promise he made to his voters. Despite some concerns about humanitarian treatment at the camps, they will generally be pretty popular. Legal challenges to the camps will be quickly dispatched. Many major companies that depend upon immigrant labor will be up in arms about the new policy, and many influential CEOs will work behind the scenes to try to influence the administration to reconsider its stance. The administration—especially the new vice president, J.D. Vance, who has shown immense populist disdain for many leading business figures—will ignore such pleading, as will the attorney general (Kris Kobach?). The deportations will create a labor crisis, and will cause the price of many goods (especially food) to rise. Americans will be unhappy about this, but Trump and the Republican Party will not be punished electorally, as Biden and Harris were, for the inflation that ensues.
2. The camps (along with other mechanisms) will be used to address the large, growing, and very visible problem of street homelessness affecting cities across the U.S. Thanks to the new freedom offered to cities by the recent Supreme Court decision in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, local police in cities nationwide (aided by Border Patrol, DEA, ICE, and other forces) will commence widespread sweeps of homeless encampments and arrests of unhoused individuals. People will be taken to jail for the crime of being poor. Undocumented immigrants who are arrested as part of the sweeps will immediately go to the camps. So too, though, will other unhoused people who are unable to prove their legal citizenship, which will include many people since the homeless are less likely to have personal identifying information, especially because these materials are commonly thrown away by the police when they clear out encampments and steal the possessions of the unhoused. Again, civil liberties advocates will protest, but the protests will be largely ineffectual. By and large, the sweeps will be widely popular. Street homelessness in America will decline dramatically and will become a far less visible problem in cities nationwide. This will be trumpeted as a mark of progress by local leaders, it will be celebrated by downtown business owners and gentrifiers, and (despite some concerns about individual rights) it will be greeted with more approval than disapproval by the general urban public. Those who approve of the sweeps will include many urban liberals who never in their wildest imaginations would fathom the idea of voting for Trump. Cities will look and feel cleaner and safer. It will be popular.
3. The filibuster as a legislative tactic designed to bolster the strength of the minority in the U.S. Senate will disappear. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and other leading Republicans have said publicly that they do not intend to eliminate the filibuster. They are lying. They will dump it the first time that the Democratic minority attempts to use it, which will be probably be within the first few weeks of the new session. The attempt to use the filibuster—and the elimination of the filibuster that it will provoke—could well arise in response to the nationwide abortion ban that Republicans will attempt to pass (and succeed) in the first few months of 2025.
4. There will be nationwide abortion ban, probably around 15 weeks, though it could be as early as 6 weeks (where Florida currently stands) or as late as 20-24 weeks (where many states’ current bans begin). Trump previously floated 15 weeks as an appropriate time frame, and I suspect that will be where it ultimately ends up. This will be seen as a “compromise” between the hardline right-wing Republicans and the moderate Republicans in the U.S. Senate who will vote to approve it with a bare majority, not the 60 votes currently needed. It will quickly pass the Republican House and be signed into law by the president. At the end of the presidential campaign, Trump believed that abortion was his biggest liability, and he backed off on the idea of pledging to ban abortion. But he won, and the Republicans took both houses of Congress, and they’re going to do it. Trump is singlehandedly responsible for the overturning of Roe v. Wade, and many worried that this would cause women to defect in large numbers and oppose his election. That didn’t happen. Republicans have learned that abortion is not the political liability they worried about. States, of course, will be free to impose stricter bans, and many states will continue to ban abortion altogether. In the states with the most liberal abortion laws, though, it will become harder to obtain an abortion. Enforcement of the state bans and the nationwide ban will escalate. Many, many people will be arrested for trying to obtain an extralegal abortion. There will be major protests about it. They will die down, though, and Republicans will not pay a major electoral price for this radical change to the reproductive landscape. Other restrictions on reproductive rights beyond abortion will come later.
5. The way the federal government collects revenue will shift dramatically. The administration will vastly expand the use of tariffs. In the early days of the Republic, tariffs accounted for nearly 100% of federal revenue, but that number dropped well below 20% by the beginning of the twentieth century, and has been barely above 0% for the past eighty years or so. New tariffs on imports from China and other countries will significantly raise that proportion. This will bolster federal revenues, though it will totally upend global trade and diplomacy. These tariffs, as economists have long predicted, will cause the prices of consumer goods to skyrocket immediately. They will also (in conjunction with the deportation of millions of immigrant workers) lead to a decline in the quantity and variety of goods available to American shoppers on store shelves and at the grocery store. This will upset many people. We will see a huge spike in inflation, which will place a major financial burden on American families. In this year’s election, inflation was mentioned over and over again by voters as the primary reason that they voted against Harris and the Biden administration. As I wrote in USA Today, those concerns over inflation were real, but I think Republican voters were mostly dissembling regarding the impact of inflation on their votes, and if President Trump had overseen the same level of inflation, they would still likely have voted for Trump. As such, they will remain loyal in the future, and they will support the Republican administration in spite of the financial pain that inflation will cause them. In large part, they will justify (to themselves, to the media, and to pollsters) paying higher prices as part of their civic duty to support President Trump in his efforts to fix our country. This ability to divorce inflation from electoral preference will be aided by the fact that the increase in tariffs will allow the Republican administration and Congress to reduce income tax rates for taxpayers at all income levels. The tax cuts will be generous, and they will be noticed by workers. Workers will appreciate the extra dollars in their pocket, and they will excuse the price increases caused by the tariffs. (They would not be so forgiving to Joe Biden, or any other Democrat, who engineered the same scheme. After all, they’re not actually voting based upon “economic anxiety,” any more than they were 2016, despite what they tell pollsters and the media.)
