The USA inflation infex does not include food or energy prices

[CraigM]

This drives me crazy. You hit the nail on the head Craig. My friends that were Biden/Harris/Waltz fans voted for them always talked about how Trump was going to end all of these benefits. Funny thing. They don't really pay any taxes and losing FREE benefits. I always laugh and tell them nothing is free. Someone is paying for it!

I get tired of all of these people online that push to get a Plan B or second passport so they don't have to pay any taxes. They act like no one should pay any taxes or they are Patriots but in the end they are just freeloaders that want free sh*t.

After the last election I had to actually ditch a lot of friendships. I can appreciate differences in political opinions but I had to just cut them off. Some of my friends are the same. They think everything is owed free to them. They complain about all the taxes they pay. But then when I talk to them they pay very little taxes.

People always complain about taxes but people forget 40% of all US households pay ZERO income taxes. And these are usually the people that complain the most about Trump or Republicans.

That has been my experience as well. The Democratic Party used to care about people, now it's dominated by lunatics and non-contributors.

 

[Wally]

Well, just now I learned that your personality is a bit less flexible than the one you project through your writings

Don't' bother @CraigM. The offer of buying a beer was nice but the response was telling.

Let's be clear @Content Provider if Harris won we would be in hyperinflation like scenarios like Argentina has gone through. Maybe even a depression. Did you see all the illegals they were literally importing in to the USA? I saw it first hand. So inflation would be chaotic if they won.

Most likely we would have seen crazy unrest. Forget about going to war in Iran. There would be chaos within the USA.

Biden was heading down the road of a complete loss of foundational freedoms. The media was all lying and often times still are.

The US would be in chaos right now. I don't agree with the War and some other things but it would be worse under Biden.

What Biden was doing was basically the Peronist playbook. Look at the mess Argentina got itself into. It was under the same principles of Biden and Harris. The problem is once you go down that path it is very difficult to come out.

I appreciate you fellows wading into this. It's like talking to a wall when people view their political position as moral vs immoral. Very similar with the tax dodgers, and they're often one and the same. I know a fellow who owes the IRS a ton of money and refuses to pay his debts or even his health care premiums, but will post anti-Trump stuff all day long and peace-and-love while saying doctors have a "duty of care" for delinquents like him. Funny thing is, I still like the guy because he's not all bad, just completely full of s--- sometimes.

I think we all have a friend like this. Just like you said for me it is tough because I like the people personally but I just learned to not talk about politics with them. But with this War they are coming out of the woodwork.

War is never easy but the way I look at it is it would have been easy to stay out of the War and said none of our business with monsters like Hitler. Took someone to stand up to dictators. I'm not saying I agree with Trump on entering this War but hopefully things sort itself out.

 

[Wally]

i meant this to be an economic discussion. sorry it turned into democrat vs republican rant. peace out. i have taken two words out of my my vocabulary. democrat and republican. i have replaced it with with liberal vs conservative to avoid this type conversation. trump name alone starts more auguments because he is so devisive

This is always what happens. Probably now more than ever. I see the same thing here with Milei. Both sides dig in and the other side is probably not going to give in. Milei will always lose about 50% of the population automatically and this side will never vote for him. Trump is probably the same. The joke was Trump could murder someone on Mainstreet and people wouldn't care. An ex-friend sent me a WhatsApp the other day saying that Trump is murdering people and getting away with it.

I learned arguing doesn't help. But I had to give my 2 cents.

 

[ben]

i meant this to be an economic discussion. sorry it turned into democrat vs republican rant. peace out. i have taken two words out of my my vocabulary. democrat and republican. i have replaced it with with liberal vs conservative to avoid this type conversation. trump name alone starts more auguments because he is so devisive

Poor Jim. Just meant to talk about inflation and started World War III.

 

[earlyretirement]

Ha! I hear you but I would still make the same choice all day long. Harris was a terrible candidate for President and Walz as her running mate just made it farcical. Neither of them had any business operating at that level of politics and leadership. The two of them together would have been a gong show of epic proportions.

As usual, I agree with you Craig. I know many on this forum don't live in the USA anymore or haven't for some time. Other than occasional trips to the USA you might not have seen how ridiculous it was.

