WyIted

You should seek treatment or hand yourself in.

Does the past exist?

Does the future exist?

Do abstractions exist?

Do thoughts exist?

If something will never be observed, does it exist?

If you have heard that something has been observed, but never observe it yourself, does it exist?

I guess I am going to catch the AIDS virus tonight.

There is nothing wrong with being closeted or not “out” about your identities to everyone in your life!

Interesting, can you explain why you're townreading me (implicitly at least via voting with me)?

So I’m reading this shit more and I’m thinking “Yo, what the fuck is this thread?”

Idk what needs to be done but take a look please

VTL Wylted for being gay

During President Joe Biden's first two years in office, congressional Democrats supported his policy positions an average of 98% of the time in the Senate and 100% in the House. Senate Republicans opposed him about 94% of the time, while House Republicans opposed his positions at a similar rate of 97%. These figures come from FiveThirtyEight's analysis of congressional voting records.

This data illustrates strong party-line voting during Biden's presidency, with Democratic lawmakers largely unified in support of his agenda. Notable exceptions, such as Senator Joe Manchin and Senator Kyrsten Sinema, often drew attention for challenging specific parts of Biden's policies, especially around the filibuster or spending, but they still aligned with Biden's overall positions in most votes.

So I think that it is more of a case of what will the Republicans do to hold on to power

It really highlights the asymmetry of American politics this past election. When the left was on the attack, they would attack the candidate himself. When the right is on the attack, they get to attack every stupid thing anyone on the left has ever done regardless of whether the candidate herself bought into any of it or whether the issue at hand even has anything at all to do with politics.

The advantages are straightforward. In real life, if a Senator was elected on a moderate conservative Christian platform to a 6-year term and then was videotaped engaging in kinky master-slave roleplay with his black boyfriend, on day 1 of office, then the voters who put him there would have to wait 6 years to remove him

The Illuminati? Seriously bro, what are you, 10? And who's in charge, Kanye and Taylor Swift?

So a delusional conspiracy theory, that's your big reason?

The word "cars" obviously includes all cars, per law of identity, so it would be absurd to say that some cars arent cars. Its complicated.

Oh so you made this about race as if stupid white people dont exist. Thats great

And that’s a helluva claim to throw in there, are you about to contingent me to death? Because… not necessarily lol.

You seem to have misunderstood. You have already investigated, and there is not a single thing that suggests the presence of any kind of hoofed creature,

Lets say that you are a smart person,

so you make food supplies which include sugar, oil, flour, wheat, chocolate... the stuff which is mostly cheap or desirable, lasts long and contains plenty of calories, useful as supplies in both nuclear war and to counter constantly rising food prices by buying plenty of food before it becomes more expensive.

Then the problem appears.

A stupid person appears, who made no supplies but enjoyed spending his money on lots of stuff instead of securing his future, then a nuclear war happens, and he is left without any food.

Lets look at how stupid person thinks.

Stupid person thinks: "I was stupid and didnt care about my future despite plenty of warnings, but I shouldnt be punished for my bad actions. Oh look, that guy has food and he should share it with me."

Lets look at the complete situation now.

A smart person worked to secure his future to have food, while stupid person enjoyed in the moment, but now smart person must share food with stupid person, so stupid person actually has secured future all while fully enjoying present.

Such is Tao, where stupid person ends up being the smartest.

Finally, you’re enjoying a hot cup of joe when your 8 year old runs into the room and says that he saw a unicorn outside. When you go to its supposed location, there is no trace of anything. 

Would you even entertain the thought that there’s a unicorn in your backyard?

Donald Trump’s foreign policy approach, often referred to as "America First," was marked by a blend of direct diplomacy, economic leverage, and unconventional tactics. While controversial, there are arguments supporting its effectiveness in achieving certain strategic objectives, particularly in fostering a dialogue with North Korea.

Trump's Approach to Foreign Policy

Trump’s foreign policy was rooted in pragmatism over ideology, focusing on securing deals that he perceived as beneficial to U.S. interests. His strategy often involved:

• Challenging Established Norms: Breaking with traditional diplomatic protocols to pursue bold, direct engagement.
  
• Economic Leverage: Using tariffs and sanctions as tools to pressure adversaries and allies alike to negotiate favorable terms.
  
• Reducing U.S. Military Commitments Abroad: Emphasizing the need for allies to shoulder more defense responsibilities.
  

These principles were evident in his dealings with North Korea, which represented one of the most significant diplomatic gambles of his presidency.

North Korea: A Case Study

Trump’s approach to North Korea marked a dramatic shift from previous administrations, which largely relied on multilateral pressure and indirect communication to address the country's nuclear ambitions. By engaging directly with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, Trump aimed to defuse tensions and open the door to denuclearization.

De-escalating Tensions

• Pre-Trump Era: Relations between the U.S. and North Korea were at a historic low, with escalating missile tests by North Korea and heightened military rhetoric. The Obama administration’s policy of "strategic patience" had not succeeded in curbing Pyongyang's nuclear development.
  
• Early Trump Administration: Initial exchanges between Trump and Kim were hostile, with Trump referring to Kim as "Little Rocket Man" and North Korea threatening U.S. territories. However, Trump shifted gears toward diplomacy in 2018.
  

Historic Summits

• Singapore Summit (2018): Trump became the first sitting U.S. president to meet with a North Korean leader. The meeting yielded a joint statement where North Korea committed to work toward denuclearization, albeit without detailed timelines or enforcement mechanisms.
  
• Hanoi Summit (2019): Though this summit ended without a deal, it underscored Trump's willingness to negotiate directly and avoid escalating military conflict.
  
• DMZ Meeting (2019): Trump made history again by stepping into North Korea, symbolizing a personal commitment to diplomacy.
  

Concrete Outcomes

1. Reduction in Hostilities: While complete denuclearization was not achieved, North Korea paused its nuclear tests and long-range missile launches during much of Trump’s tenure.
   
2. Humanitarian Gains: The return of American hostages and the remains of U.S. soldiers from the Korean War were significant humanitarian achievements.
   
3. Dialogue over Isolation: Trump's willingness to engage directly with Kim Jong-un reduced the immediate risk of war and maintained open communication channels, a departure from the previously stagnant relationship.
   

Broader Impacts

1. Breaking the Cycle of Escalation: By meeting Kim without preconditions, Trump signaled a willingness to negotiate in unconventional ways, breaking the cycle of threats and counter-threats.
   
2. Strengthened U.S. Leverage in the Region: Trump’s diplomacy put pressure on China to enforce sanctions on North Korea, indirectly involving Beijing in resolving the crisis.
   
3. Setting a Precedent for Engagement: While critics argued that Trump legitimized Kim’s regime, his approach demonstrated that diplomacy could reduce immediate risks, paving the way for future administrations to build on his efforts.
   

Criticism and Defense

Critics argue that Trump’s strategy lacked follow-through, as North Korea continued to develop its nuclear capabilities covertly. However, defenders assert that his efforts:

• Prevented a potential military conflict.
  
• Established a foundation for future dialogue.
  
• Highlighted the importance of a bold, direct approach in breaking diplomatic deadlocks.
  

Conclusion

Trump’s foreign policy, particularly toward North Korea, was an exercise in calculated risk-taking. By prioritizing engagement over isolation and using his unique brand of personal diplomacy, Trump disrupted a decades-long stalemate and achieved tangible, albeit limited, progress. While the ultimate goal of denuclearization remains unrealized, his efforts opened the door to a new era of U.S.-North Korea relations, demonstrating that unconventional approaches can yield unexpected opportunities for peace.