Political tweets/quotes master thread

[yelped]

https://x.com/Nick_Delehanty/status/1887474095798829211

[zh cohen]

What would show us if this makes sense is are there other industries that have such a service and at what cost.

I think a better way would be to see how many non-governmental, non-Democrat, subscribers there are to Politico's service.

[skyguy918]

When you have a company that's losing money every quarter, sometimes you just have to start chopping. If you wait till you have all the information, and you're sure, nothing will get done.

That makes no sense. Aside from the issue of comparing government to for profit companies, for profit companies also don't operate that way when looking to cut costs. They absolutely look to make informed decisions if they want to keep the enterprise going after all the cost cutting.

[Shmuel K]

That makes no sense. Aside from the issue of comparing government to for profit companies, for profit companies also don't operate that way when looking to cut costs. They absolutely look to make informed decisions if they want to keep the enterprise going after all the cost cutting.

If a private company would be wasting as much money as the government maybe it is a good time for them also to make uninformed decisions about cutting costs...

[Ver hut gazugt]

I think a better way would be to see how many non-governmental, non-Democrat, subscribers there are to Politico's service.

hard to know that. They came out saying majority of subscribers are not government.

[aygart]

hard to know that. They came out saying majority of subscribers are not government.

51%?

[aygart]

You're going to see a lot of this type of thing. There's no doubt there's plenty of fat to be trimmed. But you're nuts if you think Elon and his team are taking the time to actually figure out what's fat and what's not.

Why do you think that? I mean, it is possible that they won't but my guess is that they will at least try.

[skyguy918]

Why do you think that? I mean, it is possible that they won't but my guess is that they will at least try.

Then you're probably not following what's going on very well.

[aygart]

Then you're probably not following what's going on very well.

Mostly true, but lots of talk and noise before they do much less than it sounds would be typical Trump. What is making you say this?

[sguitarist18]

That makes no sense. Aside from the issue of comparing government to for profit companies, for profit companies also don't operate that way when looking to cut costs. They absolutely look to make informed decisions if they want to keep the enterprise going after all the cost cutting.

I'm not saying a for-profit company would just do "gorel hagra" and pick random things to cut, but anything that looks like fat would start to get chopped - not spending a 10-year study to figure out each item's potential value. And then after the chopping, there can be deeper reviews, see how things are working without those additional expenses, and a process for adding things back that turn out to be truly necessary.

There are things that are totally wasteful, things that are valuable but too much money is being spent on, and things that are valuable, important and nice to have, but not at the cost of being in the red.

[aygart]

I'm not saying a for-profit company would just do "gorel hagra" and pick random things to cut, but anything that looks like fat would start to get chopped - not spending a 10-year study to figure out each item's potential value. And then after the chopping, there can be deeper reviews, see how things are working without those additional expenses, and a process for adding things back that turn out to be truly necessary.

There are things that are totally wasteful, things that are valuable but too much money is being spent on, and things that are valuable, important and nice to have, but not at the cost of being in the red.

The people relevant to each section would be first given a chance to explain why an item is or isn't necessary before it gets chopped.

[skyguy918]

I'm not saying a for-profit company would just do "gorel hagra" and pick random things to cut, but anything that looks like fat would start to get chopped - not spending a 10-year study to figure out each item's potential value. And then after the chopping, there can be deeper reviews, see how things are working without those additional expenses, and a process for adding things back that turn out to be truly necessary.

There are things that are totally wasteful, things that are valuable but too much money is being spent on, and things that are valuable, important and nice to have, but not at the cost of being in the red.

What ten years? We're like 2 weeks in.

[justaregularguy]

The people relevant to each section would be first given a chance to explain why an item is or isn't necessary before it gets chopped.

im not at all saying this is a better plan to implement but they say possession is 9/10th of law. I’m using that to slightly fit in this situation: when they’re already being funded it’s a tough job to convince the doge (or whoever it is) that something is necessary, but it’s also tough on the doge team to sift out good and bad.
Instead , if doge outright gets rid of it and then says come back and give me your sales pitch why we shud be bringing you back, makes it easier for doge, and the real passionate cases will come back.

[sguitarist18]

The people relevant to each section would be first given a chance to explain why an item is or isn't necessary before it gets chopped.

Most departments are going to fight to retain as much resources as possible, on a number of levels - just on a practical selfish level, and also (especially for people who've been part of a system for decades) it's hard to see that things can be done differently.

What ten years? We're like 2 weeks in.

The standard approach for bureaucracy is to take things nice and slow and careful, to convene a study group to determine the best kind of study to consider the value of each department, service and expense. Once you start going down that road, nothing's going to happen.

im not at all saying this is a better plan to implement but they say possession is 9/10th of law. I’m using that to slightly fit in this situation: when they’re already being funded it’s a tough job to convince the doge (or whoever it is) that something is necessary, but it’s also tough on the doge team to sift out good and bad.
Instead , if doge outright gets rid of it and then says come back and give me your sales pitch why we shud be bringing you back, makes it easier for doge, and the real passionate cases will come back.

Exactly.

[ExGingi]

https://x.com/piersmorgan/status/1889432470568968298

[Alexsei]

https://x.com/rkylesmith/status/1889833721567772934

[justaregularguy]

https://x.com/rkylesmith/status/1889833721567772934

for example? (A question, not a challenge   )

[Alexsei]

for example? (A question, not a challenge   )

I guess it's referring to student loan forgiveness

[Alexsei]

https://x.com/Oilfield_Rando/status/1889840107617976463

[Randomex]

As the news outlet The 19th pointed out, by bringing his kid with him to “work,” Musk is actually benefiting from a privilege not afforded to most women in a position of authority at a company or holding office.

“On the one hand we could celebrate the display of parenthood in the Oval Office as placing value on a political official’s whole self, including their caregiver role, instead of assuming that role prevents them from most effectively doing their public sphere job,” Kelly Dittmar, director of research at the Center for American Women and Politics, told the 19th. “But on the other hand, we need to consider how this display of parenthood would be received if it were a woman political official holding her child while speaking to [the] press.”

From https://gizmodo.com/elon-musks-kid-keeps-saying-weird-stuff-about-trump-2000563118