I travel around the USA alot for vacations and work. I also live in San Diego and my wife and I routinely cross the border to go eat and I always have banking stuff as I have a company and a lot of real estate in Mexico. We would go over and Biden was literally bussing in migrants non-stop. I'm not talking a few. I'm talking thousands. No matter when we went there would be lines and busloads of people they were bringing over.

We once flew from San Diego to Chicago (a sanctuary city) and it was a redeye flight. The plane was loaded with migrants that just crossed the border. The government was flying them all over the country to these sanctuary cities. The flight attendants looked scared. I can't describe the stench and poor state of people that were all dirty. I did feel sorry for them. But as a #'s guy I was just adding up in my head all the $$ that was costing taxpayers.

Went to New York City and same thing. I think most people just didn't understand the depths we were at. You can multiply that X 100 on any # of things.

That being said, I'm against a lot of what Trump is doing. I'm against rounding up people in construction sites, farms, etc. Was against the tariffs too. What Trump was trying to do with tariffs was exactly the model of Argentina. If he managed to bring back factories for making clothes/shoes or anything else it would cost a fortune.

Like many of you, I also deleted most of my social media. Deleted my long time Facebook account especially as I couldn't bring myself to have to read stupid posts from people other than their politics I generally liked.

I appreciate you fellows wading into this. It's like talking to a wall when people view their political position as moral vs immoral. Very similar with the tax dodgers, and they're often one and the same. I know a fellow who owes the IRS a ton of money and refuses to pay his debts or even his health care premiums, but will post anti-Trump stuff all day long and peace-and-love while saying doctors have a "duty of care" for delinquents like him. Funny thing is, I still like the guy because he's not all bad, just completely full of s--- sometimes.

This is exactly a point I have made before. I know many people like this. Freeloaders that do a lot of complaining but when it comes down to it, they pay almost nothing in taxes. It's sad because I had friendships and other than the constant political chatter I really enjoy them.

I try not to talk politics. When it is all said and done most of these politicians are crooks. That we can probably all agree on. Politically people will always disagree on things. I think much of the time it comes down to someone wanting something for free and others that are actually paying for it. Under that scenario you will always get disagreement.

 

[jbeas176]

hey ben thats pobresito jim. i use it all the time. you might have been alittle critical.

 

[jbeas176]

just because i didn’t buy your discount flight tickets is no reason to ne angry

 

[Cheap Bastard]

Never think politics is a winning argument when two sides are so dead set on who they like or dislike. You guys really were correct that each side has different incentives. Of course the side that is getting free stuff doesn't like when you cut that off. And the other side that is paying for it doesn't want to.

I look at some wonky stuff in Argentina that are not sustainable. Like the universities broke but they let all the students from Mercosur countries come and study free at the university. The funny thing is I am not seeing or hearing about Argentines going to Colombia to study. It's always the other way around. Then people throw a hissy fit when you say that they will cut off education to some of these people. Someone is paying for it.

I don't agree with everything this government is doing both in US and Argentina but I agree with enough of it vs. the alternative of the other party winning.

Come on @Content Provider you can't honestly say that Kamala Harris was a good candidate can you? I think I would have even preferred sleepy Joe vs. Kamala. She was just not there. Then again Joe wasn't either but he had someone running the show. I can't imagine Tampon Tim and Kamala. That is scary.

 

[jbeas176]

you will be my friend

 

[JeffR]

So? And...? How EXACTLY is asking a simple question a sign of flexibility or inflexibility? Maybe you've read something into it that is, or is not, there.

Anyway, the entire pro-Trump, anti-Trump is not about politics or personality. It is about morals.

Politics often boils down to clashing moral foundations, not just policy wonkery or charisma. Jonathan Haidt's The Righteous Mind nails this: liberals and conservatives prioritize different innate moral intuitions, like care vs. loyalty or fairness vs. authority. Trump taps into the latter for his base—fairness as proportionality (punish cheaters), sanctity (cultural purity), and ingroup loyalty—while his critics frame it through harm avoidance and equality.

It's why debates feel like parallel universes: one side sees a defender of traditional virtues against elite corruption; the other, a threat to empathy and institutions. Data from Pew Research backs this—moral values predict partisan loyalty more reliably than demographics or economics.

Moral foundations? Look at Biden and his family. His son was a degenerate liar/drug addict/ abuser. I think Trump is an idiot too. But that is besides the point.

@Content Provider what were Harris's biggest platform promises that you were most excited about?