6. These first five points are some of the major moves that I think will happen (or at least begin) in the first year of the new administration. They will get the ball rolling well before 2026 midterms. There will be a lot of protests, but no widespread mass movement of resistance. No riots. Many people will be livid about these moves, but many, many people will be pleased, and not just the MAGA base. By November of 2026, the Republicans will be able to boast that they have saved American jobs by deporting “illegals,” that they have delivered major tax relief to American working families, that they have “saved” thousands of “babies” while also being “reasonable” about protecting women, that they have managed to stop China from ripping us off, and that they have cleaned up city streets across the country and made our cities safer than they’ve been in years. Many people will be persuaded by these arguments. In the 2026 midterms, Republicans will buck the trend of the incumbent party losing seats, and they will expand their majorities in the House and the Senate.
7. In doing so, they will demonstrate that they have a clearer mandate than ever to proceed with their agenda. We can expect them to ride that mandate to implement major changes to the administrative state. The Department of Education, under its new secretary (Christopher Rufo?) will dramatically shrink its role, though I doubt it will be abolished altogether. Federal oversight of public schools will all but vanish, and will devolve to the states. In tandem, federal funding for public schools will mostly disappear. State governments, facing higher educational funding burdens, will begin to unwind their public education systems over time. This process will occur first in very conservative and rural states. It will occur in conjunction with an augmented public relations campaign explaining to families and young people that education is not the essential path to adult financial success that they were previously led to believe. There are plenty of good jobs out there (in the growing Border Patrol and ICE, for instance) that don’t require much education. The Department of Education will shift its focus over time toward implementing stricter regulation over institutions of higher education, writing new rules about what can and cannot be taught and imposing major new hurdles to receiving federal funding for colleges and universities. In conjunction with the declining emphasis on education in the popular culture, which will lead to a major dropoff in college enrollment among young people, these financial burdens will cause institutions of higher education to engage in massive layoffs of faculty members, and hundreds of colleges will close across the country. Prestigious private institutions will persist, though they will offer a much more conservative curriculum aimed at training wealthy elite youth to take leading roles in the corporations and the government. But public higher education will be a hollow shell of what it was in the twentieth century. For most students who continue to want to achieve a college degree, they will attend defunded public institutions where they will receive online instruction from AI bots, a contemporary version of watered down “correspondence courses.” It won’t matter, of course. The value of a college degree will decline severely, as most companies will declare that higher education is not necessary for most of the jobs available. The technical jobs can be done by AI.
8. In the long run, the decline in education will transform the culture in major ways. To an extent, this will simply be an extension of trends already underway, but there will be new developments, too. Democrats, increasingly written off as the weird party for people with useless college degrees, will become more and more alienated from the typical American voter, and their vote share will decline. Reading as a recreational hobby will continue (and accelerate) its existing slide. As a result, many bookstores and libraries will be shuttered. Presses, publishers, academic journals, and magazines will fold in staggering numbers. Most newspapers will disappear, especially smaller local newspapers. A few major newspapers will persist. The New York Times, in particular, will remain the bulwark of liberal ideas, and while it will be assailed for its bias, its strong financial backing will make it hard to kill. Other papers, including the Washington Post and the L.A. Times, will continue to exist, but their political coverage of the activities of the Republican majority will be neutered, and they will not offer any critical editorial commentary. Nearly all news content will be delivered to consumers via social media, especially YouTube, which will be overwhelmingly dominated by hypermasculine podcasters and alt-right commentators, who, despite their uncontested dominance over voters’ eyeballs, will continue to portray their message as edgy and iconoclastic. In the absence of opposition media voices, this reorientation of the media (along with the persistent dominance of right-wing voices on talk radio) will have a major impact upon the prevalent ideological valence of the average voter. The whole country will move substantially to the right, whether they realize it is happening to them or not. The MAGA movement will not be fringe; it will be more mainstream than ever.
9. The strength of the federal government will aid tremendously in this transformation of the media. Along with causing major media owners to capitulate to the Trump agenda (as has clearly already happened with Bezos and Musk, among others), Republicans will use the FCC (once again under Ajit Pai, most likely) to chasten recalcitrant media sources. All funding for public media (PBS and NPR) will be eliminated, and public media as we know it will disappear over time. MSNBC will either cease to exist or will reposition itself in line with mainstream conservative values. CNN, hemorrhaging viewers and advertisers, will probably disappear within a decade or two. Fox News and Newsmax will continue, but they will actually be less relevant than they are today, because most eyeballs will have migrated permanently to viral conservative commentary videos on X produced by people like Nick Fuentes.
