[kapone]

> Yeah, because he was guarding them against the current administration abusing the Justice Department to go after them

Ha ha. They (democrats overall) need to look inwards for that.

> Same reason he pardoned Fauci and others. Fauci screwed up our country so bad, it aint even funny. The fact that he needed a PRE-EMPTIVE (i.e. he wasn't even accused of anything at the time) pardon says it all. And the fact that Biden gave it to him, says everything there is to say about Biden.

> And from what we've seen, he was right to do so. Not even close.

> Although, they've been angling to declare his pardons void so they can go after whoever they wish. They should.

- Look at what Biden did to the southern border. And look at it now. - Look at almost any "democrat" run major city. Any. Then look at the crime rates and cost of living. - And the recent farce that was this "No Kings" crap...

Trump isn't perfect. Far from it. He's got major flaws, both in character and execution. However, name any major policy initiative that he's undertaken that is bad for the "country". As a whole.

[travisjungroth]

> However, name any major policy initiative that he's undertaken that is bad for the "country". As a whole.

This is a ridiculous standard. Each of his policies (individually) only hurting some Americans is not a flex.

[kapone]

Everything, always hurts “someone”. There is no universal good.

The totality is what matters, not you, not me.

[jaapz]

> However, name any major policy initiative that he's undertaken that is bad for the "country".

His foreign policy means even the EU is now looking inward more because we simply don't trust you guys anymore. Thanks, we were depending on you guys too much anyway! It will take a while before we're weened off of you for sure, but your global influence will shrink tremendously thanks to your current president's untrustwortiness.

In dutch we have a saying which is roughly translated as "Trust comes on foot, and leaves by horse"

[beej71]

> However, name any major policy initiative that he's undertaken that is bad for the "country". As a whole.

Any? His energy policy.

I have plenty more.

[kapone]

What about it? What’s wrong with it?

Oil prices are down, we now produce more oil than anybody else, and enjoy low energy prices domestically.

Where’s the problem?

[triceratops]

Electricity prices are up. The administration is cancelling solar and wind projects because of ideology.

[kapone]

Electricity prices are up everywhere. We're still way lower than many many places. There's many parts of the US (take a wild guess where all the data centers are going...) where electric rates are <$.10/kwh.

Now compare that to...

Yes, solar and wind projects are being canceled, and yes, there may be an element of ideology involved, but the reality also is that the math aint working.

If the math worked, Europe's energy prices wouldn't be where they are now, given the commitment they've made to renewables. I'd much rather see a national focus on nuclear, which is as clean as any other form of energy, and to a degree that is happening now.

[triceratops]

Lies and more lies. You've fallen for them too.

The math is clear - solar + batteries is the cheapest source of electricity. China isn't generating 80% of all new electricity with solar because they want to be green above all else.

> Europe's energy prices wouldn't be where they are now, given the commitment they've made to renewables

Again a tired old lie. Europe is a big place, just like the US. Some countries have high prices and some countries don't.

Be better informed. Stop lying.

[amanaplanacanal]

I guess we are pretending that climate change isn't real now.

[kapone]

Whether it is or isn't is not the point. A national energy policy has to work for its people first. If it's not working it needs to be changed.

And I guess the two countries (combined) that have almost 3B people don't believe in climate change either? Because if they did...

[beej71]

I agree it has to put the people first, just like China is doing. And if you want to get on the climate change soapbox, it's too late. The US produces more global warming emissions per capita than any other country, and China's not going to catch up.

[beej71]

The US has been a top, if not the top, producer and exporter of oil for some time. Trump's not particularly involved in that above and beyond using it as a campaign slogan.

The problem is that the rest of the world is very actively moving on, led by China. A great many oil importing countries reduced their imports last year. China deploys more solar in 6 months than the US has deployed ever and is distributing this technology to the rest of the world far cheaper than they can bring it here. The US had a program to get 1000 new auto chargers installed. China installed 100,000. People are simply unaware of the sheer scale of the Chinese juggernaut. They think that since we're ahead now (questionable) and we're going 95 MPH, we'll always be ahead. They don't realize that China is going 250 and we're getting passed.

Trump would do well for the country to plan ahead JUST A LITTLE BIT.

But as Bolton said, it's unclear if Trump knows the difference between his personal interest and the national interest, or if he's even aware there is a national interest.

[lovich]

We were producing more oil than anyone else prior to Trump coming in. We’ve been posting ATHs on that front for years every year

[kapone]

I know, and yet...we were draining the SPR for some odd reason. Why's that?

[ImPostingOnHN]

Now we're not, and yet, we're selling pardons for bribes. Why's that?

[lovich]

Because the energy market has more inputs than oil and that was a lever used to keep gas prices specifically stable.

We already stopped that a while ago so I don’t know why you’re referencing it other than the blatant partisanship you’re showing across the thread.

What level of evidence would you need to accept that this admin had done something negative?

[Zigurd]

Easy: what passes for diplomacy has been so awful that nobody wants to buy weapons from us anymore, nor do they value our treaty commitments. Oh the irony of proposing to meet in Budapest.

[kapone]

Buy weapons from us?? That’s your barometer?

And they are not “our” treaty commitments. Treaties by definition involve more than one party.

But out of curiosity, what commitments are talking here? Talking in abstracts is meaningless.

[Hikikomori]

>Trump isn't perfect. Far from it. He's got major flaws, both in character and execution. However, name any major policy initiative that he's undertaken that is bad for the "country". As a whole.

They're usually not that bad for his billionaire grifter buddies, I'll give you that.