 

[Joe]

Let's be honest. If this war drags on for too long and the world falls into a recession you will hear a lot of I told you so against Trump. He has been a huge disappointment to me on the no new wars. I don't know what he is thinking.

 

[retiredbanker]

trump announced the best economy ever with inflation at 2.5. did he get his inflation index from milei?

Wait until $150 to $175 a barrel oil. Not going to be good.

 

[CraigM]

As usual, I agree with you Craig. I know many on this forum don't live in the USA anymore or haven't for some time. Other than occasional trips to the USA you might not have seen how ridiculous it was.

That's exactly right Mike, I have similar stories and you had to live here to witness some of the insanity of the Biden years. The media tried to cover for him but voters knew better and the election was a blowout.

This is exactly a point I have made before. I know many people like this. Freeloaders that do a lot of complaining but when it comes down to it, they pay almost nothing in taxes. It's sad because I had friendships and other than the constant political chatter I really enjoy them.

I try not to talk politics. When it is all said and done most of these politicians are crooks. That we can probably all agree on. Politically people will always disagree on things. I think much of the time it comes down to someone wanting something for free and others that are actually paying for it. Under that scenario you will always get disagreement.

100%

 

[Content Provider]

Moral foundations? Look at Biden and his family. His son was a degenerate liar/drug addict/ abuser. I think Trump is an idiot too. But that is besides the point.

@Content Provider what were Harris's biggest platform promises that you were most excited about?

Please name some of Biden's. Let's revisit Trumps just for a reminder of what Trump supporters are really supporting:

Moral failings are subjective—they depend on one's ethical framework, cultural values, and priorities (e.g., personal conduct vs. policy outcomes, private behavior vs. public leadership). There is no objective list; what critics label as failings, supporters often view as irrelevant, exaggerated by opponents, or even strengths in a disruptive leader who "fights the system." Donald Trump has been elected president twice despite intense scrutiny, with millions of voters (including many conservative Christians) explicitly accepting his personal flaws because they prioritize other considerations like economic policies or anti-establishment stance.

Critics—from ethics watchdogs, former White House insiders, scholars, polls, and court records—commonly cite the following areas as moral shortcomings. These draw from documented statements, actions, lawsuits, and public reactions. Trump and his defenders consistently deny wrongdoing, call many claims politically motivated smears, or argue context is ignored (e.g., "tough talk" on immigration or "locker-room banter").

1. Alleged sexual misconduct and misogynistic attitudes​

At least 28 women have accused Trump of sexual misconduct (rape, assault, groping, non-consensual kissing, or entering dressing rooms unannounced) dating back to the 1970s. Notable examples include:

• The 2005 Access Hollywood tape, in which Trump was recorded saying stars can "grab [women] by the pussy" without consent (he later called it "locker-room talk" and apologized for the language but denied the behavior).
• E. Jean Carroll case: A jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse (forcible digital penetration) and defamation in 2023, awarding $5 million (upheld on appeal); a separate defamation judgment added $83.3 million in 2024 (also upheld). The judge clarified the jury's finding aligned with the common definition of rape.

Trump has denied every allegation as "fiction" or Clinton-orchestrated lies, vowed (but largely failed) to sue accusers, and called some women unattractive or untruthful. Critics see a pattern of disrespect toward women; defenders note many cases were withdrawn, settled without admission, or lacked criminal charges, and argue voters weighed this in elections.

2. Racially insensitive or divisive rhetoric​

Trump's statements on race and immigration have been widely condemned as morally questionable for promoting division, stereotypes, or equivalence with extremists. Examples include:

• 2017 Charlottesville response: After a white supremacist rally with neo-Nazis, he said there were "very fine people on both sides" (later clarifying he excluded neo-Nazis and white nationalists).
• 2018 "shithole countries" comment (referring to Haiti, El Salvador, and African nations while preferring Norwegian immigrants).
• Defense of Confederate symbols and statues; recent phrases like immigrants "poisoning the blood of our country" or dehumanizing terms ("animals," "not humans").

Scholars and outlets (e.g., The Atlantic, Brookings) have linked this to rises in hate incidents; polls (e.g., 2019) showed roughly half of Americans viewed specific remarks as racist. Trump denies racism ("I am the least racist person"), attributes comments to anti-PC bluntness or policy concerns (e.g., illegal immigration), and points to actions like criminal justice reform or minority unemployment records. Supporters often see this as merit-based realism rather than prejudice.