10. As mentioned above, colleges and universities will shed huge numbers of faculty. As a result, progressive ideologies, which have been cultivated primarily in the landscape of institutions of higher education, will retreat to the shrinking radical ideological fringe. You will see much less mainstream coverage of issues related to race, sexual orientation, and gender identity. Terms like “BIPOC,” “colonialism,” “anti-racism,” and “transgender” will largely disappear from public discourse, except when they are resurrected every couple of years as threatening bogeymen in conservative political ads. Democrats who believe that their party lost the 2024 election because it paid too much attention to the issues facing minoritized groups will generally be pleased with this trend. They will continue to lose elections anyway.
11. As the popular conservative mandate expands, Republicans will go after not just abortion but also contraception. Some forms of contraception, like LARCs, will be banned outright or heavily restricted. Tariffs will be used to dramatically increase the price of internationally manufactured condoms. This effort to increase fertility will coincide with a highly publicized campaign to indoctrinate people in “traditional” monogamous heterosexual sexual norms. Marriage incentives (or non-marriage disincentives) for federal benefits will expand. Acceptance of homosexuality will decline, and the weak protections offered by Obergefell could come under threat. As young men are increasingly disincentivized from attending college in order to enter the workforce, young women will increasingly be disincentivized from pursuing higher education in order to pursue marriage, motherhood, and homemaking. The ideal of the “tradwife” will move from a fringe online idea to official government policy, incentivized by new income tax deductions for families with wives who work as homemakers. Many taxpayers will love this, especially heterosexual married couples. It will be popular.
12. This migration from a “live-and-let-live” libertarianism to an aggressive moralizing mandate will be just one example of the Republican Party’s shifting relationship with the U.S. Constitution and civil liberties more broadly. In recent decades, the party has championed portions of the Constitution that prioritize civil liberties—particularly the 1st, 4th, and 10th amendments. That will change.
13. Regarding the 1st Amendment, you will see a lot less emphasis on “Freedom of Expression” from Republicans than you have seen in recent years. Conservative forces have pushed for “Freedom of Expression” largely because they have believed (rightly or wrongly) that their conservative views have been excluded, marginalized, or omitted from spaces of public discourse—especially institutions of higher education and the media. Many colleges and universities across the country, including my own, have implemented “Freedom of Expression” policies largely in response to conservative whining that their speakers were being “deplatformed” (though there was little evidence to support that idea). In reality, “Freedom of Expression” policies were designed to give radical right-wing voices carte blanche to say hateful things with few repercussions. As I recall, I was the only person on the faculty of my institution to vocally oppose the adoption of a “Freedom of Expression” policy, because I saw through the transparent craven partisanship underlying the whole endeavor. As they take control of most institutions influencing ideological trends, especially universities, you can expect those institutions to rescind those (now unnecessary) policies. More broadly, Republicans’ attitudes toward the 1st Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech—imperative when they believed their views were in the minority across the culture—will transform when they believe their views are in the majority. New restrictions on speech, targeted primarily at vocal left critics of the conservative orthodoxy, will emerge, and liberals and leftists will be punished, ostracized, and fired for the statements they make. This will be done in the interest of preserving “public safety,” a concept widely mocked and ridiculed by conservatives when left voices on campuses aimed to create “safe spaces” for vulnerable students.
14. The 10th Amendment has been used as the jurisprudential backdrop for Republicans’ “states’ rights” initiatives for a long time, particularly on the idea of returning abortion policy “back to the states.” With total control of all three branches of the federal government in the hands of far-right conservatives, we can expect a dizzying reversal on the idea of state-level autonomy. Along with the federal nationwide abortion ban, we will see federal bans on “sanctuary cities,” the overruling of state policies related to things like drug enforcement, and a reduction in state attorneys general’s powers to challenge and sue the federal government. Strict obeisance will be enforced by greater strictures regarding the disbursement of federal funds to states.
15. Going back to #5 above, the changing distribution of federal revenue sources will not reduce the federal debt. If anything, the debt will continue to grow. Republicans will not be blamed for this, as Democrats often are, and they will not face electoral consequences for it. Trump, who has a half-century-long reputation for ignoring his own debts, stiffing contractors, and escaping debt via the mechanism of bankruptcy, will attempt to do the same thing with the federal debt. Republicans in Congress will hold firm in their opposition to raising the debt ceiling, and the country will default on its debt for the first time. Trump will shrug. Most Americans will not know what that means, they will not understand how it will affect their lives as consumers, and they will not care, and Trump and his allies will not suffer electorally as a result.
16. Many, though not all, of the policies outlined above will be very popular with the voting public. Policies and campaign ads that target and restrict women and members of the LGBTQIA+ population will be quite popular with a growing and broadening interracial and cross-class coalition of conservative cisgender men, who will solidify a difficult-to-overcome voting bloc in elections to come. The Democratic Party will grow increasingly irrelevant to groups that had formerly formed the core of its voting base. Democratic minorities will shrink in both houses of Congress and in state legislatures, and Democrats will control a shrinking number of governorships nationwide. Progressive candidates will sense futility and will be less likely to try to run for office. Within another one to two decades, conservative presidents will have appointed eight of the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court, as Justice Jackson will remain the lone liberal voice on the bench.
MAGAism will prevail as American political orthodoxy for a generation or more. It will prevail because it will entrench itself in the courts and the institutions, it will dismantle progressive institutions, and it will wear out opponents. But above all else, it will prevail because—for all its failures, blunders, and atrocities—it will not become unpopular. A governing coalition of voters will find something to appreciate and enjoy in it, and it will continue on long after the 47th president leaves office.
Trump is the MAGA movement’s Lenin. We have yet to learn who will become its Stalin.

