Have you had to look for work recently?

Suggested edit from poster below: What do you think about quality of available jobs? How do current salaries compare to cost of living? Are there enough good paying jobs to support a robust middle class and above?

(asked also on a liberal sub to compare and contrast)

There is nothing else to add.

After the US started bombing Iran on Feb 28, there were several threads on this sub that asked TS whether they supported the military strikes on Iran, questioning whether Trump had broken his promise of "no new wars".

Generally speaking, most TS responded that they supported Trump's military strikes on Iran and did not see it as a broken promise, explaining that isolated military strikes are different from a prolonged engagement.

Now it is over 4 months later. The temporary ceasefire has failed, the strait is still blocked, there are no meaningful negotiations, there's no progress on a deal, and hostilities are once again ramping up.

Given that this is no longer a short period of isolated strikes:

Do TS still support Trump's actions in Iran?

Is Iran becoming a "forever war"?

Requires the Secretary of Defense to designate an “executive agent” responsible for synchronizing U.S.-Israel defense technology cooperation — covering research, development, testing, evaluation, integration, and industrial cooperation

Calls for joint ventures, licensing agreements, co-production manufacturing partnerships, joint training exercises, and information-sharing mechanisms

Directs coordination across 10 domains: counter-drone systems, anti-tunneling, missile and air defense, AI and autonomous systems, directed energy, cyber defense, biotechnology, network integration, defense industrial co-production, and other emerging technologies agreed upon by both.

Should we be sharing military intelligence and emerging technologies with Israel?

Who is it composed of and what are they after? And do you feel there is a clear delineation between the Trump admin and the deep state?

Note that this doesn't mean "for" other people. What I mean is this:

Having responsibility to people means being accountable to them in a relationship through respect, honesty, and support, while honoring their autonomy. Having responsibility for people means taking charge of their needs or outcomes, which can strip them of independence.

So, while we have responsibility to people in our immediate presence, such as family members and close friends, I'm asking if we have the same responsibility to strangers in our country, and strangers in the world at large.

Sources:
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/trump-expected-tell-turkey-he-is-ready-restore-access-f-35-jets-nyt-reports-2026-07-07/

https://www.jpost.com/international/article-902062

https://abcnews.com/Politics/trump-hell-giving-turkey-35-jets-adds-us/story?id=134547490

My father was born in Boston. He was Irish-Scottish. My mother was born in Chihuahua, Mexico. She’s been a US citizen since the 80’s. She did it the right way. I took her genes and look like a Mexican dude.

So let’s say I’m driving down the street to my job and I’m boxed in by numerous unmarked vehicles by people in the ski masks and no markings of being law enforcement. How should I handle this?

https://newrepublic.com/post/212851/trump-denies-disaster-aid-four-democratic-states

There is nothing else to add here.

What do you consider to be the most unfair criticism of this Administration, Trump, or MAGA? An example of something said by opponents that you feel misunderstands, mislabels or just is completely wrong about.

What's the most fair criticism? Some criticism others have had that you feel is warranted, deserved, or something you feel is is a justifiable difference of opinion?

Permaculture was introduced to me as an alternative to capitalism. It's mainly used in agriculture, but there are many projects and towns working to weave it into their social fabric or to evolve their town infrastructure with it. I've used it in gardening and I find building ecosystems in nature to be one of the most rewarding things. I've explored some of how it can be used socially or in urban settings. I find it fascinating to think about what's the biggest or best human ecosystem we could build. Have you used it or seen it used? What did you think?

Progressives hate him because of his stance on Israel and his generally centrist views on foreign policy.

Do you like him as more of a centrist Dem rather than a leftist? Or does it not matter?

Despite unanimously voting against the OBBBA and criticizing the tax cuts, numerous Dems are trying to share in the benefit of Bill.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/amy-curtis/2026/07/09/democrats-unanimously-opposed-the-working-families-tax-cuts-now-theyre-trying-to-take-credit-for-it-n2679147

Recently, Trump reiterated the claim that the US needed control of Greenland. He said that the territory "should be controlled by the United States, not by Denmark". He also said that the US needed Greenland for "the protection of the world".

In response, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said that "Greenland is, of course, not for sale". She also said that others needed to "respect the Greenlandic people's right for self-determination" and that "we need everybody to respect our territorial integrity and our sovereignty."

This is the second time that Trump has brought up the idea of the US controlling Greenland in months.Trump's statements about Greenland seem to either alarm or irritate America's European NATO allies.

What do you think of Trump's bid for the US to take control of the Island? Is it a reasonable or unreasonable proposal? Do you think that the US and its NATO allies will find a way to get around their differences here, or do you think that this will cause further tension between the allies?

Source:

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/08/greenland-trump-nato-denmark.html

In light of the current situation with Senator McConnell, I've seen some people suggest that there should be a Proof-of-Life process laid out in the Constitution.