3. Business conflicts of interest and ethics norms​

Trump did not divest from his global businesses upon taking office (unlike modern predecessors), leading to accusations of violating the Constitution's Emoluments Clause (banning unapproved foreign payments). Foreign governments and officials patronized Trump hotels and properties, creating perceived influence. Ethics groups documented unprecedented conflicts, nepotism (family hires), and use of office for private gain (e.g., Ivanka brand promotion from the White House).

Critics called it a "nakedly unconstitutional" disregard for anti-corruption norms and the "original sin" of the administration. Trump argued his businesses operated transparently, he received no special favors, and critics ignored that he donated presidential salary. Watchdog reports labeled his first term the "most unethical presidency" on this front.

4. Dishonesty, self-centeredness, and lack of moral leadership​

Polls (Pew, 2018–2020) showed majorities viewed Trump as self-centered (80%), not honest (only ~36% yes), prejudiced (59%), and not even-tempered. Former insiders (Bill Barr, John Kelly, James Mattis, Michael Cohen, etc.) described a fragile ego driven by flattery and revenge, habitual lying ("he doesn’t know the difference between truth and a lie"), one-way loyalty, bullying, and amorality ("not moored to any discernible first principles"). Examples include crisis responses (e.g., Charlottesville equating sides) and prioritizing personal grievances.

Critics argue this erodes trust, divides the nation, and shows absence of empathy or higher principles. Trump and supporters counter that he "tells it like it is," stands up for beliefs (Pew found many Republicans agree), and that "lies" are media distortions or strategic hyperbole; his toughness is a feature against elites.

These critiques appear across left-leaning media, ethics nonprofits (CREW, Common Cause), court records, Wikipedia compilations of controversies, and insider accounts. Broader Wikipedia categories document extensive litigation, administration ethics issues, and personal critiques.

Counter-perspective: Many Americans reject these as moral disqualifiers. Supporters (including in 2024/2025 elections) compartmentalize flaws, viewing Trump as a symbol of resilience against "the swamp" or media bias. Some evangelical leaders explicitly forgave personal sins for policy alignment. Polls and elections show character concerns do not override perceived results for tens of millions.

In short, Trump's record provides ample material for critics to argue moral failings in personal conduct, integrity, and leadership. Supporters see a flawed but authentic fighter whose "failings" are human or weaponized by opponents. Voters ultimately weigh these through their own moral lens—Trump's repeated electoral success demonstrates that not everyone shares the critics' conclusions.

 

[Content Provider]

Please name some of Biden's. Let's revisit Trumps just for a reminder of what Trump supporters are really supporting:

Moral failings are subjective—they depend on one's ethical framework, cultural values, and priorities (e.g., personal conduct vs. policy outcomes, private behavior vs. public leadership). There is no objective list; what critics label as failings, supporters often view as irrelevant, exaggerated by opponents, or even strengths in a disruptive leader who "fights the system." Donald Trump has been elected president twice despite intense scrutiny, with millions of voters (including many conservative Christians) explicitly accepting his personal flaws because they prioritize other considerations like economic policies or anti-establishment stance.

Critics—from ethics watchdogs, former White House insiders, scholars, polls, and court records—commonly cite the following areas as moral shortcomings. These draw from documented statements, actions, lawsuits, and public reactions. Trump and his defenders consistently deny wrongdoing, call many claims politically motivated smears, or argue context is ignored (e.g., "tough talk" on immigration or "locker-room banter").

1. Alleged sexual misconduct and misogynistic attitudes​

At least 28 women have accused Trump of sexual misconduct (rape, assault, groping, non-consensual kissing, or entering dressing rooms unannounced) dating back to the 1970s. Notable examples include:

• The 2005 Access Hollywood tape, in which Trump was recorded saying stars can "grab [women] by the pussy" without consent (he later called it "locker-room talk" and apologized for the language but denied the behavior).
• E. Jean Carroll case: A jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse (forcible digital penetration) and defamation in 2023, awarding $5 million (upheld on appeal); a separate defamation judgment added $83.3 million in 2024 (also upheld). The judge clarified the jury's finding aligned with the common definition of rape.