Штатные конституции убирают из голосования натурализованных граждан , оставляя только American born для голосования

[ЭниУэй]

А вот от либерального профессора социологии прогноз. Букав много и читать сложно, может кто осилит. Меня удивило что он считает что не только аборты будут запрещены, но и постепенно birth control

As of mid-2024, at least eight states have proposed or enacted legislation that aims to make contraception less accessible. Some of these efforts include:
Indiana
A law that only allows subdermal contraceptives for Medicaid recipients, based on the false claim that IUDs cause abortions

Oklahoma
A bill that would restrict both abortion and contraception, including IUDs and emergency contraception

Louisiana
A House committee passed a bill that interprets "human personhood" to begin at fertilization, which could potentially outlaw birth control like Plan B and IUDs

Idaho
A state representative held hearings on legislation that could ban emergency contraceptives and IUDs

Other ways states have restricted access to birth control include:

Limiting Medicaid coverage: Some states have attempted to exclude certain contraceptive methods from their state Medicaid programs

Allowing health care providers to refuse services: Some states allow health care providers to refuse to provide services related to contraception

Allowing pharmacists to refuse to dispense contraceptives: Some states allow pharmacists to refuse to dispense contraceptives

A 2022 Guttmacher Institute report found that birth control prescriptions declined in states that had abortion bans.

[Fur_Elise]

Пока я только вижу что страховые компании с большим удовольствием платят за противозачаточные, потому что это дешевле чем платить за роды и все что после них

[JamesBond]

у меня ничего никто не отнимает. Мне не нужен велфер. Но 10М+ свежих нелегалов надо выкинуть отсюда нах .. надеюсь что это произойдет.