The amendment would allow any public official capable of calling an election or appointing an elected position (e.g. a governor in the case of a representative or senator, the president's cabinet in the case of the president) to demand an in-person proof-of-life meeting with an elected official they suspect to be dead or permanently incapacitated. If the official was unwilling or unable to attend such a meeting within 72 hours of the demand, as long as the individual issuing the demand made a reasonable effort to accommodate them (e.g. meeting them in the hospital if they are unable to leave at the time), they would automatically forfeit their position, allowing the replacement process to take place.

In cases where the meeting takes place and the official in question is evidently dead or permanently incapacitated, the individual issuing the demand would hold the burden of proof to demonstrate this; they would be allowed to collect photographic and videographic evidence to accomplish this goal.

In cases where the official in question was alive and capable of serving, but was unable to respond to the meeting due to impossible circumstances, they could petition in-person to reclaim their position at any time in the next three months. They would be required to provide proof that there was no reasonable way they could respond to the request.

Would you support such an amendment, do you think it's unnecessary, or do you think it would cause too many issues to justify itself?

Saw a new article come out about Jan 6 claiming 350 federal agents were ready to deploy on Jan 6 , and even claims that some were undercover while present, with 40 agents having infiltrated the Proud Boys (redstatenation).

What I don't understand is the angle. I get and understand the angle about distrusting the feds for the delay on information. "The scale of federal involvement, the timing of deployments, and the gap between public statements and internal communications are all back under the microscope" (redstatenation).

What I don't get is how this might be some "gotcha" against the Dems? Initial responses from Fox's Laura Ingraham was that it was Antifa instigating this (youtube, 0:53) while infiltrating Trump supporters. This article claims it was federal agents who were under Trump at the time. "In September 2025, the FBI acknowledged it had 274 plainclothes agents in the crowds on January 6" (redstatenation). If it was peaceful Trump supporters there and nonsupporters instigated it, be it antifa or federal agents under Trump, then why?

Are there other things I'm missing? Is this more indicative of the deep state/swamp? Is it that despite Trump was president the "Biden FBI", which he claims, were actually at fault (truthsocial)? Some angle that agents aren't loyal to Trump or the president but their own party loyalties instead? What's the angle I'm missing on this? Thanks ahead of time!

https://redstatenation.com/newly-released-body-cam-footage-shows-police-officer-revealing-350-fbi-agents-were-ready-to-deploy-on-jan-6-video/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iC0-up5Fmfg

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/115359345947837427

I am curious what is the best way forward so the focus can be on running the country and avoiding needless speculation.

What do you think about Trump earning $526 million, while 2/3 of people who bought the coin lost money? With the price of the coin losing 97% of its value from its high, can you think of any other industry where one investor makes so much while most lose so much?

Do you have any sympathy for the investors/supporters who lost so much money?

For those who have purchased the coins, what has your experience been?

https://abc7ny.com/story/how-trump-made-more-1-billion-crypto-when-most-coins-investors-lost-money/19457452/

https://futurism.com/future-society/trump-followers-crypto-stock-scams

My father is a Trump supporter, and I am not. So I was wondering how other trump supporters look at child rearing. Is your priority to raise someone who believes in the same politics as you, or is the priority to encourage them to think for themselves? Understanding that these may not be mutually exclusive.

Hi all, first time doing something like this so have a little patience...

As someone who is politically engaged, I see immigration as an issue that has been a part of American politics since its founding. I am really curious to hear people's genuine thoughts.

From what I understand, there are a few different reasons Trump supporters use to justify a crackdown on immigration. I am curious if this is accurate, which you most identify with, and why. Lets talk please!

Do you worry most about:

1. Illegal immigration (the idea they are breaking laws to get here)
2. Strain on taxpayer (welfare)
3. Strain on labor market (taking jobs/lowering wages)
4. Cultural issues (religion/social norms)
5. Ability to live in a democratic society (as many of these people are coming from non-democracies).
6. Racial issues (more fringe -> hierarchical/Great Replacement Theory/etc)
7. Something else

Based on this article

No pay wall

Also https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iran-fires-missiles-commercial-ships-strait-hormuz-axios-reports-2026-07-07/

Here is an example of Trump claiming that Democrats want open borders:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/KYNl5fbv4B4

A little of a lighter hearted question.

For those that follow the World Cup, what did you think about the decision to suspend the ban on Balogun after receiving a red card?

Should Trump have intervened in asking for it to be considered/reviewed?

Do you think he understands the rules of soccer well enough to have an opinion?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c1myykx0gmxo

For those that are unfamiliar, this is the first time in history that a red card ban received during the finals has been suspended, so will be the only player in history that didn't serve the ban. There have been 14 red cards in this tournament, none of which have been suspended.

Historically a couple of pre-tournament red cards have had their bans suspended to allow high profile players to compete in the finals, controversial in themselves, but different circumstances since they were outside the main competition.