Trump has denied every allegation as "fiction" or Clinton-orchestrated lies, vowed (but largely failed) to sue accusers, and called some women unattractive or untruthful. Critics see a pattern of disrespect toward women; defenders note many cases were withdrawn, settled without admission, or lacked criminal charges, and argue voters weighed this in elections.

2. Racially insensitive or divisive rhetoric​

Trump's statements on race and immigration have been widely condemned as morally questionable for promoting division, stereotypes, or equivalence with extremists. Examples include:

• 2017 Charlottesville response: After a white supremacist rally with neo-Nazis, he said there were "very fine people on both sides" (later clarifying he excluded neo-Nazis and white nationalists).
• 2018 "shithole countries" comment (referring to Haiti, El Salvador, and African nations while preferring Norwegian immigrants).
• Defense of Confederate symbols and statues; recent phrases like immigrants "poisoning the blood of our country" or dehumanizing terms ("animals," "not humans").

Scholars and outlets (e.g., The Atlantic, Brookings) have linked this to rises in hate incidents; polls (e.g., 2019) showed roughly half of Americans viewed specific remarks as racist. Trump denies racism ("I am the least racist person"), attributes comments to anti-PC bluntness or policy concerns (e.g., illegal immigration), and points to actions like criminal justice reform or minority unemployment records. Supporters often see this as merit-based realism rather than prejudice.

3. Business conflicts of interest and ethics norms​

Trump did not divest from his global businesses upon taking office (unlike modern predecessors), leading to accusations of violating the Constitution's Emoluments Clause (banning unapproved foreign payments). Foreign governments and officials patronized Trump hotels and properties, creating perceived influence. Ethics groups documented unprecedented conflicts, nepotism (family hires), and use of office for private gain (e.g., Ivanka brand promotion from the White House).

Critics called it a "nakedly unconstitutional" disregard for anti-corruption norms and the "original sin" of the administration. Trump argued his businesses operated transparently, he received no special favors, and critics ignored that he donated presidential salary. Watchdog reports labeled his first term the "most unethical presidency" on this front.

4. Dishonesty, self-centeredness, and lack of moral leadership​

Polls (Pew, 2018–2020) showed majorities viewed Trump as self-centered (80%), not honest (only ~36% yes), prejudiced (59%), and not even-tempered. Former insiders (Bill Barr, John Kelly, James Mattis, Michael Cohen, etc.) described a fragile ego driven by flattery and revenge, habitual lying ("he doesn’t know the difference between truth and a lie"), one-way loyalty, bullying, and amorality ("not moored to any discernible first principles"). Examples include crisis responses (e.g., Charlottesville equating sides) and prioritizing personal grievances.

Critics argue this erodes trust, divides the nation, and shows absence of empathy or higher principles. Trump and supporters counter that he "tells it like it is," stands up for beliefs (Pew found many Republicans agree), and that "lies" are media distortions or strategic hyperbole; his toughness is a feature against elites.

These critiques appear across left-leaning media, ethics nonprofits (CREW, Common Cause), court records, Wikipedia compilations of controversies, and insider accounts. Broader Wikipedia categories document extensive litigation, administration ethics issues, and personal critiques.

Counter-perspective: Many Americans reject these as moral disqualifiers. Supporters (including in 2024/2025 elections) compartmentalize flaws, viewing Trump as a symbol of resilience against "the swamp" or media bias. Some evangelical leaders explicitly forgave personal sins for policy alignment. Polls and elections show character concerns do not override perceived results for tens of millions.

In short, Trump's record provides ample material for critics to argue moral failings in personal conduct, integrity, and leadership. Supporters see a flawed but authentic fighter whose "failings" are human or weaponized by opponents. Voters ultimately weigh these through their own moral lens—Trump's repeated electoral success demonstrates that not everyone shares the critics' conclusions.

Kamala Harris's 2024 presidential campaign platform focused heavily on an "opportunity economy" aimed at lowering costs for families, strengthening the middle class, and addressing affordability issues like housing, healthcare, and groceries. Her proposals built on many Biden-era policies while emphasizing direct relief for working people.

Here are some of her biggest and most prominent platform promises:

- **Massive expansion of tax relief for middle-class and working families**, including permanently restoring and expanding the Child Tax Credit (up to $3,600 per child under 6, $3,000 for older kids, fully refundable, plus a $6,000 credit for newborns) and the Earned Income Tax Credit (with more generous provisions for childless workers). This was framed as cutting taxes for over 100 million Americans.