Что же вас так держит в Бруклине ? .. ответ, я знаю , субсидированное жилье !!! .. ...

1) я не живу в Бруклине
2) у меня никогда не было субсидированного жилья. Я плачу, и очень много за своё жильё. Я первую квартиру купил в 2005.

Оставьте свои бредовые фантазии.

[Женя Стоунер]

А вот от либерального профессора социологии прогноз. Букав много и читать сложно, может кто осилит. Меня удивило что он считает что ...

Неспособность лаконично выражаться говорит либо о неуважении к собеседнику либо о неорганизованности мыслей и непонимании темы. В данном случае, это вообще rant , долбень обзавелся хрустальным шаром и видит в нем кино и немцев, простите, нацистов.

Уж лучше "перечесть женитьбу Фигаро"(ц), чем этот кг/ам.

[Sky]

Если бы Трамп озвучил громко о поправках в Constitution of the United States право голосовать ТОЛЬКО U.S. citizen by birth , я бы с большим удовольствием проголосовала бы за этот amendment

[Fur_Elise]

Умиляет, что люди ведут речь об abortion ban при том что аборты разрешены до 6-15-22 whatever недель. Бан это когда совсем не разрешено. А если дается аж 15-22 недели чтобы решить вопрос, то какой же это "бан"? 6 маловато правда.

[Sky]

Что же вас так держит в Бруклине ? .. ответ, я знаю , субсидированное жилье !!! .. ...

1) я не живу в Бруклине
2) у меня никогда не было субсидированного жилья. Я плачу, и очень много за своё жильё. Я первую квартиру купил в 2005.

Оставьте свои бредовые фантазии.

Тогда в чем проблема, переехать в другой штат , где только белые традиционные Yankees?

[Sky]

Умиляет, что люди ведут речь об abortion ban при том что аборты разрешены до 6-15-22 whatever недель. Бан это когда совсем не разрешено. А если дается аж 15-22 недели чтобы решить вопрос, то какой же это "бан"? 6 маловато правда.

Вас это персонально затронуло ? А, Как насчет роста welfare dependency в США ? И национального долга ?

[Fur_Elise]

Если бы Трамп озвучил громко о поправках в Constitution of the United States право голосовать ТОЛЬКО U.S. citizen by birth , я бы с большим удовольствием проголосовала бы за этот amendment

Я не уверена что вас пригласили бы принять участие в голосовании за эту поправку

[JamesBond]

1) я не живу в Бруклине
2) у меня никогда не было субсидированного жилья. Я плачу, и очень много за своё жильё. Я первую квартиру купил в 2005.

Оставьте свои бредовые фантазии.

Тогда в чем проблема, переехать в другой штат , где только белые традиционные Yankees?

мне не надо никуда переезжать. У меня всё хорошо. Меня не беспокоят небелые - я сам не очень белый. Я поддерживаю легальную иммиграцию.

Эта администрация сюда пустила 10М случайных людей из нищих стран. Их надо депортировать нах...
End of story

[Sky]

Если бы Трамп озвучил громко о поправках в Constitution of the United States право голосовать ТОЛЬКО U.S. citizen by birth , я бы с большим удовольствием проголосовала бы за этот amendment

Я не уверена что вас пригласили бы принять участие в голосовании за эту поправку

В нашем штате проголосовали за эту поправку, и меня радует этот тренд

[Sky]

Тогда в чем проблема, переехать в другой штат , где только белые традиционные Yankees?

мне не надо никуда переезжать. У меня всё хорошо. Меня не беспокоят небелые - я сам не очень белый. Я поддерживаю легальную иммиграцию.

Эта администрация сюда пустила 10М случайных людей из нищих стран. Их надо депортировать нах...
End of story

Вас тоже , чтобы не паразитировали

[beholder]

Если бы Трамп озвучил громко о поправках в Constitution of the United States право голосовать ТОЛЬКО U.S. citizen by birth , я бы с большим удовольствием проголосовала бы за этот amendment

Я и не сомневался, ведь голос анкор-бейби для таких намного весомее голоса здравомыслящего взрослого человека, который лучше большинства американцев знает законы и политическую систему США.

[Женя Стоунер]

я сам не очень белый

Это по сравнению с простыней?

[JamesBond]

я сам не очень белый

Это по сравнению с простыней?

Простыни бывают разного цвета. Об этом даже в Бакхеде знают.