- **Building 3 million new affordable homes** over her first term to tackle the housing shortage, combined with $25,000 in down-payment assistance for first-time homebuyers and tax incentives for builders.

- **Banning corporate price gouging** on food and groceries to combat inflation and lower everyday costs.

- **Protecting and expanding healthcare access**, including extending the $35 monthly cap on insulin, the $2,000 annual out-of-pocket cap on prescription drugs under Medicare, and strengthening the Affordable Care Act.

- **Restoring nationwide abortion rights**, such as by supporting legislation to codify Roe v. Wade protections (and even eliminating the filibuster if needed to pass it) — this was one of her signature issues.

Other notable ones included no taxes on tips, increasing the startup expense deduction for small businesses to $50,000 to spur entrepreneurship, and continuing investments in clean energy and infrastructure.

**Sources**:
- Kamala Harris campaign website (archived policy page: kamalaharris.com/issues)
- PolitiFact: "Kamala Harris’ 2024 campaign promises" (Sep 30, 2024)
- CBS News: "Kamala Harris' policy plans and platform on key issues" (Nov 5, 2024)
- BBC News: "Where Kamala Harris stands on 10 key policy issues" (Oct 23, 2024)
- CNN: "Promises Kamala Harris has made so far in her campaign" (Aug 2024)
- Al Jazeera: "US election 2024: What are Harris and Trump's positions" (Nov 4, 2024)

 

[Silvia]

Wait until $150 to $175 a barrel oil. Not going to be good.

What will these kind of prices mean for Argentina? I thought since we have so much gas and oil here we would be sheltered and protected from higher oil prices but the prices keep going up at the pump last week and this week!

 

[Silvia]

Please name some of Biden's. Let's revisit Trumps just for a reminder of what Trump supporters are really supporting:

Moral failings are subjective—they depend on one's ethical framework, cultural values, and priorities (e.g., personal conduct vs. policy outcomes, private behavior vs. public leadership). There is no objective list; what critics label as failings, supporters often view as irrelevant, exaggerated by opponents, or even strengths in a disruptive leader who "fights the system." Donald Trump has been elected president twice despite intense scrutiny, with millions of voters (including many conservative Christians) explicitly accepting his personal flaws because they prioritize other considerations like economic policies or anti-establishment stance.

Critics—from ethics watchdogs, former White House insiders, scholars, polls, and court records—commonly cite the following areas as moral shortcomings. These draw from documented statements, actions, lawsuits, and public reactions. Trump and his defenders consistently deny wrongdoing, call many claims politically motivated smears, or argue context is ignored (e.g., "tough talk" on immigration or "locker-room banter").

1. Alleged sexual misconduct and misogynistic attitudes​

At least 28 women have accused Trump of sexual misconduct (rape, assault, groping, non-consensual kissing, or entering dressing rooms unannounced) dating back to the 1970s. Notable examples include:

• The 2005 Access Hollywood tape, in which Trump was recorded saying stars can "grab [women] by the pussy" without consent (he later called it "locker-room talk" and apologized for the language but denied the behavior).
• E. Jean Carroll case: A jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse (forcible digital penetration) and defamation in 2023, awarding $5 million (upheld on appeal); a separate defamation judgment added $83.3 million in 2024 (also upheld). The judge clarified the jury's finding aligned with the common definition of rape.

Trump has denied every allegation as "fiction" or Clinton-orchestrated lies, vowed (but largely failed) to sue accusers, and called some women unattractive or untruthful. Critics see a pattern of disrespect toward women; defenders note many cases were withdrawn, settled without admission, or lacked criminal charges, and argue voters weighed this in elections.

2. Racially insensitive or divisive rhetoric​

Trump's statements on race and immigration have been widely condemned as morally questionable for promoting division, stereotypes, or equivalence with extremists. Examples include:

• 2017 Charlottesville response: After a white supremacist rally with neo-Nazis, he said there were "very fine people on both sides" (later clarifying he excluded neo-Nazis and white nationalists).
• 2018 "shithole countries" comment (referring to Haiti, El Salvador, and African nations while preferring Norwegian immigrants).
• Defense of Confederate symbols and statues; recent phrases like immigrants "poisoning the blood of our country" or dehumanizing terms ("animals," "not humans").

Scholars and outlets (e.g., The Atlantic, Brookings) have linked this to rises in hate incidents; polls (e.g., 2019) showed roughly half of Americans viewed specific remarks as racist. Trump denies racism ("I am the least racist person"), attributes comments to anti-PC bluntness or policy concerns (e.g., illegal immigration), and points to actions like criminal justice reform or minority unemployment records. Supporters often see this as merit-based realism rather than prejudice.

3. Business conflicts of interest and ethics norms​

Trump did not divest from his global businesses upon taking office (unlike modern predecessors), leading to accusations of violating the Constitution's Emoluments Clause (banning unapproved foreign payments). Foreign governments and officials patronized Trump hotels and properties, creating perceived influence. Ethics groups documented unprecedented conflicts, nepotism (family hires), and use of office for private gain (e.g., Ivanka brand promotion from the White House).

Critics called it a "nakedly unconstitutional" disregard for anti-corruption norms and the "original sin" of the administration. Trump argued his businesses operated transparently, he received no special favors, and critics ignored that he donated presidential salary. Watchdog reports labeled his first term the "most unethical presidency" on this front.

4. Dishonesty, self-centeredness, and lack of moral leadership​

Polls (Pew, 2018–2020) showed majorities viewed Trump as self-centered (80%), not honest (only ~36% yes), prejudiced (59%), and not even-tempered. Former insiders (Bill Barr, John Kelly, James Mattis, Michael Cohen, etc.) described a fragile ego driven by flattery and revenge, habitual lying ("he doesn’t know the difference between truth and a lie"), one-way loyalty, bullying, and amorality ("not moored to any discernible first principles"). Examples include crisis responses (e.g., Charlottesville equating sides) and prioritizing personal grievances.

Critics argue this erodes trust, divides the nation, and shows absence of empathy or higher principles. Trump and supporters counter that he "tells it like it is," stands up for beliefs (Pew found many Republicans agree), and that "lies" are media distortions or strategic hyperbole; his toughness is a feature against elites.

These critiques appear across left-leaning media, ethics nonprofits (CREW, Common Cause), court records, Wikipedia compilations of controversies, and insider accounts. Broader Wikipedia categories document extensive litigation, administration ethics issues, and personal critiques.

Counter-perspective: Many Americans reject these as moral disqualifiers. Supporters (including in 2024/2025 elections) compartmentalize flaws, viewing Trump as a symbol of resilience against "the swamp" or media bias. Some evangelical leaders explicitly forgave personal sins for policy alignment. Polls and elections show character concerns do not override perceived results for tens of millions.

In short, Trump's record provides ample material for critics to argue moral failings in personal conduct, integrity, and leadership. Supporters see a flawed but authentic fighter whose "failings" are human or weaponized by opponents. Voters ultimately weigh these through their own moral lens—Trump's repeated electoral success demonstrates that not everyone shares the critics' conclusions.

It look like you just use ChatGPT.

 

[Bharat]

What will these kind of prices mean for Argentina? I thought since we have so much gas and oil here we would be sheltered and protected from higher oil prices but the prices keep going up at the pump last week and this week!

They will try to limit prices but no way they can keep prices stable at the pump. Especially with Milei who seems to let companies charge whatever they want. This war will probably end Milei's term as well as Trump's. Gas prices in the US are going up and will keep going up.

Here in BA I see them going up and that will cause inflation to go up even more.

 

[Bettina]

That has been my experience as well. The Democratic Party used to care about people, now it's dominated by lunatics and non-contributors.

I think neither party really cares about the people. I see the same in Argentina. I don't think that the politicians really care about the people.

Getting back to the matter of the thread I am finding the monthly inflation to be about 5% when I average in all my stuff.

 

[Uncle Wong]

I think neither party really cares about the people. I see the same in Argentina. I don't think that the politicians really care about the people.

Getting back to the matter of the thread I am finding the monthly inflation to be about 5% when I average in all my stuff.

That is so wild when I hear 5% monthly inflation. Any time I want to complain about inflation in the US I just think what people are going through in Argentina and I shut my mouth.

It just seems totally unrealistic for inflation in Argentina to go down to reasonable levels. Milei said he will make it go to 0% this year. But it looks like it just keeps going up. Actually when you look at the inflation during his term so far it is so crazy high. You can only blame the previous guy for so long. I still don't see a credible plan to get the inflation to reasonable levels. Now the war will complicate things further.